Comprehensive Conservation Plan Comprehensive Conservation Plan

Savannah Coastal

Refuges Complex

Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge

Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge

Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge

Savannah National Wildlife Refuge

Tybee National Wildlife Refuge

Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge

Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge

Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge

Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge

Savannah National Wildlife Refuge

Tybee National Wildlife Refuge

Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long-term guidance for

management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies

needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and identify the Fish and

Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail

program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above

current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service

strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do

not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and

maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.

Photo Credits:

Eric Horan ; Marsh Scene

Genevieve Bailey-Rogers

& Jason Rogers ; Alligator

Dave Goeke ; Beach Scene

John Carrington ; Wood Storks

USFWS ; Loggerhead Sea Turtle
Savannah Coastal National Wildlife 

Refuges Complex 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Southeast Region 

September 2011
Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN 

SAVANNAH COASTAL REFUGES COMPLEX 

Blackbeard Island, Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Savannah, 

Tybee, and Wassaw National Wildlife Refuges 

Chatham, Effingham and McIntosh Counties, Georgia, and Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Southeast Region 

Atlanta, Georgia 

September 2011 
Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
Table of Contents i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 1

I. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 5

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5

Purpose And Need For The Plan ................................................................................................. 5

Fish and Wildlife Service .............................................................................................................. 5

National Wildlife Refuge System .................................................................................................. 6

Legal and Policy Context .............................................................................................................. 8

National and International Conservation Plans and Initiatives ..................................................... 9

Relationship To State Wildlife Agency ........................................................................................ 10

II. REFUGE OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................... 13

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 13

Refuge History and Purpose ...................................................................................................... 15

Historical Overview ...........................................................................................................15

Purposes ........................................................................................................................... 16

Special Designations .................................................................................................................. 23

Ecosystem Context ..................................................................................................................... 27

Regional Conservation Plans and Initiatives .............................................................................. 30

Ecological Threats and Problems ...............................................................................................36

Physical Resources .................................................................................................................... 41

Climate .............................................................................................................................. 41

Climate Change and Global Warming ............................................................................... 42

Geology and Topography .................................................................................................. 47

Soils .................................................................................................................................. 50

Groundwater ..................................................................................................................... 51

Surface Water ................................................................................................................... 52

Water Quality .................................................................................................................... 52

Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 53

Biological Resources .................................................................................................................. 54

Habitat ............................................................................................................................... 54

Wildlife ...............................................................................................................................68

Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 75

Socioeconomic Environment ...................................................................................................... 79

Refuge Administration and Management ................................................................................... 84

Land Protection and Conservation .................................................................................... 84

Visitor Services ................................................................................................................. 85

Personnel, Operations, and Maintenance ....................................................................... 101

III. PLAN DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................ 107

Public Involvement and the Planning Process ......................................................................... 107

Summary of Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities ................................................................... 108

Fish and Wildlife Population Management ...................................................................... 108

Habitat Management ....................................................................................................... 113

Resource Protection ........................................................................................................ 115
ii Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Visitor Services ............................................................................................................... 115

Refuge Administration .................................................................................................... 116

IV. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ..................................................................................................... 117

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 117

Vision ....................................................................................................................................... 117

Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ............................................................................................ 118

Fish and Wildlife Population Management...................................................................... 118

Habitat Management....................................................................................................... 132

Visitor Services ............................................................................................................... 160

Resource Protection ....................................................................................................... 179

Refuge Administration .................................................................................................... 186

V. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................................................................... 191

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 191

Proposed Projects .................................................................................................................... 191

Funding and Personnel ............................................................................................................ 195

Partnership/Volunteers Opportunities ...................................................................................... 198

Step-Down Management Plans ................................................................................................ 199

Monitoring and Adaptive Management ..................................................................................... 199

Plan Review and Revision........................................................................................................ 200

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A. GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................. 201

APPENDIX B. REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITATIONS .................................................... 213

APPENDIX C. RELEVANT LEGAL MANDATES AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS ............................. 223

APPENDIX D. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ......................................................................................... 235

Summary Of Public Scoping Comments .................................................................................. 235

Draft CCP/EA Comments and Service Responses .................................................................. 239

APPENDIX E. APPROPRIATE USE DETERMINATIONS .............................................................. 257

APPENDIX F. COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATIONS ..................................................................... 269

APPENDIX G. INTRA-SERVICE SECTION 7 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION .................................. 309

APPENDIX H. WILDERNESS REVIEW ........................................................................................... 315

APPENDIX I. REFUGE BIOTA ........................................................................................................ 317

APPENDIX J. BUDGET REQUESTS .............................................................................................. 339

APPENDIX K. LIST OF PREPARERS ............................................................................................. 341

APPENDIX L. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ................................................................ 343

Overview .................................................................................................................................. 343
Table of Contents iii

APPENDIX M. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ................................................................ 347

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 347

Alternatives ............................................................................................................................... 347

Alternative A. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 347

Alternative B. ................................................................................................................... 349

Alternative C. ................................................................................................................... 352
iv Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1. Savannah Coastal Refuges – National Wildlife Refuge Complex ..................................... 14

Figure 2. Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge ....................................................................... 17

Figure 3. Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge ................................................................................ 19

Figure 4. Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge .......................................................................... 20

Figure 5. Savannah National Wildlife Refuge ................................................................................... 22

Figure 6. Tybee National Wildlife Refuge ......................................................................................... 24

Figure 7. Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge ...................................................................................... 25

Figure 8. Ecoregions of South Carolina Level III and IV ................................................................... 28

Figure 9. Ecoregions of Georgia Level III and IV .............................................................................. 29

Figures 10 and 11. 1971 - 2000 Temperature and Precipitation ........................................................ 43

Figure 12. Barrier Islands of the Lower Coastal Plain ........................................................................ 49

Figure 13. General Habitat Types on Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge ............................. 59

Figure 14. General Habitat Types on Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge ...................................... 61

Figure 15. General Habitat Types on Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge ................................ 65

Figure 16. General Habitat Types on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge ......................................... 67

Figure 17. General Habitat Types on Tybee National Wildlife Refuge ............................................... 69

Figure 18. General Habitat Types on Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge ............................................ 71

Figure 19. Protected Lands of Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge ....................................... 86

Figure 20. Protected Lands of Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge ................................................. 87

Figure 21. Protected Lands of Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge ........................................... 88

Figure 22. Protected Lands of Savannah National Wildlife Refuge .................................................... 89

Figure 23. Savannah Island National Wildlife Refuge Acquisition Boundary ...................................... 90

Figure 24. Protected Lands of Tybee National Wildlife Refuge .......................................................... 91

Figure 25. Protected Lands of Wassaw Island National Wildlife Refuge ............................................ 92

Figure 26. Location of Public Use Areas on Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge. ................. 93

Figure 27. Location of Public Use Areas on Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge ............................ 94

Figure 28. Location of Public Use Areas on Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge ...................... 96

Figure 29. Location of Public Use Areas on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge (South) .................. 98

Figure 30. Location of Public Use Areas on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge (North) ................... 99

Figure 31. Location of Public Use Areas on Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge. .............................. 102

Figure 32. Proposed organization structure for the management of the 

Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex--current and proposed positions ......................... 196
Table of Contents v

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1. Climatological normals ........................................................................................................ 48

Table 2. Air Quality by County .......................................................................................................... 55

Table 3. Air Quality by City ............................................................................................................... 56

Table 4. Land Cover Classifications ................................................................................................. 57

Table 5. Land Cover Classifications ................................................................................................. 60

Table 6. Acreages of Habitat Types on Pinckney Island NWR ......................................................... 63

Table 7. Land Cover Classifications ................................................................................................. 64

Table 8. Acreages of Habitat Types on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge .................................... 66

Table 9. Land Cover Classifications ................................................................................................. 66

Table 10. Land Cover Classifications ................................................................................................. 70

Table 11. Demographics and Socioeconomics for the Savannah Coastal NWR Complex ................ 81

Table 12. Activities in Georgia and South Carolina by U.S. Residents ............................................... 83

Table 13. Summary of projects for Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex ........................................ 197

Table 14. National wildlife refuge step-down management plans related to the 

goals and objectives of the CCP ...................................................................................... 199

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1

Executive Summary 

The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has prepared this Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

(CCP) to guide the management of six of the seven refuges which comprise the Savannah 

Coastal Refuges Complex (Complex). This CCP includes management guidance for Blackbeard 

Island, Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, and Wassaw National Wildlife Refuges. 

The CCP for Wolf Island National Wildlife Refuge was completed in 2008. This CCP outlines 

programs and corresponding resource needs for the next 15 years, as mandated by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. 

Before the Service began planning, it conducted the following: biological reviews of each refuge’s 

wildlife and habitat management program and visitor services reviews of each refuge’s visitor 

services program. Several public scoping meetings were held to solicit public opinion of the 

issues that the CCP should address. The biological review teams were composed of biologists, 

resource management professionals from federal and state agencies, and non-governmental 

organizations having an interest in the refuges. The visitor services review teams were 

comprised of staff from the Service’s Southeast Regional Office and other Service staff. Public 

input for the development of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental 

Assessment (Draft CCP/EA) was obtained, in part, through three public scoping meetings held in 

the vicinity of the refuges. A 30-day public review and comment period of the Draft CCP/EA was 

provided to solicit public reaction to the proposed alternatives. 

The Service developed and analyzed three alternatives per refuge. Alternative A was a proposal to 

maintain the status quo or current management. Management emphasis would continue to be 

directed towards accomplishing the refuge’s primary purposes. Complex staff would continue habitat 

management of existing beaches, wetlands, open waters, forested habitats, scrub/shrub habitat, 

grasslands, and open lands. All ponds, levees, moist-soil water management units, water control 

structures and pumps would continue to be maintained to provide critical habitat for threatened and 

endangered species, waterfowl, and wetland-dependent birds. Current water quality information 

would be addressed on an as-needed basis and would continue to be limited. All other habitat 

management programs would remain unchanged. 

Current management of migratory birds would continue to provide suitable habitat for waterfowl, 

contributing to the objective of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Surveying, 

monitoring, and managing of colonial waterbirds, shorebirds, neotropical migratory birds, wading 

birds, marsh birds, and other resident birds would continue at the present level. The operation and 

management of the refuges that would provide for the basic needs of these species varies, but generally 

would include feeding, resting, and breeding. Current programs of wildland fire and forest management 

would be maintained with no improvements or adaptations. Control of invasive and exotic plant 

species would continue to be performed by Complex staff on an opportunistic basis as funding and 

staffing permitted. Additionally, the Complex staff would continue efforts to control/remove invasive, 

exotic, and/or nuisance wildlife on the refuges. 

The Service would maintain the current levels of wildlife-dependent recreation activities (e.g., hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation). 

The refuge headquarters would serve only as administrative offices with no enhancement of the 

grounds for public use and interpretation. In general, under Alternative A, management and 

administrative decisions and actions would occur when triggered by demands and sources outside 

the refuge. Under this alternative, the existing level of funding and staffing would be maintained. 
2 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Accordingly, some positions would not be filled when vacated if funds needed to be reallocated to 

meet rising costs or new priorities. 

The alternative described above (Alternative A) is required by NEPA and is the “no-action” or “status 

quo” alternative in which no major management changes would be initiated by the Service. This 

alternative also provides a baseline to compare the current habitat, wildlife, and public use 

management to the two action alternatives (B and C). 

The preferred action (Alternative B) was selected by the Service as the alternative that best signifies the 

vision, goals, and purposes of the refuges. Additionally, this alternative was developed based on public 

input and the best professional judgment of the planning team. Under Alternative B, the emphasis 

would be on restoring and improving refuge resources needed for wildlife and habitat management and 

providing enhanced appropriate and compatible wildlife-dependent public use opportunities, while 

addressing key issues and individual refuge mandates. This alternative would focus on augmenting 

wildlife and habitat management to identify, conserve, and restore populations of native fish and wildlife 

species, with an emphasis on migratory birds and threatened and endangered species. These 

objectives would partially be accomplished by increased monitoring of waterfowl, other migratory and 

resident birds, and endemic species in order to assess and adapt management strategies and actions. 

Additionally, information gaps would be addressed by the initiation of baseline surveys, periodic 

monitoring, and ultimately the addition of adaptive habitat management. 

Habitat management programs for impoundments, beaches, wetlands, open waters, forested 

habitats, scrub/shrub habitat, grasslands, and open lands would be reevaluated and step-down 

management plans would be developed to meet the foraging, resting, and breeding requirements of 

priority species. Additionally, monitoring and adaptive habitat management would be implemented to 

potentially counteract the impacts associated with long-term climate change and sea-level rise. 

Alternative B enhances each refuge’s visitor services opportunities (except for Tybee National Wildlife 

Refuge, which would remain closed to the public) by: improving the quality of fishing opportunities; 

streamlining the quota hunt process and where possible evaluating the options of allowing the use of 

crossbows and creating additional hunting opportunities; maintaining and where possible expanding 

environmental education opportunities by developing refuge-specific environmental education 

programs, enhancing current partnerships and construction of new environmental education facilities; 

enhancing wildlife viewing and photography opportunities by expanding walking, bicycling, driving, 

and boating access for wildlife observation and photography by establishing trailhead kiosks, building 

observation platforms, installing spotting scopes, providing photography workshops and identifying 

additional wildlife viewing areas; developing and implementing a visitor services management plan, 

and enhancing personal interpretive and outreach opportunities. Volunteer programs and a “Friends 

of the Refuge” group would be expanded to enhance all aspects of refuge management and to 

increase resource availability. Law enforcement activities to protect archaeological and historical 

sites and provide visitor safety would be intensified. The allocation of an additional law enforcement 

officer for the Complex would provide security for cultural resources, but would also ensure visitor 

safety and public compliance with refuge regulations. 

Under this alternative, the priority of land acquisition at Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge would be to 

acquire lands that provide resource and public use values from willing sellers by: fee title purchase, 

donation, mitigation purchase and transfer, or other viable means. This would include an 

investigation into expanding the current acquisition boundary. At Savannah National Wildlife Refuge, 

focus would be increased on acquiring lands that provide resource and public use values from willing 

sellers by any viable means. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 3

Administration plans would stress the need for increased maintenance of existing infrastructure and 

construction of new facilities. Funding for new construction projects would be balanced between habitat 

management and public use needs. Additional staff members would be required to accomplish the goals 

of this alternative. Personnel priorities would include employing an environmental education coordinator, 

law enforcement officers/park rangers, a volunteer coordinator, biological technicians, maintenance 

workers, refuge managers, refuge assistant managers, and a geographic information systems specialist. 

The increased Complex budget and staffing levels would better enable the Complex to meet the 

obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Under Alternative C, the management of the refuge resources would be employed to allow natural 

succession to take place on the refuges, while maintaining the current slate of public use 

opportunities. All purposes of the refuges and mandated monitoring of federal trust species and 

archaeological resources would be continued, but other wildlife management would be mostly 

performed on an incidental basis. 

This alternative would utilize a custodial habitat management strategy. The Service would continue 

mandated activities for protection of federally listed species. Conservation of federally listed threatened 

and endangered species would be continued through current habitat management and monitoring 

programs accomplished primarily through established partnership and research projects. Impoundments, 

beaches, wetlands, open waters, forested habitats, scrub/shrub habitat, grasslands, and open lands 

would not be actively managed and would allow natural disturbance to maintain succession, unless the 

habitats primarily focus on the needs of threatened and endangered species or the needs of priority 

species, such as migratory birds. Fire management would be reduced to include wildfire response only. 

Control of invasive and exotic plant species would continue to be performed by Complex staff on an 

opportunistic basis as funding and staffing permitted. Additionally, the Complex staff would continue 

efforts to control/remove invasive, exotic, and/or nuisance wildlife on the refuges. 

The Service would maintain the current levels of wildlife-dependent recreation activities (e.g., hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation). 

Public use facilities would continue to be maintained, as would the current visitor services program. 

No additional land acquisition would be perused under this alternative. Only additional law enforcement 

staff would be added to the staff to increase emphasis on resource protection and public safety. This 

includes being designated to uphold current regulations and for protection of wildlife, visitors, and cultural 

and historical resources. The Service would maintain the refuge as funding allows. 

The Service selected Alternative B as its preferred alternative as reflected in this CCP. Alternative B 

addresses the refuge’s highest priorities with reasonable increases in staffing, volunteers, and funding.
4 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5

I. Background 

INTRODUCTION 

This Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Savannah, Tybee, Pinckney Island, Wassaw, 

Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuges, located within the Savannah Coastal 

Refuges Complex (Complex) was prepared to guide management actions and direction for the 

refuges. A separate CCP was completed for Wolf Island National Wildlife Refuge and will need to be 

referenced for specific details pertaining to future management strategies. Fish and wildlife 

conservation will receive first priority in refuge management; wildlife-dependent recreation will be 

allowed and encouraged as long as it is compatible with, and does not detract from, the mission of 

the refuges or the purposes for which they were established. 

A planning team developed a range of alternatives that best met the goals and objectives of the 

refuges and that could be implemented within the 15-year planning period. The draft of this plan was 

made available to state and federal government agencies, conservation partners, and the general 

public for review and comment. The comments from each entity were considered in the development 

of this final CCP, describing the Fish and Wildlife Service’s preferred plan. 

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PLAN 

The purpose of this CCP is to develop a management action that best achieves the refuges’ 

purposes; attains the vision and goals developed for the Complex; contributes to the National Wildlife 

Refuge System (Refuge System) mission; addresses key problems, issues and relevant mandates; 

and is consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife management. 

Specifically, this CCP is needed to: 

 Provide a clear statement of refuge management direction; 

 Provide refuge neighbors, visitors, and government officials with an understanding of Service 

management actions on and around the refuges; 

 Ensure that Service management actions, including land protection and recreation/education 

programs, are consistent with the mandates of the Refuge System; and 

 Provide a basis for the development of budget requests for operations, maintenance, and 

capital improvement needs. 

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) traces its roots to 1871 and the establishment of the Commission 

of Fisheries involved with research and fish culture. The once-independent commission was renamed the 

Bureau of Fisheries and placed under the Department of Commerce and Labor in 1903. 

The Service also traces its roots to 1886 and the establishment of a Division of Economic Ornithology 

and Mammalogy in the Department of Agriculture. Research on the relationship of birds and animals 

to agriculture shifted to delineation of the range of plants and animals so the name was changed to 

the Division of the Biological Survey in 1896. 
6 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The Department of Commerce, Bureau of Fisheries, was combined with the Department of 

Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, on June 30, 1940, and transferred to the Department of the 

Interior as the Fish and Wildlife Service. The name was changed to the Bureau of Sport Fisheries 

and Wildlife in 1956 and finally to the Fish and Wildlife Service in 1974. 

The Service, working with others, is responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and 

wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people through Federal programs 

relating to migratory birds, endangered species, interjurisdictional fish and marine mammals, and 

inland sport fisheries (142 DM 1.1). 

As part of its mission, the Service manages more than 550 national wildlife refuges covering over 95 

million acres. These areas comprise the National Wildlife Refuge System, the world’s largest 

collection of lands set aside specifically for fish and wildlife. The majority of these lands, 77 million 

acres, is in Alaska. The remaining acres are spread across the other 49 states and several United 

States territories. In addition to refuges, the Service manages thousands of small wetlands, national 

fish hatcheries, 64 fishery resource offices, and 78 Ecological Services field stations. The Service 

enforces federal wildlife laws, administers the Endangered Species Act, manages migratory bird 

populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat, and helps 

foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Aid program that 

distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state 

fish and wildlife agencies. 

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM 

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997 is: 

“...to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, 

management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant resources 

and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future 

generations of Americans.” 

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act) established, for the 

first time, a clear legislative mission of wildlife conservation for the Refuge System. Actions were 

initiated in 1997 to comply with the direction of this new legislation, including an effort to complete 

comprehensive conservation plans for all refuges. These plans, which are completed with full public 

involvement, help guide the future management of refuges by establishing natural resources and 

recreation/education programs. Consistent with the Improvement Act, approved plans will serve as 

the guidelines for refuge management for the next 15 years. The Improvement Act states that each 

refuge shall be managed to: 

 Fulfill the mission of the Refuge System; 

 Fulfill the individual purposes of each refuge; 

 Consider the needs of wildlife first; 

 Fulfill requirements of comprehensive conservation plans that are prepared for each unit of 

the Refuge System; 

 Maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System; 

and 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 7

 Recognize that wildlife-dependent recreation activities including hunting, fishing, wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation are 

legitimate and priority public uses; and provide refuge managers authority to determine 

compatible public uses. 

The following are just a few examples of your national network of conservation lands. Pelican 

Island National Wildlife Refuge, the first refuge, was established in 1903 for the protection of 

colonial nesting birds in Florida, such as the snowy egret and the brown pelican. Western 

refuges were established for American bison (1906), elk (1912), prong-horned antelope (1931), 

and desert bighorn sheep (1936) after over-hunting, competition with cattle, and natural disasters 

decimated once-abundant herds. The drought conditions of the 1930s “Dust Bowl” severely 

depleted breeding populations of ducks and geese. Refuges established during the Great 

Depression focused on waterfowl production areas (i.e., protection of prairie wetlands in 

America’s heartland). The emphasis on waterfowl continues today but also includes protection of 

wintering habitat in response to a dramatic loss of bottomland hardwoods. By 1973, the Service 

had begun to focus on establishing refuges for endangered species. 

Approximately 35 million people visited national wildlife refuges in 2006, most to observe wildlife in 

their natural habitats. As the number of visitors grows, there are significant economic benefits to local 

communities. In 2006, 87 million people, 16 years and older, fished, hunted, or observed wildlife, 

generating $120 billion. In a study completed in 2002 on 15 refuges, visitation had grown 36 percent 

in 7 years. At the same time, the number of jobs generated in surrounding communities grew to 120 

per refuge, up from 87 jobs in 1995, pouring more than $2.2 million into local economies. The 15 

refuges in the study were Chincoteague (Virginia); National Elk (Wyoming); Crab Orchard (Illinois); 

Eufaula (Alabama); Charles M. Russell (Montana); Umatilla (Oregon); Quivira (Kansas); 

Mattamuskeet (North Carolina); Upper Souris (North Dakota); San Francisco Bay (California); Laguna 

Atacosa (Texas); Horicon (Wisconsin); Las Vegas (Nevada); Tule Lake (California); and Tensas River 

(Louisiana), the same refuges identified for the 1995 study. Other findings also validate the belief 

that communities near refuges benefit economically. Expenditures on food, lodging, and 

transportation grew to $6.8 million per refuge, up 31 percent from $5.2 million in 1995. For each 

dollar spent on the Refuge System, surrounding communities benefited with $4.43 in recreation 

expenditures and $1.42 in job-related income (Caudill and Laughland 2003). 

Volunteers continue to be a major contributor to the success of the Refuge System. In 2006, over 

36,000 volunteers contributed nearly 1.5 million hours on refuges nationwide. The value of their labor 

was more than $26 million; their in-kind services the equivalent of 696 full-time employees. 

The wildlife and habitat vision for national wildlife refuges stresses that wildlife comes first; that 

ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are vital concepts in refuge management; that refuges must 

be healthy and growth must be strategic; and that the Refuge System serves as a model for habitat 

management with broad participation from others. 

The Improvement Act stipulates that comprehensive conservation plans be prepared in 

consultation with adjoining federal, state, and private landowners, and that the Service develop 

and implement a process to ensure an opportunity for active public involvement in the preparation 

and revision (every 15 years) of the plans. 
8 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

All lands of the Refuge System will be managed in accordance with an approved CCP that will guide 

management decisions and set forth strategies for achieving refuge unit purposes. The CCP will be 

consistent with sound resource management principles, practices, and legal mandates, including Service 

compatibility standards and other Service policies, guidelines, and planning documents (602 FW 1.1). 

LEGAL AND POLICY CONTEXT 

Legal Mandates, Administrative and Policy Guidelines, and Other Special Considerations 

Administration of national wildlife refuges is guided by the mission and goals of the Refuge System, 

congressional legislation, presidential executive orders, and international treaties. Policies for 

management options of refuges are further refined by administrative guidelines established by the 

Secretary of the Interior and by policy guidelines established by the Director of the Fish and Wildlife 

Service. Select legal summaries of treaties and laws relevant to administration of the Refuge System 

and management of the Complex are provided in Appendix C. 

Treaties, laws, administrative guidelines, and policy guidelines assist the refuge manager in making 

decisions pertaining to soil, water, air, flora, fauna, and other natural resources; historical and cultural 

resources; research and recreation on refuge lands; and provide a framework for cooperation 

between the Complex and other partners, such as the Georgia and South Carolina Departments of 

Natural Resources (GADNR and SCDNR), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the Western 

Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, and private landowners, etc. 

Lands within the Refuge System are closed to public use unless specifically and legally opened. No 

refuge use may be allowed unless it is determined to be appropriate and compatible as defined in the 

Service Manual (603 FW 1&2). All programs and uses must be evaluated based on mandates set 

forth in the Improvement Act. Those mandates are to: 

 Contribute to ecosystem goals, as well as refuge purposes and goals; 

 Conserve, manage, and restore fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats; 

 Monitor the trends of fish, wildlife, and plants; 

 Manage and ensure appropriate visitor uses as those uses benefit the conservation of fish 

and wildlife resources and contribute to the enjoyment of the public; and 

 Ensure that visitor activities are compatible with refuge purposes. 

The Improvement Act further identifies six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses. These uses 

are: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and 

interpretation. As priority public uses of the Refuge System, they receive priority consideration over 

other public uses in planning and management. 

Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy 

The Improvement Act directs the Service to ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and 

environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future 

generations of Americans. The policy is an additional directive for refuge managers to follow while 

achieving refuge purpose(s) and the Refuge System mission. It provides for the consideration and 

protection of the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, and habitat resources found on refuges and 

associated ecosystems. When evaluating the appropriate management direction for refuges, refuge 

managers will use sound professional judgment to determine their refuges’ contribution to biological 

integrity, diversity, and environmental health at multiple landscape scales. Sound professional 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 9

judgment incorporates: (1) Field experience; (2) knowledge of refuge resources; (3) knowledge of 

refuge’s role within an ecosystem; (4) applicable laws; and (5) best available science, including 

consultation with others both inside and outside the Service. 

NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS AND INITIATIVES 

Multiple partnerships have been developed among government and private entities to address the 

environmental problems affecting regions. There is a large amount of conservation and protection 

information that defines the role of the refuge at the local, national, international, and ecosystem 

levels. Conservation initiatives include broad-scale planning and cooperation between affected 

parties to address declining trends of natural, physical, social, and economic environments. The 

conservation guidance described below, along with issues, problems, and trends, was reviewed and 

integrated where appropriate into this CCP. 

This CCP supports, among others, the Partners-in-Flight Plan, the North American Waterfowl 

Management Plan, the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, and the National Wetlands 

Priority Conservation Plan. 

North American Bird Conservation Initiative. Started in 1999, the North American Bird 

Conservation Initiative is a coalition of government agencies, private organizations, academic 

institutions, and private industry leaders in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, working to ensure 

the long-term health of North America's native bird populations by fostering an integrated approach to 

bird conservation to benefit all birds in all habitats. The four international and national bird initiatives 

include the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Partners-in-Flight, Waterbird Conservation 

for the Americas, and the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. 

North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan 

is an international action plan to conserve migratory birds throughout the continent. The plan's goal is 

to return waterfowl populations to their 1970s levels by conserving wetland and upland habitat. 

Canada and the United States signed the plan in 1986 in reaction to critically low numbers of 

waterfowl. Mexico joined in 1994, making it a truly continental effort. The plan is a partnership of 

federal, provincial/state and municipal governments, non-governmental organizations, private 

companies, and many individuals, all working towards achieving better wetland habitat for the benefit 

of migratory birds, other wetland-associated species and people. Plan projects are international in 

scope, but implemented at regional levels. These projects contribute to the protection of habitat and 

wildlife species across the North American landscape. 

Partners-in-Flight Bird Conservation Plan. Managed as part of the Partners-in-Flight Plan, the 

Southern Coastal Plain physiographic area represents a scientifically based land bird conservation 

planning effort that ensures long-term maintenance of healthy populations of native land birds, 

primarily non-game land birds. Non-game land birds have been vastly under-represented in 

conservation efforts, and many are exhibiting significant declines. This plan is voluntary and nonregulatory, and focuses on relatively common species in areas where conservation actions can be 

most effective, rather than the frequent local emphasis on rare and peripheral populations. 

U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan is a partnership effort 

throughout the United States to ensure that stable and self-sustaining populations of shorebird 

species are restored and protected. The plan was developed by a wide range of agencies, 

organizations, and shorebird experts for separate regions of the country, and identifies conservation 

goals, critical habitat conservation needs, key research needs, and proposed education and outreach 

programs to increase awareness of shorebirds and the threats they face. 
10 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Northern American Waterbird Conservation Plan. This plan provides a framework for the 

conservation and management of 210 species of waterbirds in 29 nations. Threats to waterbird 

populations include destruction of inland and coastal wetlands, introduced predators and invasive 

species, pollutants, mortality from fisheries and industries, disturbance, and conflicts arising from 

abundant species. Particularly important habitats of the southeast region include pelagic areas, 

marshes, forested wetlands, and barrier and sea island complexes. Fifteen species of waterbirds are 

federally listed, including breeding populations of wood storks, Mississippi sandhill cranes, whooping 

cranes, interior least terns, and Gulf Coast populations of brown pelicans. A key objective of this plan 

is the standardization of data collection efforts to better recommend effective conservation measures. 

RELATIONSHIP TO STATE WILDLIFE AGENCY 

A provision of the Improvement Act, and subsequent agency policy, is that the Service shall ensure timely 

and effective cooperation and collaboration with other state fish and game agencies and tribal 

governments during the course of acquiring and managing refuges. State wildlife management areas and 

national wildlife refuges provide the foundation for the protection of species, and contribute to the overall 

health and sustainment of fish and wildlife species in the States of Georgia and South Carolina. 

GADNR and SCDNR are state-partnering agencies with the Service, charged with enforcement 

responsibilities relating to migratory birds and endangered species, as well as managing state natural 

resources, coastal marshes, and wildlife management areas. These agencies direct each state’s 

wildlife conservation program and provide public recreation opportunities on state wildlife 

management areas. The participation of the GADNR/SCDNR throughout this planning process 

provides ongoing opportunities for an open dialogue to improve the ecological sustainability of fish 

and wildlife in Georgia and South Carolina. A key aspect of the planning process is the integration of 

common objectives between the Service and the state agency, where appropriate. An essential part 

of comprehensive conservation planning is integrating common mission objectives where 

appropriate. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies for the states of Georgia and South 

Carolina are summarized below. 

Georgia’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: 

In December 2002, the Wildlife Resources Division (WRD) of GADNR began a process to develop a 

Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS). Through the Wildlife Conservation and 

Reinvestment Program, WRD made a commitment to develop and begin implementation of this 

CWCS by October 1, 2005. Funding for this planning effort came from a federal grant to WRD 

through the State Wildlife Grant program and matching funds were provided through Georgia’s 

Nongame Wildlife Conservation Fund. The goal of the CWCS strategy is to conserve Georgia’s 

animals, plants, and natural habitats through proactive measures emphasizing voluntary and 

incentive-based programs on private lands; habitat restoration and management by public agencies 

and private conservation organizations; rare species survey and recovery efforts; and environmental 

education and public outreach activities. 

Components of this planning effort included: (1) Development of databases on rare species and 

natural communities; (2) identification of high-priority species and habitats; (3) identification of highpriority research and biological inventory needs; (4) surveys for rare species on public and private 

lands; (5) development of databases of conservation lands and high-priority watersheds and 

landscapes; (6) prioritization of conservation, education, and habitat protection needs; (7) 

collaboration with state and federal agencies on habitat protection/restoration plans; (8) technical 

assistance to private conservation organizations and local governments; (9) review of existing 

conservation laws, rules, and policies; and (10) public input and educational outreach. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 11

The following goals represent important themes in the CWCS: 

 Maintain known viable populations of all high-priority species and functional examples of all highpriority habitats through voluntary land protection and incentive-based habitat management 

programs on private lands, and habitat restoration and management on public lands. 

 Increase public awareness of high-priority species and habitats by developing educational 

messages and lesson plans for use in environmental education facilities, local schools, and 

other facilities. 

 Facilitate restoration of important wildlife habitats through reintroduction of prescribed fire, 

hydrologic enhancements, and vegetation restoration. 

 Conduct statewide assessments of rare natural communities and habitats that support species 

of conservation concern. 

 Improve efforts to protect vulnerable and ecologically important habitats such as isolated 

wetlands, headwater streams, and caves. 

 Combat the spread of invasive/noxious species in high-priority natural habitats by identifying 

problem areas; providing technical and financial assistance; developing specific educational 

messages; and managing invasive/noxious species populations on public lands. 

 Minimize impacts from development and other activities on high-priority species and habitats 

by improving environmental review procedures and facilitating training for and compliance with 

best management practices. 

 Update the state protected species list and work with conservation partners to improve 

management of these species and their habitats. 

 Conduct targeted field inventories of neglected taxonomic groups including invertebrates and 

nonvascular plants. 

 Continue efforts to recover federally listed species through implementation of recovery plans, 

and restore populations of other high-priority species. 

 Establish a consistent source of state funding for land protection to support wildlife 

conservation, and increase availability and use of federal funds for land acquisition and 

management. 

 Continue efforts to monitor land use changes statewide and in each ecoregion, and use 

predictive models to assess impacts to high-priority species and habitats. 

South Carolina’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: 

In May 2002, the SCDNR began a process to develop the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation 

Strategy (CWCS) that was funded through the State Wildlife Grants (SWG) program. The SCDNR 

committed to developing the CWCS and begin implementing the conservation actions by October 1, 

2005. The goal of the CWCS is to emphasize a cooperative, proactive approach to conservation 

while working with federal, state, and local governments; local businesses; and conservation-minded 

individuals to join in the effort of maintaining the fish and wildlife resources of South Carolina. 

The actions considered critical in this planning effort included: increasing baseline biological 

inventories with emphasis on natural history, distribution, and status of native species; increasing 

commitment by natural resource agencies, conservation organizations, and academia toward 

establishing effective conservation strategies; increasing financial support and technological 

resources for planning and implementation of these strategies; and creating public-private 

partnerships and educational outreach programs for broad-scale conservation efforts. 
12 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The following are the required elements in South Carolina’s CWCS: 

 Information on the distribution and abundance of species of wildlife, including low and 

declining populations as the state fish and wildlife agency deems appropriate, that are 

indicative of the diversity and health of the State’s wildlife. 

 Descriptions of locations and relative condition of key habitats and community types essential 

to conservation of species identified in the first element (above). 

 Descriptions of problems, which may adversely affect species identified in the first element 

(above) or their habitats, and priority research and survey efforts needed to identify factors, 

which may assist in restoration and improved conservation of these species and habitats. 

 Descriptions of conservation actions determined to be necessary to conserve the identified 

species and habitats and priorities for implementing such actions. 

 Descriptions of the proposed plans for monitoring species identified in the first element 

(above) and their habitats, for monitoring the effectiveness of the proposed conservation 

actions, and for adapting these conservation actions to respond appropriately to new 

information or changing conditions. 

 Descriptions of procedures to review the CWCS at intervals not to exceed 10 years. 

 Descriptions of the plans for coordinating, to the extent feasible, the development, 

implementation, review, and revision of the CWCS with federal, state, and local agencies and 

Indian tribes that manage significant land and water areas within the state or administer 

programs that significantly affect the conservation of identified species and habitats. 

 Descriptions of the necessary public participation in the development, revision, and 

implementation of the CWCS. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 13

II. Refuge Overview 

INTRODUCTION 

A chain of seven national wildlife refuges form the Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex that extends 

from Pinckney Island NWR near Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, to Wolf Island NWR near Darien, 

Georgia. Between these two refuges lie five additional national wildlife refuges: Savannah (the 

largest unit in the Complex), Wassaw, Tybee, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island NWRs. These 

seven refuges total 56,949 acres, span about 100 miles of the Atlantic Ocean coastline, and are 

administered from their headquarters at the Savannah NWR Visitor Center (Figure 1). 

These refuges are located in an ecosystem characterized by coastal marsh and barrier islands and 

locally referred to as "Lowcountry," bordered on the west by sandhill ridges and on the east by the 

Atlantic Ocean, and extending from Georgetown, South Carolina, to St. Mary's, Georgia. 

The variety of birdlife within the Lowcountry is enhanced by its location on the Atlantic Flyway. During 

the winter months, thousands of mallards, pintails, teal, and many other species of ducks migrate into 

the area, joining resident wood ducks on the coastal refuges. In the spring and fall, transient 

songbirds and shorebirds stop briefly on their journeys to and from northern nesting grounds. Among 

these casual visitors are the warblers (e.g., magnolia, prairie, blackpoll, American redstarts, blackthroated blue), and sandpipers (e.g., buff-breasted, white-rumped, pectoral, whimbrels, semipalmated 

sandpipers, short-billed dowitchers). Many migratory songbirds and shorebirds terminate their 

southern journeys and spend the winter. The hermit thrush, rubycrowned kinglet, yellow-rumped

warbler, black-bellied plover, and sanderling are a few of the winter residents. 

The barrier islands provide ideal habitat for a wide variety of plants and animals, including species of 

concern such as the American alligator, piping plover, wood stork, loggerhead sea turtle, and 

southern bald eagle. The saltwater marshes that lie behind the barrier islands are nurseries for 

countless marine organisms, including shrimp, oysters, crabs, striped bass, and other commercial 

and sport species that are particularly important to the coastal economy. Such an abundance of life 

in the salt marsh invites other animals to rest, feed, or nest -- promoting the diversity of flora and 

fauna found in the Lowcountry coastal plain and the barrier islands habitats. 

With the exception of Wolf Island NWR, the development of this CCP for the remaining six refuges 

comprising the Complex was initiated in 2008. The CCP for Wolf Island NWR was initiated in 2006 

and completed in 2008. This CCP contains concepts to guide further development and 

implementation of land use and management programs and associated facilities and management 

structures for the next 15 years. Consideration of physical, biological, and cultural resources, along 

with the socioeconomic environment and refuge management and administration, is taken into 

account and analyzed to produce an overview of each refuge and the challenges it faces. An 

Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental 

Protection Act (NEPA) guidelines, and was included in the draft of this plan. In addition to 

documenting the existing natural environmental and socioeconomic setting, the EA evaluates the 

impact of the proposed and alternative actions and no action in order to facilitate selection of the 

alternative most suitable for implementation. 
14 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 1. Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 15

REFUGE HISTORY AND PURPOSE 

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 

By various estimates, man has inhabited the North American continent for 10,000-40,000 years. 

There is increasing evidence that human occupancy of what is now the coastal region of the 

southeastern United States extends at least 10,000 years into the past. This is difficult to prove 

because archaeological evidence in coastal areas is quickly destroyed by changing sea levels with 

constant erosion and deposition so that many early sites are probably located under the water on the 

continental shelf and visible traces of human occupation date back only about 4,000 years. Sites on 

the barrier islands dating from A.D. 500 to 1300 reveal that the inhabitants cultivated corn, beans, 

pumpkins, and other crops before contact with Europeans. Shell heaps and middens attest to the 

importance of shellfish in the diet of the original inhabitants. 

European influence began in 1568 with the establishment of the first Spanish missions. Although 

periodically destroyed or otherwise interrupted, these missions tenaciously clung to survival for over 

100 years. During their tenure, the Spaniards enriched the native fare by the introduction of exotic 

plants (e.g., figs, oranges, other fruits) and domesticated animals (e.g., hogs, goats). In 1685, the 

English and their native allies invaded from the north and destroyed the missions and the island 

natives. For about 50 years, the islands remained uninhabited and, except for occasional visits by 

pirates and Indians, undisturbed. 

In 1732, King George I of England granted the region to General James Oglethorpe as a buffer 

against the Spanish in Florida. Oglethorpe landed in Savannah in 1733, and established it as the first 

settlement recognized by the English government in colonial days. Oglethorpe's efforts toward 

colonization extended south to St. Simons where he built Fort Frederica and ended the Spanish 

threat in North America. Subsequently, by 1776, Savannah, Richmond Hill, Midway, Sunbury, 

Darien, Brunswick, and St. Mary’s were thriving agricultural communities. Naval stores (tar, pitch, 

turpentine) and live oak timbers were the earliest major economic resources of the islands, which 

soon came under intensive agriculture. On the mainland, as well as the islands, the colonists 

experimented with a variety of subtropical plants including olives, dates, oranges, figs, rice, indigo, 

hemp, pomegranates, coffee, tea, and silk. The climate proved unsuitable for oranges, although they 

persisted as a minor crop for many years. Silk was a major crop for a few years and was produced 

on a minor scale as late as 1790. By 1750, rice and indigo were well established as profitable crops. 

The Revolutionary War brought about a decline in the market for indigo, which was largely 

supplanted by rice except on the islands. 

Rice was grown in diked fields at the mouths of mainland rivers. Production reached its peak between 

1850 and 1860. Chatham County was the leading producer, followed by Camden, McIntosh, Glynn, 

Liberty, and Bryan counties. In 1859, planters were harvesting an average of 50 bushels per acre, with 

about 23,000 acres in cultivation. Total state production was 52,507,652 pounds. 

Long-staple cotton, imported from the Bahamas about 1785, was first grown on St. Simons and was 

soon cultivated on the other islands and the adjacent mainland along the Georgia and South Carolina 

coasts. This variety, known as Sea Island cotton, was considered superior to upland cotton and sold 

for two to five times the price of the latter (Procher and Fick 2005) 

The plantation era on the Georgia coast was marked by a sophisticated level of land 

management. Despite malaria and yellow fever, which drove the white planters and their families 

inland during the growing season, the planters cleared thousands of acres of forest and cypress 

swamp to grow rice and other crops. Plantation owners were well educated and included some of 
16 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

the most advanced agriculturists in the nation, employing practices generally attributed to a much 

later age. These included irrigation, drainage, liming, fertilization, crop rotation, fallowing, 

composting, mulching, and biological insect control (using flocks of turkeys to control leaf worm 

caterpillars in cotton). Of particular interest was the application of marsh mud, crushed oyster 

shell, cordgrass, and stable manure to the fields. The application of marsh mud to the fields was 

considered essential to successful crop production. 

The Civil War and the ensuing abolition of slavery signaled the end of the Plantation Era. 

Survivors of the war returned to their devastated lands and attempted to restore the plantation 

system with paid labor, but the freed slaves and imported Irish and Chinese laborers proved to be 

undependable sources of labor and the plantations were soon abandoned (U.S. Department of 

the Interior National Park Service 1974). 

Thus, within a few years, the coastal area changed from one of the most prosperous regions in 

the nation to one of the poorest. Most of the islands were more or less deserted until the 1890s 

when wealthy industrialists purchased them and restored some of the remaining plantations. 

Except for Blackbeard Island, which was in public ownership, the islands remained private, 

relatively natural, well-managed retreats. 

PURPOSES 

Although the Complex has an overriding purpose of providing for the habitat needs of migratory birds, 

each refuge within the Complex has a unique purpose and establishing legislation. This CCP identifies 

specific goals, objectives, and strategies that are intended to support these individual refuge purposes. 

Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge 

“for use as a bird refuge and as an experiment station for acclimatization of certain foreign game 

birds” (Executive Order 4512, September 20, 1926); and, “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any 

other management purpose for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act) 

Blackbeard Island was acquired by the Navy Department at public auction in 1800 as a source of live 

oak timber for ship building. The U.S. Navy transferred land in McIntosh County, Georgia, to the 

Bureau of Biological Survey (a predecessor to the Fish and Wildlife Service) in 1924, by Executive 

Order 4512, to establish a bird refuge. A presidential proclamation in 1940 changed its designation 

from Blackbeard Island Reservation to Blackbeard Island NWR. Today, the refuge’s 5,618 acres 

include maritime forest, salt marsh, freshwater marsh, and beach habitat (Figure 2). In 1975, 3,000 

acres of the refuge were set aside as National Wilderness by Public Law 93-632. The primary 

management objectives for Blackbeard Island NWR are as follows: 

 Provide wintering habitat and protection for migratory birds. 

 Provide protection and habitat to promote resident and migratory wildlife diversity. 

 Provide protection and management for threatened and endangered plant and animal species 

(e.g., loggerhead sea turtle, American alligator, wood stork, piping plover). 

 Provide environmental education, interpretation, and recreational opportunities to the visiting 

public. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 17

Figure 2. Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge 
18 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge 

“particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program” (16 U.S.C. 667b, 

An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes); “for use as 

an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act); and, for “the conservation of the wetlands of the Nation in order to 

maintain the public benefits they provide and to help fulfill international obligations contained in 

various treaties and conventions” (16 U.S.C. 3901(b), 100 Stat. 3583, Emergency Wetlands 

Resources Act of 1986).

Harris Neck NWR was established in 1962 by transfer of federal lands formerly managed by the 

Federal Aviation Administration as a WWII Army airfield. The refuge’s 2,824 acres consist of 

saltwater marsh, grassland, mixed deciduous woods, and freshwater impoundments (Figure 3). 

Because of this great variety in habitat, many different species of birds are attracted to the refuge 

throughout the year. The primary management objectives for Harris Neck NWR are as follows: 

 Provide habitat and protection for migratory birds. 

 Provide protection and habitat to promote resident and migratory wildlife diversity. 

 Provide protection and management for threatened and endangered species (e.g., American 

alligator and wood stork). 

 Provide protection and management necessary to sustain and promote colonial nesting bird 

populations that use the refuge. 

 Provide wildlife education and interpretation and recreational opportunities to the visiting 

public. 

Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge 

“as a wildlife refuge and as a nature and forest preserve for aesthetic and conservation purposes, 

without disturbing the habitat of the plant and animal populations except as such disturbance may be 

necessary to preserve the use of the real property for the purposes above mentioned” (Deed of 

Donation, December 4, 1975); and “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management 

purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

Pinckney Island NWR, established December 4, 1975 by a Deed of Donation, was once included in 

the plantation of Major General Charles Pinckney, a prominent lawyer active in South Carolina politics 

after the American Revolution. Few traces of the island’s plantation life in the 1800s exist today. The 

4,053-acre refuge includes Pinckney Island, Corn Island, Big and Little Harry Islands, Buzzard Island, 

and numerous small hammocks (Figure 4). Pinckney is the largest of the islands and the only one 

open to public use. Nearly 67 percent of the refuge consists of salt marsh and tidal creeks. A wide 

variety of land types is found on Pinckney Island alone: salt marsh, forestland, brushland, fallow field, 

and freshwater ponds. The primary management objectives for Pinckney Island NWR are as follows: 

 To protect and provide habitat for threatened and endangered species. 

 To provide and maintain habitat for migratory and resident birds that utilize and or nest 

annually on the refuge. 

 To provide, enhance, and maintain habitat for native wildlife. 

 To promote wildlife interpretive and recreational opportunities. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 19

Figure 3. Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge 
20 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 4. Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 21

Savannah National Wildlife Refuge 

“as a refuge and breeding ground for birds and wild animals subject to future use in navigation if 

necessary and to valid existing rights if any” (Executive Order 5748, April 6, 1927); for lands acquired 

under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other 

management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d); for lands acquired under the Refuge 

Recreation Act for “(1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the protection of 

natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species” (16 U.S.C. 460k); 

for “the conservation of the wetlands of the Nation in order to maintain the public benefits they provide and 

to help fulfill international obligations contained in various migratory bird treaties and conventions” (16 

U.S.C. 3901(b), 100 Stat. 3583, Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1968); “for the development, 

advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources” (16 U.S.C. 

742f(a)(4)); and, “for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities 

and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or 

condition of servitude” (16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1), Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956) 

Savannah NWR was established on April 6, 1927, by Executive Order No. 4626, which created the 

Savannah River Bird Refuge and set aside 2,352 acres as a preserve and breeding ground for native 

birds. On November 12, 1931, Executive Order No. 5748 added 207 acres to the refuge and 

renamed the area the Savannah River Wildlife Refuge. An additional 6,527 acres were assigned to 

the refuge on June 17, 1936, by Executive Order No. 7391. On July 30, 1940, Presidential 

Proclamation 2416 renamed the refuge the Savannah National Wildlife Refuge. These three 

Executive Orders established the 9,086-acre core of the present refuge; subsequent acquisition using 

Duck Stamp funds and other special funding added 3,557 acres. An additional 459 acres were 

added when the fee title to Hog Marsh Island and adjacent lands to the north were acquired through 

an exchange of spoilage rights with Chatham County, Georgia. In 1964, Savannah Electric and 

Power Company deeded 34 acres to the refuge in exchange for a power line right-of-way. In 1978, 

the 12,472-acre Argent Swamp tract was purchased from Union Camp Corporation using Land and 

Water Conservation Funds. Bear Island (687 acres) was purchased in fee title from a private 

individual on October 19, 1993. In order to straighten the eastern boundary, two tracts totaling 54 

acres were purchased from Union Camp Corporation on August 27, 1996. The Barrows tract (535 

acres), which lies adjacent to the southeast boundary, was purchased in fee title during 1998. 

Another tract of land was added onto the mid-western portion of the refuge; the Solomon tract was 

purchased in 1999 and is 887 acres. The total current refuge acreage consists of 29,175 acres of 

freshwater marshes, tidal rivers and creeks, and bottomland hardwoods (Figure 5). About half of the 

refuge is bottomland, composed primarily of cypress, gum, and maple species. Access to this area is 

by boat only. The primary management objectives for Savannah NWR are as follows: 

 To utilize refuge property as "a refuge and breeding ground for native birds and wild animals." 

 To provide habitat and protection for those species of plants and animals whose survival is 

threatened or endangered. 

 To provide habitat and sanctuary for migratory birds consistent with the objectives of the 

Atlantic Flyway. 

 To maintain and enhance as needed the habitats of all other species of indigenous wildlife 

and fishery resources. 

 To provide opportunities for environmental education, interpretation, and quality wildlifedependent recreation for the visiting public. 
22 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 5. Savannah National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 23

Tybee National Wildlife Refuge 

“Effectuate further the purposes of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act." Tybee NWR was 

established on May 9, 1938, by Executive Order No. 7882, as a breeding area for migratory birds and 

other wildlife. The majority of the 400-acre refuge is covered with sand deposits from the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers’ dredging activities in the Savannah River (Figure 6). The more stable portions of 

the island are densely covered with such woody species as eastern red cedar, wax myrtle, and 

groundsel. Saltwater marsh borders parts of the island. At low tide the shoreline provides a resting 

and feeding place for many species of migratory birds. Stated objectives of the refuge only dictate 

basic ownership and protection. Tybee NWR was established by executive order to "effectuate 

further the purposes of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act." The refuge is primarily managed for the 

benefit of nesting shorebirds. Due to its small size, limited habitat, and funding, Tybee NWR is closed 

to the public. 

Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge 

“for the purpose of creating a fish and wildlife refuge to be maintained as nearly as practicable in its 

natural state” (Deed of Donation, October 20, 1969); and, “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any 

other management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

Wassaw, one of Georgia’s coastal barrier islands, was designated a national wildlife refuge on 

October 20, 1969, by a Deed of Donation from the Nature Conservancy for the sum of one dollar. 

Unlike many of Georgia’s Golden Isles, little development and few management practices have 

modified Wassaw’s primitive character. The 10,053-acre refuge includes beaches with rolling dunes, 

live oak and slash pine woodlands, and vast salt marshes (Figure 7). The island supports rookeries 

for egrets and herons, and several species of wading birds are abundant in the summer months. In 

summer, telltale tracks on Wassaw’s beach attest to nocturnal visits by the threatened loggerhead 

sea turtles that come ashore for egg laying and then return to the sea. The primary management 

objectives for Wassaw NWR are as follows: 

 Maintain and protect the coastal maritime forest, marsh, and beach communities. 

 Provide habitat for migratory birds, wading and shorebirds, and native fauna. 

 Provide habitat for threatened and endangered loggerhead sea turtles, wood storks, peregrine 

falcons, and piping plovers. 

 Provide recreation and environmental education for the public. 

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

Lands within the Complex were reviewed for their suitability in meeting the criteria for Wilderness 

Areas, as defined by the Wilderness Act of 1964. On Blackbeard Island NWR, 3,000 acres (and all of 

Wolf Island NWR) are designated as a Wilderness Area. A Wilderness Area (in contrast with those 

areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape) is recognized and defined as “an area 

where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor and 

does not remain.” An area of wilderness is further defined as an area of undeveloped, federal land 

retaining its primal character and influence without permanent improvements or human habitation, 

which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which: 

1. Generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of 

man’s work substantially unnoticeable; 

2. Has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; 
24 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 6. Tybee National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 25

Figure 7. Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge 
26 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

1. Has at least 5,000 acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation 

and use in an unimpaired condition; and 

2. May also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or 

historic value. 

No areas in the other five refuges were found to meet these criteria. Therefore, the suitability of 

refuge lands for wilderness designation is not further analyzed in this CCP. 

The Service administratively designates Research Natural Areas (RNAs) on refuges; currently there 

are 210 such areas on refuges totaling 1,955,762 acres. RNAs are part of a national network of 

reserved areas under various ownerships. RNAs are intended to represent the full array of North 

American ecosystems with their biological communities, habitats, natural phenomena, and geological 

and hydrological formations. In RNAs, as in designated wilderness, natural processes are allowed to 

predominate without human intervention. Under certain circumstances, deliberate manipulation may 

be used to maintain the unique features for which the research natural area was established. 

Activities such as hiking, bird watching, hunting, fishing, and wildlife observation and photography are 

permissible, but not mandated, in research natural areas. RNAs may be closed to all public use if 

such use is determined to be incompatible with primary refuge purposes. Virgin slash pine-hardwood 

habitat on Blackbeard Island NWR has been designated as RNA. 

Biosphere reserves are protected areas of representative terrestrial and coastal environments which 

have been internationally recognized under the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Program for their 

value in conservation and in providing the scientific knowledge, skill, and human values to support 

sustainable development. Biosphere reserves are united to form a worldwide network which 

facilitates sharing of information relevant to the conservation and management of natural and 

managed ecosystems. Five units of the Refuge System are included in Biosphere reserves, and 

three of these are found on the lower Coastal Plain of Georgia and South Carolina: Blackbeard 

Island NWR, Wolf Island NWR, and Cape Romain NWR.

The Georgia Department of Natural Resources has designated several high-priority waters associated 

with the Complex. These are streams, estuarine, and marine waters that contain important populations of 

high-priority aquatic species or are representative of an aquatic system and its associated community. 

South Carolina’s Department of Health and Environmental Control has also designated outstanding 

resource waters in the immediate area of the Complex. Outstanding resource waters are designated as 

freshwater or saltwater that constitutes an outstanding recreational or ecological resource. 

The following are those designated waters: 

 High Priority Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters Associated Refuges

Georgia

 Savannah River, Site 46 Savannah NWR 

 Savannah River, Coastal Site 235 Savannah and Tybee NWRs 

 Wilmington/Bull/Tybee, Coastal Site 241 Wassaw NWR 

 Little Ogeechee/Skidaway Coastal Site 226 Wassaw NWR 

 S. Newport/Barbour Is./Wahoo/Johnson, Coastal Site 232 Harris Neck NWR 

 Crescent/Sapelo/Julienton Coastal Site 219 Harris Neck NWR 

 Doboy/Teakettle/Mud/Cabretta Coastal Site 224 Blackbeard Island NWR 

 [Altamaha River, Site 28 Wolf Island NWR] 

 [Darien/North/Black/Carnigan, Coastal Site 223 Wolf Island NWR] 

South Carolina

 Colleton River and its tributaries including the Okatie River Pinckney Island NWR
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 27

The Savannah River which flows through the Savannah NWR has also been designated by the 

Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) as a free-flowing river segment possessing "outstandingly 

remarkable" natural or cultural values of more than local or regional significance. About a 170-mile 

segment of the Savannah River (from river mile 20 at King's Island upstream to river mile 190) is 

designated as having outstandingly remarkable values of scenery, recreation, geology, fish, wildlife, 

history, and cultural resources. 

Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Savannah, and Wassaw NWRs are recognized as Important Bird Areas 

(IBA) by the National Audubon Society. 

The Wolf Island NWR (Wolf, Egg, and Little Egg Islands) is located at the mouth of the Altamaha 

River. The Altamaha River has also been designated by the NRI as a free-flowing river segment 

possessing "outstandingly remarkable" natural or cultural values of more than local or regional 

significance. About a 128-mile segment of the Altamaha River (from Altamaha Sound upstream to 

river mile 128 at the junction of Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers) is designated as having outstandingly 

remarkable values of scenery, recreation, geology, fish, wildlife, history, and cultural resources. 

ECOSYSTEM CONTEXT 

An ecosystem is a geographical area that includes and interconnects all the living (biotic) organisms, 

their physical (abiotic) surroundings, and the natural cycles that sustain them. All of these elements 

are interconnected. Managing any one resource affects the others in that ecosystem. Ecosystems 

can be small (a single stand of aspen) or large (an entire watershed including hundreds of forest 

stands across many different ownerships). 

The United States (including Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico) is comprised of 14 Ecosystem 

Divisions. Of these 14 ecosystem divisions, the Subtropical Division (230) includes the Southern 

Atlantic and Gulf Coast States. Within the Subtropical Division lies the Outer Coastal Plain Mixed 

Forest Province (232) (Bailey 1978). 

Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of 

environmental resources. The Southern Coastal Plain Ecoregion lies within the Outer Coastal Plain 

Mixed Forest Province (Loveland and Acevedo 2008). Regionally, the Southern Coastal Plain 

Ecoregion, an area of over 14 million square kilometers, extends from South Carolina and Georgia 

through much of central Florida, and along the Gulf coast lowlands of the Florida Panhandle, 

Alabama, and Mississippi (area 75-Level III Ecoregion). The Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

(SCRC) is located in the Southern Coastal Plain Ecoregion. Figures 8 and 9 illustrate the Southern 

Coastal Plain ecoregion in Georgia and South Carolina (Environmental Protection Agency 2009a and 

2009b). This ecoregion is lower in elevation with less relief and wetter soils than the more inland, 

adjacent Southeastern Plains ecoregion. Once covered by a variety of forest communities that 

included longleaf pine, slash pine, pond pine, beech-magnolia, and mixed upland hardwoods, land 

cover in the region is now predominantly slash and loblolly pine plantations with cypress-gum, bay 

swamp, and bottomland hardwoods in low-lying areas (GADNR 2005).

Ecoregional subdivisions (Level IV) in Georgia and South Carolina of the Southern Coastal Plain 

include: the Okefenokee Plains (75e); Sea Island Flatwoods (75f); Okefenokee Swamp (75g); Bacon 

Terraces (75h); Floodplains and Low Terraces (75i); and Sea Islands/Coastal Marsh (75j). The 

SCRC lies almost entirely in the Sea Islands/Coastal Marsh ecoregion subdivision (75j), as shown in 

Figures 8 and 9 (Environmental Protection Agency 2009a and 2009b). A portion of the Savannah 

NWR also lies in the Floodplains and Low Terraces ecoregion subdivision (75i), which is 

characterized by the broad floodplains and terraces of major rivers, such as the Savannah, 
28 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 8. Ecoregions of South Carolina Levels III and IV 

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division. “Ecoregions of North Carolina and South 

Carolina.” http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/ncsc_eco.htm
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 29

Figure 9. Ecoregions of Georgia Levels III and IV 

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division. “Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia.” 

http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/alga_eco.htm 
30 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Ogeechee, and Altamaha. Soils consist of stream alluvium and terrace deposits of sand, silt, clay, 

and gravel, along with some organic muck and swamp deposits. The ecoregion subdivision 

includes large sluggish rivers and backwaters with ponds, swamps, and oxbow lakes. River swamp 

forests of bald cypress and water tupelo and oak-dominated bottomland hardwood forests provide 

important wildlife habitat (GADNR 2005).

The Sea Islands/Coastal Marsh ecoregion subdivision, encompassing Blackbeard, Harris Neck, 

Pinckney Island, Tybee, Wassaw, Wolf Island and major parts of Savannah NWRs, contains the 

lowest elevations in South Carolina and Georgia and is a highly dynamic environment affected by 

ocean wave, wind, and river action. Quaternary unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay have been laid 

down as beach, dune, barrier beach, saline marsh, terrace, and nearshore marine deposits. Mostly 

sandy soils are found on the barrier islands, while organic and clayey soils often occur in the 

freshwater, brackish, and salt marshes. Maritime forests of live oak, red cedar, slash pine, and 

cabbage palmetto grow on parts of the sea islands, and various species of cordgrass, saltgrass, 

and rushes are dominant in the marshes. The island's dunes are dominated by sea oats, which 

play a primary role in stabilizing the dune. Other dune plants include bayberry, dogfennel, bitter 

panic grass, broomsedge, wax myrtle, and Spanish bayonet. The island, marsh, and estuary 

systems form an interrelated ecological web, with processes and functions valuable to humans, but 

also sensitive to human alterations and pollution. The coastal marshes, tidal creeks, and estuaries 

are important nursery areas for fish, crabs, shrimp, and other marine species. Parts of the region 

have a long history of human alterations. Native Americans cultivated corn, melons, squash, and 

beans. A Spanish mission period during the 1500s-1600s included crops of citrus, figs, peaches, 

olives, artichokes, and onions. During the colonial and antebellum periods in the late 1700s and 

1800s, a plantation agriculture economy produced indigo, rice, sugar cane, and Sea Island cotton. 

Savannah Harbor is one of the largest container ship ports on the east coast, and it also contains 

one of the largest commercial shrimp fisheries in the state, raising concerns about the health of the 

estuary, coastal marshes and associated flora and fauna. While parts of the this region are now 

managed as wildlife refuges or estuarine research reserves, the expanding resort economy 

continues to broadly change land uses, water quality, and the once more isolated Gullah and Sea 

Island cultures (Griffith et. al 2002, and EPA 2009b). 

Blackbeard Island, Harris Neck, and Wassaw NWRs (and Wolf Island NWR) are located in the 

Service’s Altamaha River watershed ecosystem unit. Savannah, Pinckney Island, and Tybee NWRs 

are located in the Service’s Savannah-Santee-Pee Dee River watershed ecosystem unit. The 

watershed ecosystem approach is comprehensive in that it is based on all of the biological resources 

within a watershed and it considers the ecological health of communities within that watershed. 

REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS AND INITIATIVES 

The Complex is a component of many regional and ecosystem conservation planning initiatives, 

which are described in the following paragraphs. 

Many regional conservation plans and initiatives are derivatives of national plans (mentioned in 

Chapter I, National and International Conservation Plans and Initiatives). These regional plans are 

developed by a variety of cooperating regional organizations and agencies and are being planned 

and implemented in the southeastern United States. Some of the more notable which are compatible 

with the mission and purpose of the Complex are listed below: 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 31

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan 

Recognizing the importance of waterfowl and wetlands to North Americans and the need for 

international cooperation, the United States and Canada governments developed a strategy to 

restore waterfowl populations through habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement. The 

strategy was documented and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) was 

signed in 1986 by the Canadian Minister of the Environment and the U.S. Secretary of the 

Interior, the foundation partnership upon which hundreds of others would be built. With its update 

in 1994, Mexico became a signatory to the Plan. The Plan is innovative because its perspective 

is international in scope, but its implementation functions at the regional level. Its success is 

dependent upon the strength of partnerships, called "joint ventures," involving federal, state, 

provincial, tribal, and local governments; businesses; conservation organizations; and individual 

citizens. Joint ventures develop implementation plans focusing on areas of concern identified in 

the Plan. The vision of the NAWMP is to recover waterfowl populations by restoring and 

managing wetland ecosystems, to conserve biological diversity in the western hemisphere, to 

integrate wildlife conservation with sustainable economic development, and to promote 

partnerships of public and private agencies, organizations, and individuals for conservation. 

Canada, the United States, and Mexico are committed to the ongoing continental effort to restore 

North America's waterfowl and wetland resources. 

The North American Waterbird Conservation Plan 

The North American Waterbird Conservation Plan (NAWCP) is the product of an independent 

partnership of individuals and institutions having interest and responsibility for conservation of 

waterbirds and their habitats in the Americas. This partnership—Waterbird Conservation for the 

Americas—was created to support a vision in which the distribution, diversity, and abundance of 

populations and habitats of breeding, migratory, and non-breeding waterbirds are sustained or restored 

throughout the lands and waters of North America, Central America, and the Caribbean. The Plan 

provides a continental-scale framework for the conservation and management of 210 species of 

waterbirds, including seabirds, coastal waterbirds, wading birds, and marshbirds utilizing aquatic 

habitats in 29 nations throughout the Americas. Threats to waterbird populations include destruction of 

inland and coastal wetlands, introduced predators and invasive species, pollutants, mortality from 

fisheries and industries, disturbance, and conflicts arising from abundant species. The NAWCP 

provides an overarching continental framework and guide for conserving waterbirds. It sets forth goals 

and priorities for waterbirds in all habitats, at nesting sites, during annual migrations, and during nonbreeding periods. It advocates continent-wide monitoring; provides an impetus for regional 

conservation planning; proposes national, state, provincial and other local conservation planning and 

action; and gives a larger context for local habitat protection. 

Southeast United States Waterbird Conservation Plan 

This Plan seeks to elaborate on the goals and objectives established in the North American 

Waterbird Conservation Plan. Within the context of the continental plan, stepped down goals and 

objectives are described for the southeastern regional landscape. In the regional plan, priority 

species are identified, major threats to waterbirds are described, and conservation actions are 

outlined. This Plan, by providing a link between the national plan and local conservation 

initiatives, outlines a framework through which partners can identify and develop projects that 

build upon existing information to move waterbird conservation forward at both the regional and 

continental scale. Particularly important habitats of the Southeast Region include pelagic areas, 

marshes, forested wetlands, and barrier and sea island complexes. Fifteen species of waterbirds 

are federally listed, including breeding populations of wood storks, sandhill cranes, whooping 
32 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

cranes, interior least terns, and populations of brown pelicans. A key objective of this Plan is the 

standardization of data collection efforts to better recommend effective conservation measures 

(Waterbird Conservation for the Americas). 

Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan 

The Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan (PIF) is a cooperative partnership between government 

agencies, private organizations, individuals, academic communities, and industry. PIF was launched 

in 1990 in response to growing concerns about many land bird species. The central premise of PIF 

has been that resources of public and private organizations in North and South America must be 

combined, coordinated, and increased in order to achieve success in conserving land bird 

populations in this Hemisphere. Bird conservation plans have been developed for physiographic 

areas. These plans identify priority species for conservation efforts in each area, recommend 

population and habitat objectives for managing these priority species, and provide implementation 

and management strategies for reaching objectives. 

U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan 

The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (USSCP) is a partnership effort throughout the United States 

to ensure that stable and self-sustaining populations of shorebird species are restored and protected. 

The USSCP was developed by a wide range of agencies, organizations, and shorebird experts for 

separate regions of the country, and identifies conservation goals, critical habitat conservation needs, 

key research needs, and proposed education and outreach programs to increase awareness of 

shorebirds and the threats they face. Of particular interest to the Complex is the Southeastern 

Coastal Plain - Caribbean Shorebird Conservation Plan, which calls for an annual habitat objective to 

provide 4,000 acres of suitable shorebird foraging habitat (e.g., mudflats) during both the southbound and north-bound migration for shorebirds (Hunter et al. 2005). 

North American Bird Conservation Initiative

The North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) is a coalition of government, private, and 

academic organizations, and private industry leaders addressing bird conservation. The initiative’s 

vision is to achieve regionally based, biologically driven, landscape-oriented partnerships that deliver 

the full spectrum of bird conservation across the North American continent and that support 

simultaneous, on-the-ground delivery of conservation for all birds. It evolved in 1998 out of 

recognition of the value of coordinating efforts of the NAWMP, NAWCP, PIF, and USSCP. 

Populations and habitats of North America's birds are protected, restored, and enhanced through 

coordinated efforts at international, national, regional, state, and local levels, guided by sound 

science and effective management. Bird Conservation Regions (BCR) encompasses landscapes 

having similar bird communities, habitats and resource issues. The South Atlantic Coastal Plain Bird 

Conservation Region (BCR 27) includes the Complex. 

The South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative

Under NABCI, the South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative (SAMBI) represents one of the initial 

efforts in North America to integrate the objectives of four major bird conservation plans 

(NAWMP, USSCP, NAWCP, and PIF) into a single plan that land managers, biologists, 

administrators, and private landowners can use to achieve common goals and objectives for bird 

conservation across a regional landscape. The primary objectives are to develop population and 

habitat goals for priority species, delineate “all bird” focus areas, develop a long-term framework 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 33

for bird conservation in the Southeastern Coastal Plain, and develop and seek funding for "all 

bird" projects (The South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative). 

American Oystercatcher Conservation Plan for the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States 

This plan focuses on H. p. palliatus in the United States, referred to as “American Oystercatcher” or 

simply as “oystercatchers.” The present plan addresses only the populations on the East and Gulf coasts 

and summarizes current knowledge of their life history, distribution, and population trends, describes 

current threats, lists research and management needs, and outlines recommended conservation actions. 

Conservation activities recommended to address these threats include: Identification and protection of 

existing habitat; creation of new habitat through carefully designed use of dredge-spoil materials; 

management of existing protected areas to reduce predation and disturbance; and control of predator 

populations, especially in the nesting season (Schulte et al. 2006). 

The Atlantic Coast Joint Venture

The Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) is a partnership focused on the conservation of habitat for 

native birds in the Atlantic Flyway of the United States from Maine south to Puerto Rico. The joint 

venture is a partnership of the 18 states and commonwealths and key federal and regional habitat 

conservation agencies and organizations in the joint venture area. The joint venture was originally 

formed as a regional partnership focused on the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands under 

NAWMP, and has since broadened its focus to the conservation of habitats for all birds consistent 

with major national and continental bird conservation plans and NABCI. 

Atlantic Loggerhead Sea Turtle Recovery Plan (Revised 2008)

Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or 

protect the species. This plan is intended to serve as a guide that delineates and schedules those 

actions believed necessary to restore the Atlantic Loggerhead (Caretta careua) as a viable selfsustaining element of its ecosystem. It is intended to determine population status and trends along 

the Atlantic (and Gulf) coast of the United States and to determine progress towards the recovery. 

Wood Stork Recovery Plan (Revised 1996)

The objective of the recovery plan is to assure the long-term viability of the U.S. breeding population 

of the wood stork in the wild, allowing initially for reclassification to threatened status and ultimately 

removal from the list of threatened and endangered species. 

The National Estuary Program 

Established as part of the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA), this program seeks to 

protect and restore 28 designated estuaries of national significance that are deemed to be threatened 

by pollution, development, or overuse. Several federal agencies participate in the planning and 

assessment efforts: EPA, NOAA, USGS, DOI, and USDA (EPA 2007). 

USGS National Coastal Program Plan

"A Plan for a Comprehensive National Coastal Program" describes a comprehensive National 

Coastal Program that responds to critical regional needs while addressing national issues 

associated with coastal change, including nutrient enrichment, oxygen depletion, harmful algal 

blooms, chemical contamination, diseases in marine organisms, and fish kills; shoreline erosion, 
34 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

the increasing susceptibility of coastal communities to natural hazards and sea level rise, 

increasing demands on non-living resources (including groundwater, sand and gravel, and energy 

resources); and declines in living marine resources, habitat loss, loss of biodiversity, and 

invasions of non-indigenous species (USGS undated). 

The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM) provides national leadership, 

strategic direction, and guidance to state and territory coastal programs and estuarine research 

reserves. It oversees six major programs. Each program has a national reach, but is designed to 

account for local resources and needs. OCRM works with state and territory coastal resource 

managers to develop a scientifically based, comprehensive national system of marine protected 

areas (MPAs) and supports effective management and sound science to protect, sustain, and restore 

coral reef ecosystems. These activities are mandated by the Coastal Zone Management Act, the 

MPA Executive Order, and the Coral Reef Conservation Act (NOAA 1999). 

Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership

The Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP) includes fish and wildlife agencies from 14 

southeastern states; the Gulf and Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissions; the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and NOAA 

Fisheries. The SARP focuses on six key issue areas: Aquatic Habitat Conservation; Public Use; 

Imperiled Fish and Aquatic Species Recovery; Fishery Mitigation; Inter-jurisdictional Fisheries; and 

Aquatic Nuisance Species. These partnering entities work together for the conservation and 

management of aquatic resources in the southeast. 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife

The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (Partners) is working with landowners to restore, 

enhance, and protect fish and wildlife habitat on private lands. Through alliances with organizations 

and individuals, the Partners program is a voluntary partnership whose focus is to restore vegetation 

and hydrology to historic conditions on private lands. 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program-Southeast Region

The Service seeks to engage willing private landowners through non-regulatory incentives (with 

technical and financial assistance) to conserve and protect valuable fish and wildlife habitat on 

privately owned lands. 

South Carolina Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy

The South Carolina Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) identifies the challenges 

facing the State of South Carolina's diverse wildlife species and devises strategies to conserve those 

"species with the greatest conservation need," and their habitats. It is a guide to conserving the 

1,240 species of fish and wildlife that have immediate conservation needs or are key indicators of the 

diversity and health of the state’s wildlife. The CWCS emphasizes a cooperative, proactive approach 

to conservation, inviting local governments, businesses and conservation-minded organizations and 

individuals to join in the task of maintaining the fish and wildlife resources (SCDNR 2006). 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 35

Georgia Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy

Supported by the State Wildlife Grants (SWG) Program, Georgia's Comprehensive Wildlife 

Conservation Strategy (CWCS) (also known as the State Wildlife Action Plan) identifies the 

challenges facing Georgia's diverse wildlife species and devises strategies to conserve those 

"species with the greatest conservation need," and their habitats. Georgia ranks sixth in the 

nation in overall species diversity based on numbers of vascular plants, vertebrate animals and 

selected invertebrates. The state currently has 223 species that are protected by state or federal 

laws and hundreds of additional animal and plant species in need of conservation. The CWCS is 

a guide to conserving the species of fish and wildlife that have immediate conservation needs or 

are key indicators of the diversity and health of the state’s wildlife. The CWCS emphasizes a 

cooperative, proactive approach to conservation, inviting local governments, businesses, and 

conservation-minded organizations and individuals to join in the task of maintaining the fish and 

wildlife resources (GADNR 2005). 

South Carolina's Statewide Water Resource Plans

In addition to South Carolina's CWCS (above), other resource plans and initiatives guide the 

management and protection of South Carolina's natural and cultural resources: 

208 Water Quality Management Plan of South Carolina: 

This plan is developed for the purpose of encouraging and facilitating the development and 

implementation of area wide waste treatment management plans. It requires states to identify 

areas with water quality problems and designate an entity to develop area wide waste 

treatment management plans so as to attain the national goal of "fishable-swimmable waters" 

as required by the Clean Water Act (SCDHEC 1997). 

South Carolina Water Plan: 

The purpose of this plan is to establish guidelines for the effective management of the state's 

surface and ground water resources, to sustain the availability of the water resource for 

present and future use, to protect public health and natural systems, and to enhance the 

quality of life for all citizens (Badr et al. 2004). 

Georgia's Statewide Natural Resource Plans (Georgia Department of Natural Resources)

In addition to Georgia's CWCS (above), several other natural resource plans and initiatives guide the 

management and protection of Georgia’s natural and cultural resources: 

The Department of Natural Resources Strategic Plan (A 10-year Strategic Plan for the 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources) was developed with input from the Board of 

Natural Resources, DNR leadership and staff, and facilitators from the University of Georgia 

Fanning Institute and approved by the Board of Natural Resources in March 2007. It focuses 

on ways in which DNR can improve efficiency through better internal coordination and 

communications; expand public-private partnerships to address critical natural and cultural 

resources issues; and provide high-quality customer service to the citizens of Georgia. 

To ensure continued service to current and future Georgians, the Parks, Recreation and 

Historic Sites Division formulates a comprehensive statewide recreation policy every five 

years. This policy is contained within the Georgia Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor 
36 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Recreation Plan (SCORP), a plan that also makes the state eligible to receive and 

distribute federal funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). LWCF 

grants support state, county and city outdoor recreation projects in three categories: land 

acquisition, development and rehabilitation. 

Under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, each State Historic Preservation 

Office (SHPO) is charged with developing a statewide historic preservation plan. 

Georgia's State Historic Preservation Plan 2007-2011: Building a Preservation Ethic

provides common direction for all organizations and individuals who support the 

preservation of Georgia’s historic places. The plan includes information about trends in 

Georgia and how they may affect historic properties; mission, vision and goals for 

historic preservation; information about Georgia's historic and archaeological resources, 

information about how preservation works in Georgia, and about the statewide 

preservation planning process.

ECOLOGICAL THREATS AND PROBLEMS 

In order to prepare a CCP that would establish goals and objectives on how to manage the Complex 

over the next 15 years, a number of planning steps were followed. One of those steps was a review 

of known ecological threats and problems that may hinder the ability of refuge personnel to fulfill the 

objectives of the individual refuges. This iterative, ongoing review process has recognized a number 

of common regional concerns, which are of particular importance to refuges in the Complex. 

 Large industries (especially pulp and paper and chemical industries) attracted to the coastal 

region of Georgia and South Carolina by an abundance of water, seaport facilities, climate, and 

an available and receptive labor force have contributed to major pollution problems. The 

estuaries receive stormwater runoff, pollutants from industries and municipalities along the coast, 

and from river systems carrying agricultural pesticides and sewage and industrial wastes from 

towns and cities upstream along the rivers, additionally, these industries are depleting ground 

water necessary to recharge freshwater wetlands. Besides being aesthetically objectionable and 

hazardous to human health, the impacts on wildlife, recreation, commercial and sport fishing and 

tourism are detrimental. 

 Dredging associated with the expansion and maintenance of harbors and inland waterways, 

coastal development, highway construction, etc., results in alteration of circulation patterns, 

shoreline erosion and sediment deposition (not to mention the direct loss of marshlands by the 

dredging activities per se). Dredging increases the silt load and turbidity of the waters, reducing 

photosynthesis and decreasing primary production. Benthic organisms can be buried by silt and 

fisheries impacted by the anoxia developed due to the exposure of bottom sediments (for 

example, disturbed sediments from Wassaw Sound have been found to have the potential to 

remove the oxygen from a volume of water, 535 times the same volume of sediment 

[Frankenberg and Westerfield 1968]). 

 Dredging activities in the Savannah area have also raised concerns that the deeper dredging might 

crack or weaken the compacted silty sand of the freshwater aquifer that keeps sea water out. 

 Beach erosion is a problem on all barrier islands due to storm surges, global warming/sea-level 

rise, and sand-starved refuge beaches. Littoral currents which flow from north to south along the 

Georgia and South Carolina coastline carry sand deposited by coastal rivers. This sand is 

subsequently redeposited on the beaches of the barrier islands. Dredging activities in the 

Savannah River delta have interrupted this natural southward transport of sand by dumping the 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 37

dredged material on land at the mouth of the river (i.e., Tybee NWR-Oysterbed Island) and 

robbing the Georgia barrier islands of their sand supply. The result is that barrier islands in 

coastal Georgia are sand starved. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) predict 

a rise of approximately 39 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) along the South Carolina and 

Georgia coastlines by the year 2100. Tidal marshes are among the most susceptible ecosystems 

to climate change, especially accelerated SLR. Rising sea levels may result in tidal marsh 

submergence and habitat migration as salt marshes transgress landward and replace tidal 

freshwater and brackish marsh (Church et al. 2001; Meehl et al. 2007). 

 Several Invasive/exotic species are a common concern among most (if not all) of the refuges in 

the Complex: 

o Laurel Wilt – the Ambrosia beetle with its associated fungus can kill a mature red bay tree 

in a matter of days; 

o Invasive plants – Chinese tallow trees (an exotic that is a serious threat because of its 

ability to invade high-quality, undisturbed forests); Cogon grass (a rapidly spreading 

ground cover presenting the potential for problems for native plants and trees); Alligator 

weed; water hyacinth; Chinaberry; etc. 

o Feral hogs – feral hogs destroy native plants and compete with other wildlife for food; and, 

are a special concern because of their egg predation of loggerhead nests. 

Blackbeard Island NWR

Blackbeard Island NWR is located on Sapelo Sound in coastal Georgia and represents some of the 

most important estuarine habitat in the southeastern United States. It is characterized by extensive 

salt marshes and freshwater marshes which support one of the most biologically productive systems 

in the world. The primary threat to this region is urban development, which will contribute to 

increased stormwater runoff, pollution, groundwater depletion and sedimentation of offshore habitats. 

 Blackbeard Island NWR consistently has one, if not the highest density of nests in Georgia, and is 

considered a most important loggerhead beach. The Blackbeard Island NWR sea turtle project began 

in 1966 and represents one of the longest sea turtle nest study/protection programs in Georgia. 

 Approximately 340 acres of Blackbeard Island NWR’s beach appear to be eroding, especially at 

the north and south ends of the island. Lack of beach sand has negative impacts on the 

invertebrates that support shorebirds and limit sea turtle nesting. 

 At one time, a large aquifer supplied the impoundments on the refuge with freshwater via artesian 

wells. Industrial growth placed such a demand on the aquifer that water no longer flows from the 

wells. Therefore, the sole source of impoundment freshwater replenishment is rainfall. 

Freshwater fishing on Blackbeard Island NWR has not been reported since 2001 due to 

prolonged drought and the lack of aquifer freshwater. 

 Invasive species of management concern are: 

o The Ambrosia beetle (most if not all red bay trees over 4 feet in height are dead as a result 

of ambrosia beetle fungus infestation on the island); 
38 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

o Feral hog control/removal is conducted prior to and during the sea turtle nesting season in 

an effort to decrease egg and hatchling depredation. The population of feral hogs on the 

island is assumed to be expanding. Management and control is hindered due to the 

island's dense palmetto understory. Predation of logger head sea turtle nests by feral 

hogs is a potential problem ; 

o Cattails have overgrown both open water ponds on the refuge. The wood stork rookery 

and the largemouth bass fishery no longer exist on Flag Pond due to the cattail (and other 

nuisance vegetation) invasion and the drought and lack of freshwater. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) predict 

a rise of approximately 58 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) for Blackbeard Island NWR by the 

year 2100 (Craft et. al 2008). 

Harris Neck NWR

Harris Neck NWR is located on the South Newport River in coastal Georgia. This area represents 

some of the most important estuarine river systems in the southeastern United States. It is 

characterized by extensive salt marshes and freshwater marshes which support one of the most 

biologically productive systems in the world. The primary threat to this region is urban development, 

which will contribute to increased stormwater runoff, pollution, and sedimentation of offshore habitats. 

Management is focused on six man-made impoundments utilized by the endangered wood stork and 

a variety of wading birds. Management activities by refuge have resulted in this being one of the 

most stable and productive colonies in the United States relative to colony growth and productivity. 

Personnel from Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, GADNR, and University of Florida and refuge 

staff biologists continue to collect and share wood stork data from the Woody Pond rookery. 

 The land around the refuge is becoming fragmented at an alarming rate for housing 

development, and more encounters with "unwanted animals" continue to grow. 

 Invasive species of management concern are the ambrosia beetle, armadillos, coyotes, feral 

cats and dogs, and greenbrier (Smilax spp.) and emergent aquatic plants (cattails and 

Sesbania) in the refuge's ponds. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) 

predict a rise of approximately 58 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) for Harris Neck NWR by 

the year 2100 (Craft et. al 2008). 

Pinckney Island NWR

Pinckney Island NWR is located in Beaufort County, South Carolina. The refuge is 0.5-mile west of 

Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and hosts approximately 1.5 million tourists each year, resulting 

in an average of 58,000 vehicles crossing the refuge daily. 

 Migratory songbird habitat management is a primary objective of the refuge with a special 

emphasis on painted buntings. A decline in the painted bunting's population in recent years is 

of concern. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 39

 Heavy domestic and industrial withdrawals of groundwater from the Floridan aquifer have 

caused a decline in artesian pressure, with resulting saltwater encroachment into the 

freshwater coastal water aquifer, and serious declines in both freshwater quality and quantity. 

Cones of depression are largest and most serious in the Savannah and Hilton Head (and St. 

Mary's) areas. A joint monitoring effort between Georgia's Environmental Protection Division 

and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control uses three 

monitoring wells on the refuge to track the movement and rate of saltwater intrusion into the 

Floridan aquifer and has been ongoing for the last 10 years. 

 Despite the many small ponds on the refuge, freshwater supplies are limited because of large 

domestic, commercial, and industrial demands on the regional groundwater aquifer and the 

resultant water table drawn down and saltwater intrusion into the aquifer. This limits the ability 

of refuge personnel to develop freshwater wetlands for migratory songbirds, reptiles, and 

amphibians. Saltwater intrusion has moved under the Port Royal sound and been detected in 

Moss Creek. The refuge's freshwater ponds are permanently closed to public fishing. Limited 

freshwater supplies are further exacerbated by recent drought conditions (and by the future 

anticipated effects of climate change). 

 Invasive species of management concern are Johnson grass, Chinese privet, Chinese tallow, 

and feral cats. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) 

predict a rise of approximately 52 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) for Pinckney Island NWR 

by the year 2100 (Craft et. al 2008). 

Savannah NWR

Savannah NWR is located in Chatham and Effingham Counties, Georgia, and Jasper County, South 

Carolina, on the lower Savannah River between mile markers 18 and 41. The port city of Savannah 

(with a metropolitan population of over 320,000) lies immediately downstream of the refuge and is a 

center of pulp, paper, and organic chemical industries. Savannah NWR contains approximately 

6,000 acres of impounded freshwater wetlands, of which about 3,000 acres are actively managed by 

22 water control structures. These freshwater impoundments are the most important managed 

habitat within the refuge. Several refuge management concerns arise due to the intrusion and 

activities from the Savannah metropolitan regional area. 

 Impacts of Savannah River dredging and harbor deepening activities (from a 42-foot to a 48-

foot depth to accommodate mega ships) threaten aquatic habitats, especially those of the 

endangered shortnose sturgeon and the striped bass, due to lowered dissolved oxygen (DO) 

levels. Prior to 2005, striped bass fishing in the Savannah River system was closed for 16 

years due to low recruitment of young fish caused by harbor modifications and higher 

salinities in traditional spawning areas of the river. 

 Saltwater intrusion due to past dredging projects has resulted in a loss of tidal freshwater 

marshes on the refuge from 6,000 acres in 1927 to less than 2,800 acres today. A study to 

assess the changes in plant communities and the corresponding interstitial salinity gradient (a 

follow-up to studies conducted in 1986-87 and 1993-94) is ongoing with plans to continue 

indefinitely until the freshwater marsh fully recovers. Also scientists from the National 

Wetlands Research Center and the University of New Orleans are investigating forest dieback 

in the tidal freshwater swamps and the influence of saltwater intrusion within the refuge. 
40 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 The Port of Savannah, which includes the Garden City and Ocean terminals, is the nation's 

fastest growing port, the second busiest container port on the East Coast, and the fourth 

busiest in the nation. Transportation fuel (e.g., diesel, oil) spills from large marine vessels 

(e.g., tankers, barges, boats) and chemical spills from industries hold the potential to 

adversely impact the refuge's river and marsh habitats. 

 Commercial and residential development and urban sprawl along the border of the refuge are 

unprecedented. (Jasper County, South Carolina, has an estimated population growth of 600 

percent in the next 15 years.) Consequently, boundary encroachment and increasing frequent 

law enforcement issues (e.g., prostitution, drugs, poaching, theft) are threatening the 

purposes (i.e., "Inviolate sanctuary" and "preserve and breeding ground for native birds" ) for 

which the refuge was established. (The city of Hardeeville’s efforts to annex the refuge are 

also of political concern.) 

 Clear-cut logging threatens nearly 3,000 acres of mature bottomland hardwood habitat on Mill 

Creek, one known nesting site for the swallow-tailed kite on the Savannah River. 

 Commercial truck traffic of SC 170/GA 25 highway (bisecting the refuge east to west) is 

very high, resulting in many accidents, debris and trash, and congestion – disturbing the 

aesthetic and primitive character of the refuge; reactivation of the Seaboard Coastline 

Railroad and development of a new port will lead to further disturbance to the habitat and 

native wildlife of the refuge. 

 Some invasive plant species of management concern are: Alligator weed, Chinese tallow, 

water hyacinth, American lotus, cattails, and Chinaberry. 

 The feral hog is an exotic species on the refuge and poses significant threats to refuge 

management and other native wildlife. As hogs feed, they root up large sections along dikes 

which then erode during rains and high tides. They also destroy native plants and compete 

with other wildlife species for food. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) 

predict a rise of approximately 52 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) for Savannah NWR by 

the year 2100 (Craft et. al 2008). 

Tybee NWR

Tybee NWR is considered a sanctuary for migratory birds. The refuge is located in Jasper County, South 

Carolina, at the mouth of the Savannah River. Originally only a 1-acre oyster shoal until 1998, it is now 

used as a spoil site for material dredged from the Savannah River by the Corps of Engineers and 

presently encompasses an area of about 400 acres of scrub/shrub habitat, sand beaches, and marsh. 

 

 Impacts of Savannah River dredging and harbor deepening activities threaten aquatic 

habitats, especially those of the endangered shortnose sturgeon. 

 Dredged spoil from the Savannah River (deposited on Tybee NWR) and the high volume of 

international shipping provide a constant source of invasive plant species. The exotics 

Common Reed (Phragmites communis) and Salt Cedar (Tamarix spp.) have invaded the 

refuge and are of concern. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 41

 Transportation fuel (e.g., diesel, oil) spills from marine vessels (e.g., tankers, barges, boats) 

and chemical spills from industries adversely impact the refuge's river and marsh habitats. 

 Construction and development of a new port in Jasper County, South Carolina, will lead to 

further disturbance to the habitat and native wildlife of the refuge. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) 

predict a rise of approximately 52 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) for Tybee NWR (and 

Savannah NWR) by the year 2100 (Craft et. al 2008). 

Wassaw NWR

Wassaw NWR is located in Chatham County between the Wilmington and Vernon Rivers in coastal 

Georgia, approximately 14 miles south of Savannah. Unlike many of Georgia's barrier islands, 

Wassaw NWR has experienced little in the way of human influences. Minimizing disturbance to 

wintering and nesting birds on beaches is the primary management opportunity. 

 The highlight of the refuge is its 7 miles of undeveloped, spectacular beaches. However, the 

refuge's oceanfront beach is characterized by an eroding shoreline along its northern and 

southern ends. Sand is potentially being lost by dredging operations in the Savannah River, 

creating a deficit in the overall sand which historically replenished barrier islands, including 

Wassaw NWR. 

 Dunes, beaches, and sand bars are critical for migratory birds as nesting, feeding, loafing, and 

roosting habitat. (A Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship banding station is in its 

10th year of operation on Wassaw Island.) Even more critical for shorebirds are the 

invertebrate prey populations these habitats support. Sea turtles nest on barrier island 

beaches and feed in offshore waters. Lack of sand, as a result of dams and dredged harbors, 

is having a negative impact on the sea turtle habitats. An ongoing sea turtle research 

program, begun in 1973, is conducted by the Caretta Research Project. 

 Freshwater aquifers on the island have ceased to flow due to a cone of depression created by 

industrial and municipal withdrawals from the Floridan aquifer. Freshwater habitats on the 

island are temporary and seasonal. Water levels in refuge ponds are impacted by increased 

withdrawal of groundwater by local industry, eliminating flow from artesian wells on the refuge. 

 Invasive species of management concern are the Ambrosia beetle (most if not all red bay 

trees over 4 feet in height are dead as a result of ambrosia beetle fungus infestation on the 

island); feral hogs; Chinese tallow; and cogon grass. 

 Sea Level Rise (SLR) model simulations (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model – SLAMM) 

predict a rise of approximately 58 cm (Scenario – SRES A1B mean) for Wassaw NWR (and 

Savannah NWR) by the year 2100 (Craft et. al 2008). 

PHYSICAL RESOURCES 

CLIMATE 

The Georgia-South Carolina Coast, from Blackbeard Island NWR to Pinckney Island NWR 

experiences relatively moderate climate conditions. Sea breezes offer some relief from intense 

summer heat. Average summer (June through August) temperatures hover around the 80°F mark, 
42 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

with Savannah at 80.7°F and Sapelo Island at 80.4°F. Maximum summer temperatures average 

about 90 °F. The warmest day on record was July 20, 1986, when temperatures reached 105 °F at 

both Savannah and Sapelo Island. Winters are relatively mild and short. Average winter (December 

through February) temperatures are around 50°F, with Savannah at 51.4°F and Sapelo Island at52.3°F. Minimum winter temperatures average about 40°F. The Georgia-South Carolina coastal 

area experiences few cold days. Historically, Savannah and Sapelo Island have temperatures below 

32°F only about 26 and 16 days a year, respectively. The coolest day on record was January 21, 

1985, when temperatures fell to 3 °F at both Savannah and Sapelo Island. 

Precipitation along the coast averages about 50 inches per year. The maximum 1-day (24 hours) 

rainfall totals at Savannah and Sapelo Island are 8.47 inches (associated with Hurricane EasySeptember 5, 1950) and 8.07 inches (June 23, 1984), respectively. Snowfall along the Georgia coast 

is rare. However, Savannah and Sapelo Island did record significant snowfall (3 to 4 inches) in 

December 1989. November and December are typically the driest months of the year whereas 

August and September, included in the hurricane season, are usually the wettest months. 

The first recorded hurricane to cause significant damage to the Georgia coast struck the Charleston, 

South Carolina, area on September 15, 1752. Since that time, numerous hurricanes have passed along 

the Georgia coast, but surprisingly few have caused serious damage. The Georgia coast has not had a 

major hurricane (defined as at least a category 3 hurricane) since the late 1890s. Hurricanes off the east 

coast tend to follow the path of warm, lighter air above the Gulf Stream, which is flanked on both sides 

with heavier, cooler air. Brunswick, Georgia, is farther (80 miles) from the Gulf Stream and its 

accompanying warm air than any other place on the southeastern coast. Consequently, the Georgia 

coastal area is less exposed to hurricanes than areas farther north or south (Carter 1970). Details for 

temperature and precipitation data are given in Table 1 and Figures 10 and 11. 

In Savannah the average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 54 percent. Humidity is higher at 

night, and the average at dawn is about 86 percent. The sun shines about 62 percent of the time in 

summer and winter. The wind is predominantly from the northeast and northwest in the winter 

(December – February), from the south in spring and summer (March – August), and from the 

northeast in the fall (September – November). The northerly winds of the winter and fall are much 

stronger than those of the summer and spring. Average wind speed is highest, 8.8 miles per hour, in 

February and March. 

CLIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING

Global climate change poses risks to human health and to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. 

Important economic resources, such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and water resources, also 

may be affected. Warmer temperatures, more severe droughts and floods, and sea level rise will 

have a wide range of impacts. These stresses add to existing stresses on resources caused by 

other influences such as population growth, land-use changes, and pollution. 

According to NOAA and NASA data, the Earth's average surface temperature has increased by 

about 1.2 to 1.4oF since 1900. The 10 warmest years in the 20th century have all occurred within 

the past 15 years, with the warmest 2 years being 1998 and 2005. Some climate models, based 

on increases in emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous 

oxide, predict that average surface temperatures could increase from 2.5 to 10.4o

F by the end of 

this century. The increase in CO2 is attributed largely to human activities since 1945. The 

burning of fossil fuels adds 5.6 billion tons of carbon to the atmosphere each year; and 

deforestation contributes another 0.4 to 2.5 billion tons. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 43

Figures 10 and 11. 1971 - 2000 Temperature and precipitation 

[Data is smoothed using a 29 day running average.] 

- Max. Temp. is the average of all daily maximum temperatures recorded for the day of the year. 

- Ave. Temp. is the average of all daily average temperatures recorded for the day of the year. 

- Min. Temp. is the average of all daily minimum temperatures recorded for the day of the year. 

- Precipitation is the average of all daily total precipitation recorded for the day of the year. 

Source: The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. "The Southeast Regional Climate Center," Historical 

Climate Summaries for Georgia. http://www.sercc.com/climateinfo/historical/historical_ga.html
44 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Global warming, resulting in melting of glaciers and ice sheets, will cause sea levels to rise. Globally, sea 

level has risen 4–10 inches during the past century. NASA estimates that the polar ice cap is melting at 

the rate of 9 percent per decade and that Arctic ice thickness has decreased 40 percent since the 1960s. 

NASA estimates that yearly, 50 billion tons of ice is melting from the Greenland ice sheet. NASA aerial 

surveys show that more than 11 cubic miles of ice is disappearing from the ice sheet annually. 

Considering that land less than 10 meters above sea level contains 2 percent of the world's land surface 

but 10 percent of its population -- in the United States, major impacts will be felt by large numbers of 

people living on the low-lying coastlands, particularly the Gulf and East coast states. The current pace of 

sea-level rise is three times the historical rate and appears to be accelerating. 

The effects of climate change and global warming will be changes in weather/rainfall patterns, 

decreases in snow and ice cover, rising sea levels, and stressed ecosystems. For the southeastern 

United States and the Southern Coastal Plain region this can mean extreme precipitation events; 

greater likelihood of warmer/dryer summers and wetter/reduced winter cold; and, alterations of 

ecosystems and habitats due to these changes in weather patterns – to name but a few possibilities. 

For example, since 1957, the climate of South Carolina has been characterized by warmer and drier 

conditions. According to recent observations (1957-1991), the annual average temperature 

increased by nearly 1o

F. The largest temperature increase resulted during the 1980s from warmer 

than average wintertime temperatures. Precipitation decreased 6 percent or 3.2 inches primarily due 

to lower than average springtime rainfall. Thus, the current trend in South Carolina's climate resulted 

in warmer and drier conditions (SCDNR undated). 

In regard to alterations of ecosystems and habitats, a recent study of the effects of climate change on 

eastern U.S. bird species concluded that as many as 78 bird species could decrease by at least 25 

percent, while as many as 33 species could increase in abundance by at least 25 percent due to 

climate and habitat changes (Matthews et al. 2004). 

Georgia 

 By 2100, temperatures in Georgia could increase by about 2°F in summer (with a range of 

1-4°F), 3°F in winter and spring (with a range of 1-7°F), and 4°F in fall (with a range of 2-9°F). 

Precipitation is estimated to increase by about 10 percent in winter and spring and by 15-40 

percent in summer and fall. 

 Although it is not clear how severe storms such as hurricanes would change, an increase in the 

frequency and intensity of summer thunderstorms is possible. 

 Georgia’s coastline, only about 100 miles long, has a barrier island system that includes 13 

islands – The Golden Isles of Georgia. Behind the barrier islands of the Georgia coast lie 

extensive salt marshes dominated by smooth cordgrass. These 375,000 acres of salt marshes 

make up 1/4 of the remaining salt marshes in the eastern United States. The highly productive 

marshes provide homes for oysters and clams and serve as nursery grounds for young shrimp, 

crab, and fish. The marshes protect the shorelines from erosion and also act as a purification 

system by filtering out many pollutants added to the waters by human activities. Changes in 

rainfall would alter stream flow and flooding patterns of these wetlands, which are very sensitive 

to fairly small changes in water levels. 

 In the Savannah area sea level is rising by 13 inches per century, and it is likely to rise another 

25 inches by 2100. The wetlands along the low-lying coasts of Georgia are subsiding and may 

be either flooded or washed away as sea levels rise. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 45

 Possible responses to sea level rise include building walls to hold back the sea, allowing the sea 

to advance and adapting to it, and raising the land (i.e., replenishing beach sand and elevating 

houses and infrastructure). Each of these responses will be costly, either in out-of-pocket costs 

or in lost land and structures. For example, the cumulative cost of sand replenishment to 

protect the coast of Georgia from a 20-inch sea level rise by 2100 is estimated at $154 million to 

$1.3 billion (EPA, September 1997). 

 Ecosystems in Georgia consist largely of extensive forests and diverse wetlands, including the 

Okefenokee Swamp, extensive coastal tidal marshes, tidal creeks, and riparian forests, all of 

which are sensitive to changes in climate, especially changes in rainfall. 

South Carolina: 

 By 2100, temperatures in South Carolina could increase by 3°F (with a range of 1-5°F) in all 

seasons (slightly less in winter and summer, slightly more in spring and fall) (EPA, September 

1998). Higher temperatures and increased frequency of heat waves may increase the number 

of heat-related deaths and the incidence of heat-related illnesses. 

 There are 2,876 miles of tidally influenced shoreline in South Carolina. Historical rates of 

accretion and erosion vary considerably across the state’s coastline — erosion has been most 

severe on a 20-mile section of the Grand Strand and parts of the Santee delta, while Kiawah 

Island is accreting at a rate of 9 feet per year. 

 

 At Charleston, sea level is rising by 9 inches per century, and it is likely to rise another 19 inches 

by 2100. The cumulative cost of sand replenishment to protect the coast of South Carolina from 

a 20-inch sea level rise by 2100 is estimated at $1.2-$9.4 billion (EPA, September 1998). 

 Erosion is likely to increase under a 1- to 3-foot rise in sea level. The potential for increased 

storm damage as a result of sea level rise is particularly high along the densely developed 

Grand Strand. 

 Sea level rise could lead to flooding of low-lying property, loss of coastal wetlands, erosion of 

beaches, saltwater contamination of drinking water, and decreased longevity of low-lying roads, 

causeways, and bridges. In addition, sea level rise could increase the vulnerability of coastal 

areas to storms and associated flooding. 

 Warmer seas could contribute to the increased intensity, duration, and extent of harmful algal 

blooms, called red tides. These blooms damage habitat and shellfish nurseries, can be toxic to 

humans, and can carry bacteria like those causing cholera. Brown algal tides and toxic algal 

blooms already are prevalent in the Atlantic Ocean. Warmer ocean waters could increase their 

occurrence and persistence. 

 South Carolina is dominated by coastal ecosystems that provide critically important habitat 

for endangered and threatened species such as the American alligator, Bachman's warbler, 

brown pelican, loggerhead sea turtle, piping plover, red-cockaded woodpecker, shortnose 

sturgeon, and wood stork. Sea level rise under a changing climate could threaten many lowlying coastal ecosystems. 
46 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The SCDNR, Office of the State Climatology, further details some of the changes the state (and the 

southeast) might expect: 

 Agriculture and the fishing industry -- While experts estimate that United States agricultural 

production will be adequate for domestic needs even under the most extreme scenario, they do 

expect major regional changes in the production and quality of food commodities. Production is 

generally seen as shifting northward, with crops in the southeast particularly vulnerable. 

 Productivity could change -- Although warmer temperatures may lead to increased yields in some 

parts of the country, Georgia and South Carolina already have a high baseline temperature. 

Adding to it is likely to increase the moisture and heat-stress crops are subjected. The wettest 

scenario does not offset crops' increased water needs, and the dry one suggests yield could 

decrease by nearly 80 percent. Even the direct positive effects on photosynthesis of a CO2-

enriched atmosphere cannot in such cases make up for the indirect effects of moisture-stress 

resulting from climatic change. 

 Need for irrigation may increase -- Under the wet model scenario of the Goddard Institute of 

Space Studies, it is still estimated that the southeast will require increased irrigation. Alreadyirrigated land will require more water, and more land will require irrigation. 

 Crop mix may change -- With warmer temperatures, crops like corn would cease to be profitable 

in the southeast, while heat-tolerant crops like cotton could make a comeback. 

 Disease and pest vulnerability might increase -- Warmer conditions may accelerate the life cycles 

of insect pests, leading to attacks on plants at earlier and more susceptible stages of growth. The 

range of some southeast coast pests could also shift northwards if winters became less severe. 

 Cultivated acreage could decrease -- Because many farms are already marginal enterprises, 

farmers may not be able to compete in a changed environment. The amount of land under 

cultivation could decrease. 

 Fish and shellfish populations could be reduced -- Both increased water temperatures and 

changes in the salinity of habitats could reduce the population of species profitable to the state's 

fishing industry. 

 Forestry -- Dieback of forests in 30 to 80 years. Even modest warming could cause significant 

changes, but a CO2-induced warming poses the additional threat of occurring so quickly that 

forests would not be able to adjust in time. 

o Loss of species. Southern hardwoods (e.g., black gum, laurel oak, and elm) might replace 

loblolly pines as the dominant species. 

o Conversion of forests to grasslands. The drier scenarios suggest that sections of the 

southeast might not support forests at all. Abandoned farms that have traditionally reverted to 

forests might now remain in grasses. 

o Increased vulnerability to pests and disease. Not only is the range of pests likely to increase, 

but climate-stressed stands are more susceptible to attack by disease, pests, and fire. 

 Water Resources -- Exactly how water resources will be affected by climate change is difficult to 

ascertain. Not only do the Global Climate Models (GCMs) vary widely in how they predict 

precipitation (i.e., the supply of water) to change, but climate changes will also influence the 

demand for water. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 47

o Water resource availability could change. Studies indicate the regional availability and 

reliability of water resources may be responsible for the most dramatic effects of climate 

change. With warmer temperatures, demand for water is likely to increase for agriculture, 

energy, cooling, and recreation. It is not certain whether the supply will be able to meet the 

demand. 

o Water quality could be affected. Regardless of precipitation changes, water quality could be 

affected. Drier scenarios create oxygen-starved lakes and streams; wet scenarios increase 

the threat of pollution from runoff. 

o Risk of flooding might increase. The capacity of current drainage system to handle an 

increase in the frequency of large amounts of precipitation might be exceeded under some 

scenarios. 

 Energy -- Our demand for electricity is rather sensitive to the weather and to industrial growth. 

Changes in the weather patterns mean changes in energy consumption. Higher temperatures 

would mean: 

 

o An increase demand for air conditioning. Higher summertime temperatures would mean 

increased use of air conditioners. 

o Decrease in demand for heating. Warmer winters would decrease the amount of energy 

required for heating. 

o Require an increase in electrical capacity. Higher demands for air conditioning in the summer 

would be partially offset by higher wintertime temperatures, affecting total consumption only 

moderately. But the periods could require a significant increase in South Carolina and 

Georgia's electrical capacity. 

GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY 

The mainland rivers that flow into the Atlantic Ocean along the Georgia and southern South Carolina 

coasts drain three major physiographic provinces: the Blue Ridge Mountains, the Piedmont Plateau, 

and the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The geology of these provinces greatly influences the amount and 

characteristics of surface water, groundwater, and sediments transported to the marshes, estuaries, 

and continental shelf. Many sedimentary strata tilted toward the sea overlie the Coastal Plain. These 

deposits were formed during the many changes in sea level associated with glaciation during the Tertiary 

and Quaternary periods. The thickest deposits are in the coastal area, tapering to a thin edge where the 

oldest (Cretaceous) sediments are exposed. Progressively more recent strata occur at the surface 

toward the coast, but relic coastal features, such as barrier islands and lagoons, are still evident in many 

places. The Coastal Plain (the youngest province) is divided into upper and lower regions. The 

western edge of the lower Coastal Plain is marked by the ocean's highest incursion, (extending inland 

for approximately 65 miles between Savannah and St. Mary's Rivers), during the Pleistocene epoch, 

which began about 2 million years ago. 

The eastern lower Coastal Plain is characterized by eight major islands and island groups bordering 

the 100 miles of the Georgia and southern South Carolina coast as shown in Figure 12. The larger 

barrier islands are a composite of a core of beach and dune deposits formed about 40,000 – 50,000 

years ago during the Pleistocene epoch when sea levels were about 6 feet above the present level. 
48 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Table 1. Climatological normals 

Climatological normals for the Years 1971-2000 

National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) 

Savannah,GA (097847) and Sapelo Island, GA (097808)

 Savannah Sapelo Island 

Month High (oF) Low (oF) Mean 

(

o

F) 

Rain 

(inches) High (o

F) Low (oF) Mean 

(

o

F) 

Rain 

(inches) 

Jan 60.4 38.0 49.2 3.95 60.1 41.9 51.0 4.07 

Feb 64.1 40.9 52.5 2.92 62.1 43.7 52.9 3.53 

Mar 71.0 47.5 59.3 3.64 68.0 49.9 59.0 3.97 

Apr 77.7 52.9 65.3 3.32 74.5 56.2 65.4 3.01 

May 84.3 61.3 72.8 3.61 81.0 64.7 72.9 2.81 

Jun 89.5 68.1 78.8 5.49 86.4 71.1 78.8 4.98 

Jul 92.3 71.8 82.1 6.04 89.8 73.7 81.8 4.98 

Aug 90.3 71.3 80.8 7.20 88.3 73.3 80.8 7.48 

Sep 86.0 67.3 76.7 5.08 84.5 70.3 77.4 7.30 

Oct 78.1 56.1 67.1 3.12 77.2 60.9 69.1 3.85 

Nov 70.5 46.9 58.7 2.40 69.7 51.5 60.6 2.87 

Dec 62.6 40.1 51.4 2.81 61.7 44.1 52.9 2.99 

Annual 77.2 55.2 66.2 49.58 75.3 58.4 66.9 51.84 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 49

Figure 12. Barrier Islands of the Lower Coastal Plain 
50 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

About 15,000 years ago, when the shoreline was 75-80 miles east of where it is today (along the 

edge of the continental shelf), glaciation ended, the continental ice sheet melted, and the sea-level 

began to rise. About 5,000 years ago, the rate of sea-level rise decreased from 3 feet per century to 

less than 1 foot per century. Holocene barrier islands began to form and migrate westward, and 

welded onto the older Pleistocene barrier islands. This westward migration is still occurring as the 

advancing seas continue to erode the eastern-facing beaches and redeposit the sediments into the 

marshes and lagoons behind the islands. The Holocene barrier islands directly south of the 

Savannah River (Tybee and Wassaw) and south of the Altamaha River (Little St. Simons and Sea 

Island) are more separated from their Pleistocene counterparts than the other Holocene islands. The 

inward advancement of these islands has been impeded by the far more copious output of sediments 

by the Savannah and the Altamaha Rivers relative to the other smaller rivers. Where the smaller 

rivers produced less sediment, the Holocene islands have migrated closer and, in some cases, have 

become attached to the older islands (St. Catherine's and Cumberland). 

The region is generally one of low seismic activity. However, a major earthquake occurred in 1886, 

which had its epicenter at Charleston, South Carolina. This earthquake, registering 10 on the Richter 

scale, caused 150 human deaths and damaged buildings in the Savannah area. 

Elevations on the barrier islands typically range from sea level to about 25 feet, although individual 

dunes may be higher. Broad, nearly level areas interspersed with low, gently sloping ridges typically 

characterize topography of the islands. Islands and portions of islands that are of more recent origin 

(Wassaw and Blackbeard) may be characterized by steep, parallel dune ridges. On beaches in other 

areas, there are major seasonal changes in beach profiles. During the summer, when wave energies 

are lowest, many sand grains are not moved out with the backwash, and there is a net movement of 

sand landward. This results in the gradual buildup of sand on the backshore. A horizontal bed of 

sand (a berm) extends from the foot of the dunes to a pronounced beach ridge at the high-tide mark. 

The berm area serves as a source of sand for replenishment and growth of the dunes. In the fall and 

winter, wave energy is greater, the berm erodes, and there is a net movement of sand from the beach 

to the breaker zone, where it is deposited as an offshore bar. 

SOILS 

Soils directly influence the kind and amount of vegetation and the amount of water available. In this 

way they indirectly influence the kind of wildlife that can live in an area. Soils are organized into a 

taxonomic classification system by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, in which each soil is categorized by order, suborder, great group, subgroup, 

family, and soil series. Nationwide, there are twelve soil orders, three of which are predominantly 

found on the refuges of the Complex – Inceptisols (Humaquepts); Entisols (Quartzipsamments and 

Sulfaquents); and, Spodosols (Alorthods and Alaquods). 

The principal sources of heavy minerals and sands on the Georgia and southern South Carolina 

coast are the (I) Altamaha and Savannah Watersheds, which originate in the Piedmont and 

mountainous Blue Ridge province, respectively; (2) smaller Coastal Plain watersheds that are of more 

recent origin; and (3) suspended material from the continental shelf. 

Soils of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont provinces are derived from crystalline rocks dating to preCambrian time. Upland soils are mostly porous sands derived from recently deposited marine 

sediments that are resistant to weathering (Regosols). These soils have a distinct “A” horizon 

(surface layer) with significant accumulations of organic matter that account for most of the exchange 

capacity. They are subject to moderate to severe leaching, and many are excessively drained. 

Principal soil series include Blanton, Galestown, Klej, Lakeland, and Palm Beach. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 51

The lower, poorly drained coastal area is characterized by soils of the following series: Mandarin, 

Rutlege, Chipley and Seabrock. These soils dominantly have a thermic soil temperature regime, an aquic 

soil moisture regime, and sandy-siliceous mineralogy. They are very deep, usually poorly drained with 

rapid to moderate permeability, and often loamy. Parent material of the coastal soil series are primarily 

marine and to a lesser extent fluvial. Most of these soil series are characteristically very acid, but locally 

on the islands they may be neutral to slightly alkaline due to the presence of oyster shells in the profile. 

Dunes along the beaches contain relatively few shell fragments. The seaward beaches and dune ridges 

of the barrier islands are made up of fine quartz sands. Apparently, both of these attributes are due to the 

low wave energies along the Georgia and southern South Carolina coast, which lack the ability to 

transport, fragment, and abrade materials. Heavy minerals of the beaches and dunes more closely 

resemble assemblages from the Piedmont rivers than they do assemblages from Coastal Plain rivers. 

This suggests that Coastal Plain rivers are less important contributors to present beach sediments than 

the Piedmont rivers. There is also an apparent relationship between the composition of beach sands and 

the mineralogy of the adjacent continental shelf, giving further evidence that continental shelf material is 

another important sediment source. 

The Bohicket and Capers soils series are dominant in tidal marshes of the barrier islands. These are 

silty clay loam soils which are very poorly drained and very slowly permeable. They tend to be 

slightly acid to moderately alkaline (USDA 2008). 

GROUNDWATER 

The limestones of Tertiary and Quaternary age that underly the Coastal Plain of Georgia and 

southern South Carolina form one of the most productive aquifer systems in the country. The Tertiary 

limestone is several thousand feet thick, ranging in age from Paleocene to Pliocene. The hydrologic 

unit of this limestone, deposited in the period from mid-Eocene to mid-Miocene, is the principal 

artesian or Coastal Plain aquifer. 

Three named aquifers characterize the groundwater regime of southeastern Georgia and southern 

South Carolina the: (a) Surficial aquifer system; (b) Floridan aquifer system; and, (c) Southeastern 

Coastal Plain aquifer system. Along the coast of Georgia and southern South Carolina, the surficial 

aquifer system is typically less than 50 feet, largely composed of unconsolidated sand and shell and 

generally thickens coastward. Complex interbedding of fine- and coarse-textured rocks and sandy 

marine terrace deposits (ranging in age from Pleistocene to Holocene) is typical of the surficial 

system. The surficial aquifer is typically unconfined and most of the water that enters the system 

moves quickly along short flowpaths and discharges as baseflow to surface streams. Thin clay beds 

separate the surficial system from the Floridan system. 

The Floridan aquifer is the largest, oldest, and deepest aquifer in the southeastern United States, 

ranging over 100,000 square miles and underlying coastal parts of South Carolina, Georgia, 

Alabama, and all of Florida (University of Florida, 2003). It has an estimated flow of 

approximately 10 billion gallons of water per day (bgd). The aquifer is one of the major sources 

of groundwater in the United States, supplying more than 3 bgd. The aquifer supplies over 50 

percent of the water requirements for coastal Georgia and South Carolina. Georgia alone 

withdraws approximately 700 million gallons per day. 

The Floridan aquifer, composed of a thick layer of carbonate rocks of Tertiary age, can be divided 

into the Upper and Lower Floridan systems, differentiated by porosity and permeability and separated 

by a less-permeable confining unit. The Upper Floridan, which consists of the Suwannee and Ocala 

limestones and also the upper portion of the Avon Park formation, is highly permeable and is the 

source of the majority of withdrawals from the Floridan aquifer. The Lower Floridan includes the 
52 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

lower part of the Avon Park formation as well as the Oldsmar limestone and the upper part of the 

Cedar Keys formation. Before development of the Floridan aquifer, nearly all of its discharge was to 

springs and streams and offshore freshwater springs in coastal areas. Development of the aquifer 

began in the late 1800s in Savannah. Since then, large industrial, municipal, commercial, and 

agricultural withdrawals of groundwater have led to a large cone of depression (~50 km radius) in the 

groundwater table in the Savannah area, and to a lesser extent in other coastal areas of Georgia (i.e., 

Brunswick and St. Mary's). This has resulted in declining water levels, saltwater intrusion, and lack of 

fresh groundwater supplies. 

SURFACE WATER 

Stream – aquifer relations for the Upper Floridan aquifer are important. The surface water systems 

interact with the underlying groundwater system to varying degrees, largely based on the degree of 

incision of a river into a surficial aquifer and on topography. The surface streams and rivers are 

interconnected with the surficial aquifer and form a single hydrologic entity that is stressed by natural 

hydrologic and climatic factors (viz. drought) and anthropogenic factors. In general, there is greater 

interconnection between the surface water and groundwater systems in the upper Coastal Plain, due to 

greater incision of aquifers by streams and greater topographic relief, than in the lower Coastal Plain. 

There are four major river systems within the Complex area and along the coastal regions of southern 

South Carolina and Georgia. They are (north to south) the Salkehatchie, Savannah, Ogeechee, and 

Altamaha Rivers. The Salkehatchie River basin is approximately 3,300 square miles and lies entirely 

within the southern portion of South Carolina, draining most of Beaufort and Jasper Counties. Near 

the coast, the Salkehatchie basin comprises several interconnecting smaller drainages. The Broad 

River joins the Chechessee River and the Beaufort River to form Port Royal Sound. Calibogue 

Sound accepts drainage from the May River, the Cooper River, and Broad Creek, and is connected 

to Port Royal Sound via the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW). The AIWW continues to connect 

the system to the New River, the Wright River, and the Savannah River, all draining into the Atlantic 

Ocean. The Savannah River, which forms the border between South Carolina and Georgia, is about 

300 miles long, has a drainage area of approximately 10,600 square miles, and an average discharge 

of 13,100 cubic feet per second (cfs). The lower 50 miles of the Savannah River are tidal. The 

Ogeechee River is about 266 miles in length, drains approximately 5,220 square miles and has an 

average annual flow of about 4,000 cfs. The lower, coastline portion of the Ogeechee basin drains 

almost all of Chatham, Bryan, Liberty, and McIntosh Counties in Georgia. The Altamaha River has 

the greatest discharge along the Atlantic coast. It is formed by the confluence of the Ocmulgee and 

Oconee Rivers, has a drainage area of approximately 13,600 square miles and an average discharge 

of about 14,300 cfs, but drains only a small portion of McIntosh County. 

The Georgia and southern South Carolina coasts are subject twice daily to tides, both approximately 

the same height. The height of the tide varies between 5 and 9 feet. The tidal movement of saline 

waters into the estuaries and the drainage of rivers into them cause the complicated hydrologic 

patterns characteristic of estuaries, with tidal action usually serving as the dominant force mixing 

freshwater and saltwater. 

WATER QUALITY 

Coastal waters in the United States include estuaries, coastal wetlands, coral reefs, mangrove and 

kelp forests, seagrass meadows, and upwelling areas. Critical coastal habitats provide spawning 

grounds, nurseries, shelter, and food for finfish, shellfish, birds, and other wildlife. The nation’s 

coastal resources also provide nesting, resting, feeding, and breeding habitat for 85 percent of 

waterfowl and other migratory birds. Estuaries are bodies of water that provide transition zones 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 53

between the freshwater from rivers and the saline environment of the ocean. This interaction 

produces a unique environment that supports wildlife and fisheries and contributes substantially to 

the economy of the United States. 

According to the EPA, the overall condition of southeast coast estuaries is fair to good, with 

environmental stressors (e.g., nutrients, contaminants) and conditions for aquatic life showing few 

signs of significant impairment. However, there is evidence of human-induced stress in some areas 

caused by rapid population growth in coastal areas of South Carolina and Georgia. Stressors 

associated with such population growth include habitat loss, resource depletion, nonpoint source 

pollution, and nutrient loadings to estuaries and coastal waters. The ecological condition evaluation 

is based on five indicators: (1) Water quality index (dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll a, nitrogen, 

phosphorus, water clarity); (2) sediment quality index (sediment toxicity, sediment contaminants, 

sediment TOC), (3) benthic index (number of species, species dominance, species abundance, 

pollution-sensitive species); (4) coastal habitat index (wet-land loss and wet-land loss rate); and (5) 

fish tissue contaminants index (metals, pesticides, PCB's). 

Localized water quality concerns are related to low dissolved oxygen concentrations in Point Royal 

Sound and the Savannah River Harbor; elevated concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria in coastal 

waters limiting shell fishing; and elevated concentrations of mercury in some species of fish. Both 

South Carolina and Georgia warn citizens against consuming large quantities of king mackerel, 

because of potential mercury contamination. 

AIR QUALITY 

The Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 (as amended in 1990 and 1997) requires the EPA to implement air 

quality standards to protect the nation's health and welfare. National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) were set for six pollutants commonly found throughout the United States: lead, ozone, nitrogen 

oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and particulate matter less than 10 and 2.5 

microns in diameter (PM10 and PM2.5) (EPA undated). 

The GADNR, Environmental Protection Division (EPD), Air Protection Branch, Ambient Monitoring 

Program conducts monitoring to satisfy CAA monitoring requirements and has monitored air quality in 

Georgia for more than 30 years. In 2006, the Air Sampling Network collected data at 65 locations in 

37 counties in Georgia. Among these 65 locations, there are 8 air sampling locations in southeastern 

Georgia in the vicinity of the Complex, along the Atlantic coastline – five are in Chatham County, and 

three are in Glynn County. The five air quality monitoring sites in the Chatham County/Savannah 

area are: Shyman Middle School (130510014), Market Street (130510017), East President Street 

(130510021), Mercer Middle (130510091), and West Lathrop/Augusta Avenue (130511002). The 

three sites in the Glynn County/Brunswick area are: Arco Pump Station (131270004), Risley Middle 

School (131270006), and Brunswick College (131273001) (GADNR 2006). 

The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), Bureau of Air 

Quality (BAQ) operates National Ambient Monitoring Stations (NAMS), State and Local Ambient 

Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), and industrial monitoring sites to measure concentrations of the six 

NAAQS pollutants. In 2006, the BAQ operated a network of 130+

 monitors/samplers at 55 sites 

throughout the state. Among these 55 sites, one air quality monitoring location is in southeastern 

South Carolina in the vicinity of the SCRC. The site is in Beaufort County, in Beaufort on King 

Street (45-013-0007) (DHEC 2006). 
54 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Areas that meet the national ambient air quality standards are designated “attainment areas,” while 

areas not meeting the standards are termed “non-attainment” areas. The 2005-2006 monitoring 

results, from the total of nine Georgia and South Carolina air monitoring sites listed above, indicate 

that the entire Complex area would qualify as an attainment area for all monitored pollutants, and that 

regional air quality improvement is being noted (Tables 2 and 3). 

The Air Quality Index (AQI) is a summary index for reporting daily air quality. It tells how clean or polluted 

the air is, and what associated health effects might be of concern. The AQI focuses on health effects that 

may be experienced within a few hours or days after breathing polluted air. EPA calculates the AQI for 

five major air pollutants regulated by the Clean Air Act: ground-level ozone, particle pollution (also known 

as particulate matter), carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide. (Because all areas of the 

United States are currently attaining the NAAQS for lead, the AQI does not specifically address lead.) For 

each of these pollutants, EPA has established national air quality standards to protect public health. 

Based on this Index, and data collected in 2006 and 2007, air quality in Chatham and Glynn Counties in 

Georgia; and, in Beaufort, South Carolina, show the following (EPA): 

 Good/Moderate Air Quality Unhealthy Air Quality

County 2006(%) 2007(%) 2006(%) 2007(%)

Chatham, GA 99.5 98 0.5 2 

Glynn, GA 99.5 99.5 0.5 0.5 

Beaufort, SC 100 99 0 1 

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

HABITAT 

Plants of special concern and/or significance of the SCRC are listed in Appendix I. 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

Blackbeard Island NWR's 5,618 acres include approximately 1,163 acres of freshwater 

impoundments and marshes, 2,000 acres of saltwater marsh, 2,115 acres of pine and oak forests, 

and 340 acres of sand beach. The more than 2,000 acres of forest are a mosaic habitat of old growth 

maritime forest, savannahs, and levees. The north end of Blackbeard NWR is thickly vegetated with 

palmettos beneath a canopy of live oaks and other hardwoods. Two freshwater impoundments on 

the north end concentrate ducks in the winter months and wading birds, including the federally 

endangered wood stork, in the summer. These ponds are populated year-round by great numbers of 

American alligators. In 1975, 3,000 acres of salt marsh and pine forest on the south end of the island 

were designated as Wilderness. The southern end of the island supports old growth slash and 

loblolly pine with a diverse understory that includes red bay, yaupon holly, and wax myrtle. These 

habitats provide for one of the highest breeding concentrations of painted buntings on the east coast 

(USFWS, Jan. 17, 2008). Saltwater creeks passing through the marshlands are open to fishing and 

the beaches provide recreational opportunities such as sunbathing and fishing. Miles of pristine 

beach provide important habitat for Atlantic loggerhead sea turtles, piping plovers, and many other 

beach-dependent wildlife species. Table 4 details the general land cover classifications of 

Blackbeard NWR. Blackbeard NWR habitat details are displayed in Figure 13. 
ble 2. Air quality by county 

Air Quality Statistics by County, 2005 and 2006a

County 2000 

Population 

 CO 

8-hr 

(ppm) 

Pb 

Qmax 

(μg/m3) 

NO2 

AM 

(ppm) 

O3

1-hr 

(ppm) 

O3

8-hr 

(ppm) 

PM10.0 

Wtd 

AM 

(μg/m3) 

PM10.0 

24-hr 

(μg/m3) 

PM2.5

Wtd 

AM 

(μg/m3) 

PM2.5

24-hr 

(μg/m3) 

SO2AM 

(ppm) 

SO2 

24-hr 

(ppm) 

County, GA 232048 ND 0.00 ND 0.083 0.068 24.0 62.0 14.9 31.0 0.005 0.040 

nty, GA 67568 ND 0.00 ND 0.077 0.064 22.0 39.0 12.8 26.0 0.001 0.008 

County, SC 120937 ND 0.00 ND ND ND ND ND IN IN ND ND 

County, GA 232048 ND 0.00 ND 0.080 0.069 ND 43.0 13.9 28.0 0.003 0.023 

nty, GA 67568 ND 0.00 ND 0.078 0.069 ND 37.0 11.6 26.0 ND ND 

County, SC 120937 ND 0.00 ND ND ND ND ND 11.0 24.0 ND ND 

Ambient Air Quality Standards -- 9.0 1.50 0.053 0.125 0.085 50.0 150.0 15.0 65.0 0.030 0.140 

st second maximum non-overlapping 8-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 9 ppm) 

t quarterly maximum concentration (applicable NAAQS is 1.5 μg/m3) 

st arithmetic mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.053 ppm) 

 Highest second daily maximum 1-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.125 ppm) 

 Highest fourth daily maximum 8-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.085 ppm) 

hest weighted annual mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 50 μg/m3) 

hest second maximum 24-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 150 μg/m3) 

est weighted annual mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 15 μg/m3) 

hest 98th percentile 24-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 65 μg/m3) 

st annual mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.03 ppm) 

est second maximum 24-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.14 ppm) 

es data not available IN - Indicates insufficient data to calculate summary statistic 

l mean μg/m3 - Units are micrograms per cubic meter 

terly maximum ppm 

Units are parts per million 
ble 3. Air quality by city 

Air Quality Statistics by City, 2005 and 2006a

opolitan Statistical Area 2000 

Population 

CO 

8-hr 

(ppm) 

Pb 

Qmax 

(μg/m3) 

NO2 

AM 

(ppm) 

O3

1-hr 

(ppm) 

O3

8-hr 

(ppm) 

PM10.0 

Wtd 

AM 

(μg/m3) 

PM10.0 

24-hr 

(μg/m3) 

PM2.5

Wtd 

AM 

(μg/m3) 

PM2.5

24-hr 

(μg/m3) 

SO2

AM 

(ppm) 

SO2 

24-hr 

(ppm) 

 GA MSA 293000 ND 0.000 ND 0.083 0.068 24.0 62.0 14.9 31.0 0.005 0.040  GA MSA 293000 ND 0.000 ND 0.080 0.069 ND 43.0 13.9 28.0 0.003 0.023 

mbient Air Quality Standards -- 9.0 1.50 0.053 0.125 0.085 50.0 150.0 15.0 65.0 0.030 0.140 

t second maximum non-overlapping 8-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 9 ppm) 

 quarterly maximum concentration (applicable NAAQS is 1.5 μg/m3) 

t arithmetic mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.053 ppm) 

Highest second daily maximum 1-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.125 ppm) 

Highest fourth daily maximum 8-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.085 ppm) 

est weighted annual mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 50 μg/m3) 

hest second maximum 24-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 150 μg/m3) 

est weighted annual mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 15 μg/m3) 

est 98th percentile 24-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 65 μg/m3) 

st annual mean concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.03 ppm) 

st second maximum 24-hour concentration (applicable NAAQS is 0.14 ppm) 

es data not available 

tinued 

 mean μg/m3 - Units are micrograms per cubic meter 

erly maximum ppm - Units are parts per million 

rom exceptional events are not included. The monitoring data represent the quality of air in the vicinity of the

oring site and, for some pollutants, may not necessarily represent county-wide air quality. 

mental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/factbook.html
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 57

Dune Habitat on Blackbeard Island NWR 

A Coastal Plain Southern Maritime Forest habitat is present on stabilized upland dunes of barrier 

islands, and near-coastal strands from central South Carolina (approximately Santee River) 

southward to approximately Volusia County, Florida. Vegetation structure and composition are 

influenced by salt spray, extreme disturbance events, and the distinctive climate of the immediate 

coast. Vegetation may include different woodland communities often dominated by southern pine 

species (i.e., longleaf, pond, and slash pine), densely shrubby oak-dominated (especially live oak) 

sub-canopies, and understories that can also include a Magnolia component. Unlike maritime 

vegetation to the north, this system may be more heavily influenced by natural fire regimes that may 

explain the dominance of fire-tolerant pine species. 

Dunes form as a result of windblown sand piling up behind minor obstacles. Once started, the dune itself 

becomes an obstacle to windblown sand, and the deposition of more sand causes the dune to grow. 

Dunes and dune ridges along the Georgia-South Carolina Coast normally grow to 10 or 12 feet in height 

(occasionally much higher) and acquire a distinct morphology characterized by gentle windward and 

steeper leeward slopes. Surface ripples parallel the dune ridge at right angles to the wind. 

Vegetation also plays an important part in the formation and stabilization of dunes. Salt-resistant 

beach plants trap windblown sand, forming little mounds of sand or dunelets that grow as the plants 

respond with increased growth and trap more sand. Few species of vascular plants can survive the 

extremely harsh physical environment of the beaches and dunes. To inhabit this area, plants must 

have the ability to withstand salt spray, constant wind, full light 

Table 4. Land cover classifications 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

Cover Type Percent 

Developed Dry Land 0.1% 

Undeveloped Dry Land 34.0% 

Swamp 6.1% 

Inland Fresh Marsh 10.3% 

Tidal Fresh Marsh 1.5% 

Transitional Salt Marsh 0.8% 

Salt Marsh 34.3% 

Estuarine Beach 0.7% 

Tidal Flat 0.5% 

Ocean Beach 0.4% 

Inland Open Water 2.0% 

Estuarine Water 4.8% 

Open Ocean 0.0% 

Brackish Marsh 2.0% 

Tidal Swamp 2.6% 

Totals 100.0%
58 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 13. General habitat types on Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 59

 intensity, high evaporation, high temperatures, roots that will endure exposure, and stems that will 

withstand burial by shifting sands. They also must be perennials able to keep above the sand, 

spread laterally, and withstand drought. 

Distance from the surf and location relative to dunes or protective vegetation on the seaward side will 

determine the exposure of a site to the limiting factors listed above. Thus, there is a gradient or a 

zonation of vegetation from mean high tide toward the interior of the island which is commonly a 

result of the modifying effect of the dunes. Plants occurring on the beach include sea rocket, beach 

hogwort, beach sandspur, salt meadow cordgrass, salt wort, sea-purslane, beach-spurge, and 

seashore-elder. Plants occurring on the foredunes and the windward slope of the rear dunes are 

exposed to a greater intensity of salt spray and include sea oats, sea beach panic grass, railroad 

vine, beach pennywort, and Spanish-bayonet, as well as some of the plants of the beach (e.g., 

seashore elder, beach spurge, and sea rocket). Annuals such as camphorweed may temporarily 

colonize dunes until killed out by salt spray. Plants occurring on the lee slope of the foredunes or in 

the interdune area, where little salt is deposited, include some of the species previously mentioned 

along with bluestem (occupying the drier sites), prickly pear, seaside goldenrod, beach primrose, 

juniper, yaupon, wax myrtle, and live oak. Low, flat areas behind breaks in the foredunes that are 

periodically inundated by unusually high tides may contain stands of salt meadow cordgrass. 

Behind the crest of the rear dunes, where sites are more protected from harsh conditions, 

vegetation is more diverse, with trees and shrubs being the dominant plants, including oak, red 

bay, wax myrtle, juniper, yaupon, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, and groundselbush. These trees 

and shrubs are often asymmetrical in form, with a sloped, sheared appearance, because they are 

damaged on the windward side by wind and salt spray—salt enters the leaves through abrasions 

caused by the lashing of wind action, and the resulting high chloride ion concentrations produces 

necrosis and death of exposed leaves and branches. However, pruning stimulates vigorous 

sprouting, resulting in the rapid formation of a dense canopy that reduces the efficiency of 

deposition on the plant and on the individual stems. 

Harris Neck NWR

Harris Neck NWR's 2,824 acres consist of approximately 705 acres of open fields, 663 acres of mixed 

pine/oak forest, 1,297 acres of salt marsh, and 157 acres of managed freshwater impoundments. 

Mudflats, thickets, swamps, and natural ponds are interspersed throughout the refuge. Table 5 details the 

general land cover classifications of Harris Neck NWR. There are 15 miles of paved roads and runways, 

which are remnants of the refuge's history as an airfield. The refuge supports notable concentrations of 

waterfowl, wading birds, shorebirds, songbirds, raptors, deer, turkey, quail, and alligators. Due to its 

accessibility and bird diversity, Harris Neck NWR was chosen as one of 18 sites forming the Colonial 

Coast Birding Trail, established in 2000. The refuge has six managed freshwater impoundments that 

support a wide variety of aquatic bird species. One impoundment has been intensively managed to 

support the endangered wood stork, with over 100 artificial nesting structures providing a safe, stable 

environment for a breeding colony. Some ponds are maintained as foraging areas for wood storks and 

many other species of wading birds. Harris Neck NWR habitat details are displayed in Figure 14. 
60 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Table 5. Land cover classifications 

Harris Neck NWR 

Cover Type Percent 

Developed Dry Land 0.7% 

Undeveloped Dry Land 50.8% 

Swamp 3.0% 

Inland Fresh Marsh 1.6% 

Transitional Salt Marsh 1.1% 

Salt Marsh 34.2% 

Estuarine Beach 0.2% 

Tidal Flat 0.0% 

Inland Open Water 1.0% 

Estuarine Water 2.0% 

Brackish Marsh 5.5% 

Totals 100.0% 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 61

Figure 14. General habitat types on Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge 
62 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Pinckney Island NWR

The 4,053-acre Pinckney Island NWR includes Pinckney Island, Corn Island, Big Harry and Little 

Harry Islands, Buzzard Island, and numerous small hammocks. All together, the refuge is 2,729 

acres of salt marsh and tidal creeks, 274 acres of forest, 240 acres of brush, 100 acres of grassland 

and fallow fields, 60 acres of roads and administrative land, and 38 acres of freshwater ponds; which 

collectively support a diversity of bird and plant life (Table 6). Table 7 details the general land cover 

classifications of Pinckney Island NWR. 

Pinckney Island NWR has several unique/threatened habitats: maritime forest, slash pine, saw palmetto, 

ephemeral wetlands, and bluff oak associated with magnolia and spruce pine. The north end of Pinckney 

Island NWR, including many small hammocks, is dominated by live oak with water oak, loblolly pine, and 

cabbage palm as associates; secondary species include hickory, pecan, magnolia, sweet gum, red cedar, 

and lesser numbers of maple, southern red oak, laurel oak, sassafras, hackberry, redbud, and winged 

elm. A small number of longleaf, loblolly, and slash pine plantations and volunteer pine stands are 

located throughout the refuge. Brush and hedge rows are dominated by wax myrtle and sweet gum with 

lesser amounts of sassafras, sumac, sycamore, and black cherry. The salt marsh consists primarily of 

salt marsh cord grass. Other typical vegetation found in a narrow band around the islands and in the 

higher marsh hammocks includes glasswort, needle grass, and sea oxeye. 

Freshwater habitat on Pinckney Island NWR is limited to approximately 38 acres. There are between 30-

50 small ponds/depressions, ranging from 0.5-acre up to 4 acres, which hold water during wetter periods 

of the year. Two of the freshwater ponds are recognized as among the best wading bird colony sites in 

the South Carolina coastal plain. Pinckney Island NWR habitat details are displayed in Figure 15. 

Savannah NWR 

Savannah NWR, comprising 29,175 acres, is one of the largest federally protected tracts of land on the 

Georgia and South Carolina coasts. Refuge habitats include: (1) Bottomland hardwoods, (2) palustrine, 

(3) estuarine and (4) tidal freshwater wetlands. Managed freshwater impoundments (pools) make up 

about 3,000 acres and there are 38 miles of river and over 25 miles of streams and creeks within the 

refuge boundaries. In addition, hardwood hammocks, and scattered upland tracts comprised of 

hardwoods, mixed hardwoods, pines, and grassland fields are present on Savannah NWR. All wetlands 

outside of managed impoundments are subject to tidal fluctuations with amplitudes ranging from 6 to 10 

feet. Finally, an additional 87 acres are used for administrative areas, and the Seaboard Coastline 

Railroad has a 24-acre right-of-way agreement with the Service. Habitat acreages are shown in Table 8. 

Table 9 details the general land cover classifications of Savannah NWR.

Savannah NWR contains approximately 6,000 acres of impounded freshwater wetlands. These 

impoundments were formerly plantation rice fields, which date back to the mid- or late-1700s. 

Approximately 3,000 acres of former fields are now actively managed by 22 water control structures 

effectively serving as impoundments to provide feeding areas and sanctuary for waterfowl, 

shorebirds, wading birds, and other wildlife. The remaining 3,000 acres are in the East Marsh Unit. 

The managed freshwater impoundments are the most important managed habitat within the refuge. 

They are the principle means of meeting one of the refuge’s primary objectives (i.e., provide habitat 

and sanctuary for waterfowl). The managed freshwater impoundments provide wintering habitat for 

approximately 22 species of waterfowl. The freshwater plant communities within the management 

units are extremely diverse and compositionally complex. This diversity makes impounded areas 

ideal habitat for a myriad of water birds. In addition, prescribed fire and mechanical and chemical 

treatments are used to manipulate plant successional stages and regulate undesirable and noxious 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 63

plants within these impoundments. However, the primary means of management of these systems is 

dependable water level control utilizing rice trunk, and stop-log water control structures and the 9-mile 

diversion canal associated with this system. 

Savannah NWR habitat details are displayed in Figure 16. 

Table 6. Acreages of habitat types on Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge 

HABITAT TYPE ISLAND ACREAGE

Upland

Hardwood/Pine Pinckney Island 515

Big Harry Island 33

Little Harry Island 36

Corn Island 28

Total Hardwood/Pine 886

Pine Pinckney Island 200

Big Harry Island 34

Little Harry Island 30

Corn Island 10

Total Pine 274

Grassland Pinckney Island 100

Brush Pinckney Island 210

Big Harry Island 30

Total Brushland 240

Administrative Land Pinckney Island 60

Total Upland 1,286

Wetland

Saltwater Marsh/Tidal Creeks Entire Refuge 2,729

Freshwater Ponds Pinckney Island 38

Total Wetland 2,767

TOTAL REFUGE ACREAGE 4,053
64 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Table 7. Land cover classifications 

Pinckney Island NWR 

Cover Type Percent 

Developed Dry Land 0.4% 

Undeveloped Dry Land 32.0% 

Swamp 1.0% 

Inland Fresh Marsh 0.1% 

Transitional Salt Marsh 0.2% 

Salt Marsh 43.9% 

Estuarine Beach 2.3% 

Tidal Flat 0.0% 

Inland Open Water 0.5% 

Estuarine Water 17.6% 

Brackish Marsh 2.0% 

Tidal Swamp 0.1% 

Totals 100.0% 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 65

Figure 15. General habitat types on Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge 
66 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Table 8. Acreages of habitat types on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge 

Habitat Type Acres 

Bottomland hardwood 6,546 

Harwood hammocks 437 

Upland Pine 275 

Cypress–Gum Swamp 10,398 

Mixed Hardwoods 883 

Grassland Field 155 

Upland Hardwood 178 

Managed Impoundments 3,000 

Tidal Marsh 7,192 

Right-of-ways 24 

Administrative Areas 87 

Total 29,175 

Table 9. Land cover classifications 

Savannah NWR 

Cover Type Percent 

Developed Dry Land 0.2% 

Undeveloped Dry Land 12.1% 

Swamp 9.9% 

Cypress Swamp 0.0% 

Inland Fresh Marsh 2.4% 

Tidal Fresh Marsh 20.8% 

Transitional Salt Marsh 0.0% 

Salt Marsh 0.0% 

Estuarine Beach 0.0% 

Tidal Flat 0.1% 

Inland Open Water 1.4% 

Riverine Tidal Open Water 4.8% 

Estuarine Open Water 0.1% 

Brackish Marsh 4.7% 

Freshwater Shoreline 0.0% 

Tidal Swamp 43.4% 

Totals 100.0% 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 67

Figure 16. General habitat types on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge 
68 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Tybee NWR

Tybee NWR consists of approximately 400 acres of scrub/shrub habitat, sand beaches, Spartina 

marsh, tidal creeks, and several invasive plants (e.g., salt cedar, tallow, tropic soda apple). Much of 

the refuge is covered with sand deposits from the Corps of Engineers' dredging activities in the 

Savannah River. Sandy portions of the island are covered with only sparse vegetation. The more 

stable portions of the island are densely covered with such woody species as eastern red cedar, wax 

myrtle, and groundsel. The saltwater marsh areas surrounding the island are dominated by salt 

marsh cordgrass. Tybee NWR habitat details are displayed in Figure 17. 

Wassaw NWR

Wassaw NWR, like Blackbeard Island NWR, is a barrier island with extensive dune habitat. Please 

see the discussion of dune habitat under “Blackbeard Island NWR,” above, entitled, “Dune Habitat on 

Blackbeard Island.” 

Wassaw NWR, totaling 10,053 acres, includes a single barrier island, two smaller islands (collectively 

known as Little Wassaw Island), several small hammocks, and the salt marsh habitat. The refuge 

includes beaches with rolling dunes, live oak and slash pine woodlands, and salt marshes. With 

about 25 miles of boundary or shoreline, the refuge includes about 7,640 acres of saltwater marsh 

dominated by smooth cordgrass and about 2,360 acres of beach dune and pine-oak upland forests. 

The estuarine wetlands are very important as nursery habitat for juvenile fish, crabs, and shrimp that 

take refuge among the vegetation for protection from predators. The woodlands consist of lush virgin 

stands of oak, pine, and cedar along with magnolia, cabbage palm, and holly. The refuge has a 

prominent central dune ridge reaching elevations of nearly 45 feet above sea level, with a series of 

lower dune ridges parallel to the main ridge. Numerous depressions and ponds lie between these 

ridges. These ponds and the saltwater creeks passing through the marshlands provide habitat for 

many species of fish and excellent foraging opportunities for birds as the aquatic organisms may be 

highly concentrated within these unique habitats. The 7 miles of undeveloped beach provides 

important habitat for numerous species of shorebirds and several threatened and endangered 

species of turtles. Little development and few management practices have modified Wassaw NWR’s 

primitive character. The refuge is considered the most primitive island on the Georgia coast. This 

lack of disturbance has allowed natural climax plant communities to flourish, which, in turn, supports a 

natural diversity of animals species. Table 10 details the general land cover classifications of Wassaw 

NWR. Wassaw NWR habitat details are displayed in Figure 18. 

WILDLIFE 

The refuges within the Complex provide habitat for a variety of resident and migratory wildlife. Many 

species of wading and shorebirds can be found on all refuges year-round. Migratory songbirds pass 

through in the spring and fall months, while a number of migratory waterfowl species spend the 

winters resting and feeding on the refuges. Sea turtles, namely the threatened Atlantic loggerhead, 

utilize the beaches of the Wassaw and Blackbeard Island NWRs for nesting, and Harris Neck NWR is 

home to one of the most successful endangered wood stork rookeries in the southeast. All species of 

concern and/or significance found on the Complex are listed in Appendix I. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 69

Figure 17. General habitat types on Tybee National Wildlife Refuge 
70 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Table 10. Land cover classifications 

Wassaw NWR 

Cover Type Percent 

Developed Dry Land 0.0%

Undeveloped Dry Land 16.0%

Inland Fresh Marsh 0.1%

Transitional Salt Marsh 1.6%

Salt Marsh 66.7%

Estuarine Beach 1.1%

Tidal Flat 0.0%

Ocean Beach 1.6%

Inland Open Water 0.1%

Estuarine Water 12.1%

Tidal Creek 0.2%

Open Ocean 0.0%

Brackish Marsh 0.4%

Totals 100.0%
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 71

Figure 18. General habitat types on Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge 
72 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

Blackbeard Island NWR supports a wide diversity of wildlife, including about 240 species of breeding and 

wintering birds, at least 20 species of mammals, and an undetermined number of reptiles, amphibians, 

and fish. The refuge is within the range of several listed threatened or endangered wildlife species. 

The Georgia coastal marshes are a historic migration corridor for waterfowl that use the Atlantic 

Flyway. Populations vary greatly from year-to-year, depending on water levels and weather 

conditions farther up the flyway. Species range from dabbling ducks, such as mallards, gadwall, and 

teal, to diving ducks, such as scaup and ring-necked ducks. 

Blackbeard Island NWR supports a diverse population of songbirds. A number of surveys to 

document the passerine populations on the refuge have been conducted through point counts. The 

refuge is a very important area for wintering shorebirds, including the endangered piping plover. 

Waterbirds such as pelicans, loons, and grebes use the refuge during winter for foraging and resting. 

During winter months, bald eagles and peregrine falcons are often seen from the beach. In the 

summer, flocks of black skimmers, terns, and brown pelicans congregate along the beach front. At 

least 15 species of terns and gulls have been recorded for the refuge. Most are observed foraging in 

open areas of the estuarine marsh and along the beach. Large numbers of waterbirds congregate at 

the north end of Blackbeard Island to rest and loaf. Raptor species that have nested on the refuge 

include osprey, bald eagle, red-tailed hawk, and Cooper's hawk. Other raptors likely to use the 

refuge all year include red-shouldered hawk, barred owl, great horned owl, eastern screech owl, barn 

owl, turkey vulture, and black vulture. Seasonal visitors include American kestrel, merlin, peregrine 

falcon, sharp-shinned hawk, northern harrier, and swallow-tailed kite. 

Listed species occurring at Blackbeard Island NWR include the wood stork, West-Indian manatee, 

and sea turtles. The refuge is a very important nesting site for loggerhead and green sea turtles. 

Resident game species include white-tailed deer, bobwhite quail, and feral hog. Bobcats historically 

occurred in the woodlands and savannahs. Other furbearing species include river otter, mink, and 

raccoon. Non-game resident wildlife potentially includes Rafinesque's big-eared bat, northern yellow 

bat, and southeastern myotis, but specific information about their use of the refuge is unknown. 

Blackbeard Island NWR has an abundant fisheries resource in refuge waters. The lifeblood of the 

fishery production is the cycle of tidal flow of the estuarine marshes. Salt marshes provide important 

nursery habitat for a variety of marine organisms including many species of fish, shrimp, and oysters. 

These food resources are the basis of the food chain and support higher level predators such as 

larger sport fish and birds. In addition to the estuarine resources, the 300-acre Flag Pond once 

supported a world class freshwater bass fishery. Due to prolonged drought conditions and decreased 

freshwater flow from the artesian wells, nearly all of the pond’s acreage has now converted to a 

dense, emergent marsh. 

Harris Neck NWR

Harris Neck NWR supports a wide diversity of wildlife, including nearly 240 species of breeding and 

wintering birds, more than 20 species of mammals, and an undetermined number of reptiles, amphibians, 

and fish. The refuge is within the range of several listed threatened or endangered wildlife species. 

The Georgia coastal marshes are a historic migration corridor for waterfowl that use the Atlantic 

Flyway. Populations vary greatly from year-to-year, depending on water levels and weather 

conditions farther up the flyway. Species range from dabbling ducks, such as mallards, gadwall, and 

teal, to diving ducks, such as scaup and ring-necked ducks. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 73

Harris Neck NWR supports a diverse population of songbirds. A number of surveys to document 

the passerine populations on the refuge have been conducted, including annual Christmas bird 

counts. The refuge is a very important area for wading birds, including the endangered wood 

stork. Great blue herons, great egrets, snowy egrets, little blue herons, herons, night herons, and 

white ibis are residents of the refuge impoundments and salt marshes. At least 12 species of 

terns and gulls have been recorded for Harris Neck NWR. Most are observed in open areas of 

the estuarine marsh and along the edges of the moist-soil units. Raptor species that use the 

refuge year-round include the bald eagle, red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper's hawk, 

sharp-shinned hawk, osprey, barred owl, great horned owl, eastern screech owl, barn owl, turkey 

vulture, and black vulture. Seasonal visitors include American kestrel, merlin, peregrine falcon, 

swallow-tailed kite, Mississippi kite, and northern harrier. 

Listed species occurring on or near Harris Neck NWR include the wood stork, West-Indian 

manatee, and sea turtles. Resident game species include white-tailed deer, wild turkeys, and 

bobwhite quail. Bobcats are common throughout the woodlands and field edges. Other 

furbearing species include otter, gray fox, and raccoon. Non-game resident wildlife potentially 

includes Rafinesque's big-eared bat, northern yellow bat, and southeastern myotis, but specific 

information about their use of the refuge is unknown. 

Harris Neck NWR has an abundant fisheries resource in refuge waters. The lifeblood of the 

fishery production is the cycle of tidal flow of the estuarine marshes. Salt marshes provide 

important nursery habitat for a variety of marine organisms including many species of fish, 

shrimp, and oysters. These food resources are the basis of the food chain and support higher 

level predators such as larger sport fish and birds. 

Pinckney Island NWR

Pinckney Island NWR is managed to maximize habitat diversity. A variety of wildlife species occurs 

on the refuge, including a number of species federally listed as endangered, threatened or as species 

of concern. Two federally listed endangered and threatened species known to occur within the 

boundary of the refuge are the wood stork, which feed and roost on the refuge but do not nest, and 

the West Indian manatee, which occurs in waters adjacent to the refuge and are frequently sighted 

near Daws Island and in Port Royal Sound. 

The refuge bird list contains over 250 species. The most popular and colorful is the painted bunting, 

a common summer resident on the island and in brushy habitat throughout the area. In fall and early 

winter, warblers are common among the live oaks and in the scrub/shrub habitat. Waterfowl, 

shorebirds, wading birds, raptors, and neotropical migratory birds are common on the refuge–

Pinckney Island NWR is one of the best places in South Carolina to see breeding yellow-crowned 

night herons. Other species of wading birds breeding on the refuge include: snowy egret, cattle 

egret, tri-colored heron, little blue heron, and black-crowned night heron. These breeding herons are 

joined in summer by a few non-breeding wood storks. 

A variety of reptiles, amphibians, fish, and mammals occurs on the refuge and in the waters in the 

immediate vicinity. Some of the more common snake species seen on the refuge include the 

cottonmouth, black racer, corn snake, and yellow and grey rat snake. Mammals common to the 

refuge include white-tailed deer, bobcat, raccoon, opossum, eastern gray squirrels, fox squirrels, 

river otter, and red fox. 
74 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Savannah NWR

Savannah NWR is home to a large variety of wildlife including: ducks, geese, wading birds, 

shorebirds and several endangered and/or threatened species including the Flatwoods salamander, 

wood stork, shortnose sturgeon, and manatee. The refuge is one of the most important wildlife 

refuges on the east coast, and during migratory periods is visited by over 20 species of warblers and 

22 species of ducks. The refuge also provides nesting areas for wood ducks, great horned owls, bald 

eagles, osprey and swallow-tailed kites, among others. 

During the winter months, thousands of mallards, pintails, and as many as 22 species of ducks 

migrate into the area, (including the rarely seen cinnamon teal, Eurasian widgeon, and black bellied 

whistling duck) joining resident wood ducks on the refuge. Other wintering birds include the 

peregrine falcon, northern harrier, short-eared owl, Virginia rail, common snipe, American woodcock, 

and a host of songbirds, including the American robin, hermit thrush, fox sparrow, and winter wren. In 

the spring and fall, transient songbirds stop briefly on their journey to and from northern nesting 

grounds. Twenty-one species of warblers, including Swainson's, Cape May, worm-eating, blackpoll, 

black-throated blue, and magnolia, have been seen in spring and autumn migrations. The hardwood 

hammocks serve to attract and concentrate the songbirds. In the summer months, sightings of purple 

gallinules and wood ducks, and flocks of white ibis and glossy ibis, are observed feeding together. 

Tybee NWR

The refuge's small size provides minimal habitat for wildlife. However, numerous species of birds utilize 

the available shoreline, tidal saltwater marsh, open spoil banks, and shrubby uplands. At low tide the 

shoreline provides a resting and feeding place for many species of migratory birds including gulls, terns, 

neotropical migratory songbirds, and shorebirds. Black skimmers, Wilson's plovers, and several other 

shorebird species have also nested on the spoil deposits during the spring and summer. During all 

seasons, the refuge's shoreline and open spoil deposits are used as resting sites for brown pelicans, 

gulls, terns, egrets, herons, and many other species. Willets have been recorded nesting and raising 

their young as well as oystercatchers, killdeer, clapper rails, and red-tailed hawks (Tomkins 1965). 

Some winter visitors include whimbrels, purple and pectoral sandpipers, dunlin, redknots, and northern 

gannets. Permanent residents include clapper rails, fish crows, and boat-tailed grackles. Endangered 

species, including piping plovers and wood storks, have been observed on the refuge, while shortnose 

sturgeon and manatees have been found in the waters bordering the refuge. 

Wassaw NWR

Wassaw NWR supports a wide diversity of wildlife, including at least 257 species of breeding and 

wintering birds and an undetermined number of mammal, reptile, amphibian, and fish species. In 

most cases, a thorough inventory has not been completed for Wassaw NWR. Therefore, the true 

extent of its value as wildlife habitat is not well known. The refuge is within the range of several listed 

threatened or endangered wildlife species. 

The refuge also provides habitat for migratory and resident waterfowl. The Georgia coastal 

marshes are a historic migration corridor for waterfowl that use the Atlantic Flyway. Populations 

vary greatly from year-to-year, depending on water levels and weather conditions farther up the 

flyway. Species range from dabbling ducks, such as mallards, gadwall, and teal, to diving ducks, 

such as scaup and ring-necked ducks. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 75

Wassaw NWR supports a diverse population of songbirds. The refuge is a very important area for 

wintering shorebirds, including the endangered piping plover. Waterbirds such as pelicans, loons, 

and grebes use the refuge during winter for foraging and resting. At least 15 species of terns and 

gulls have been recorded for the refuge. Most are observed foraging in open areas of the estuarine 

marsh and along the beach. Raptor species that have nested on the refuge include osprey, bald 

eagle, red-tailed hawk, Eastern screech-owl, and great horned owl. Other raptors likely to use the 

refuge all year include barn owl, turkey vulture, and black vulture. Seasonal visitors include 

Mississippi kite, Northern harrier, American kestrel, merlin, and peregrine falcon. 

The 7 miles of undeveloped beach provide important nesting habitat for Northern subpopulation of 

the Atlantic loggerhead sea turtles (as well as piping plovers and many other beach-dependent 

wildlife species). Due to its extensive long-term data set, Wassaw Island NWR is considered one of 

the most important index beaches for this subpopulation. Listed threatened and endangered species 

occurring at Wassaw NWR include the wood stork, West Indian manatee,and possibly Atlantic and 

short-nosed sturgeon. Resident game species include white-tailed deer and introduced eastern gray 

squirrel. Other furbearing species include otter, gray fox, mink, and raccoon. Non-game resident 

wildlife potentially includes Rafinesque's big-eared bat, northern yellow bat, and southeastern myotis, 

but specific information about their use of the refuge is unknown. 

Wassaw NWR has an abundant fisheries resource in its waters. The lifeblood of the fishery 

production is the cycle of tidal flow of the estuarine marshes. Salt marshes provide important nursery 

habitat for a variety of marine organisms, including many species of fish, plus shrimp and oysters. 

These food resources are the basis of the food chain and support higher level predators such as 

larger sportfish and birds. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) provides the framework for federal review 

and consideration of cultural resources during federal project planning and execution. The implementing 

regulations for the Section 106 process (36 CFR Part 800) have been promulgated by the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). The Secretary of the Interior maintains the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP) and sets forth significant criteria (36 CFR Part 60) for inclusion in the NRHP. 

Cultural resources may be considered “historic properties” for the purpose of consideration by a federal 

undertaking if they meet NRHP criteria. The implementing regulations at 36 CFR 800.16(v) define an 

undertaking as “a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect 

jurisdiction of a Federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a Federal agency; those 

carried out with Federal financial assistance; those requiring a Federal permit, license or approval; and 

those subject to state or local regulation administered pursuant to a delegation or approval by a Federal 

agency.” Historic properties are those that are formally placed in the NRHP by the Secretary of the 

Interior and those that meet the criteria and are determined eligible for inclusion. 

Like all federal agencies, the Service must abide by Section 106 of the NHPA. Cultural resources 

management in the Service is the responsibility of the Regional Director but is not delegated for the 

Section 106 process when historic properties could be affected by Service undertakings, for issuing 

archeological permits, and for Indian tribal involvement. The Regional Historic Preservation Officer 

(RHPO) advises the Regional Director about procedures, compliance, and implementation of the 

several cultural resources laws. The Refuge Manager assists the RHPO by informing the RHPO 

(early in the process) about Service undertakings; by protecting archaeological sites and historic 

properties on Service managed and administered lands; by monitoring archaeological investigations 

by contractors and permittees; and by reporting violations. 
76 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The Complex follows these procedures to protect the public’s interest in preserving any cultural legacy 

that may potentially occur on the refuge. If, for any reason, such activity were required in the future, the 

refuge would contract with a qualified archaeologist/cultural resources expert to conduct an 

archaeological survey of the subject property prior to such activity. The results of this survey would be 

submitted to the RHPO, as well as the South Carolina and Georgia State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO). The SHPO would review such surveys and determine whether cultural resources will be 

impacted. In other words, the SHPO will determine whether any properties listed in or eligible for listing in 

the NRHP will be affected. If cultural resources are actually encountered during construction activities, 

the refuge is to notify the SHPO immediately. 

The following discussion highlights the important events of recent history for each of the six refuges 

included in this CCP. 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

Blackbeard Island NWR is one of the oldest refuges in the country. The island has been in 

continuous federal ownership since 1800 when it was acquired by the Navy Department at public 

auction for the sum of $15,000. The Navy did a limited amount of harvesting of live oaks on the 

island for ship building. 

Between the years of 1880 and 1910, the island served as the South Atlantic Quarantine Station for 

yellow fever. In addition to housing for medical personnel, a wharf with disinfecting tanks and a hospital 

and associated buildings were constructed on the island. As crews disembarked from ships, those that 

were sick were hospitalized, while the healthy were housed separately and examined daily for yellow 

fever symptoms. Once disinfected, the ships were allowed to continue to their destination. Sulfur dioxide 

gas was used to disinfect the ships. Located on the north end of the island is a structure referred to as 

the "crematorium." Although documentation does not exist to confirm the structure was ever used for 

body incineration, it stands as one of the few reminders of that era. (Sullivan 2001) 

Blackbeard Island was named for Edward Teach, alias Blackbeard the Pirate. Legend tells of his 

murderous and plundering activities along the coast and his periodic retreats to the island for 

"banking" purposes. Rumors of Blackbeard's buried treasure still flourish, but no evidence of his 

fortune has ever been discovered.

The island's history as a refuge began on February 5, 1924, when Blackbeard was placed under the 

jurisdiction of the Bureau of Biological Survey to be maintained as a preserve and breeding ground 

for native wildlife and migratory birds. In 1940, by Presidential Proclamation, Blackbeard Island was 

designated as a national wildlife refuge.

Harris Neck NWR 

The 2,824 acres composing Harris Neck NWR have had a long, and at times, controversial history. 

Distinguished as one of the oldest intensively farmed areas along the Georgia coast, Harris Neck was 

among the first land grants given to early English and Scottish settlers in 1750. While staple crops 

were produced, it was the high-quality Sea Island cotton which brought European fame to the coastal 

agricultural industry. Unfortunately, poor farming practices soon exhausted the fragile sandy loam 

soils, and large scale farming was abandoned in 1860. (Porcher and Fick 2005; Thomas 1923) 

The American Civil War brought an end to the "Old South" plantation era, and Harris Neck was 

divided into smaller farms. The Gullah-Geechee community of Harris Neck emerged from a small 

group of former slaves who had returned to Thomas’ Peru Plantation following the Civil War. The 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 77

community consisted of primarily commercial watermen, who harvested oysters, crabs, and fish from 

the nearby waters, and small-scale farmers. The community, thus established, continued until the 

advent of World War II, when the U.S. Government purchased the property for use as an air base. At 

that time, 250 acres were converted into a triangular landing strip for use as a training facility by the 

War Department. The P-40 "Kittyhawk," used at Harris Neck Army Airfield, later gained fame from 

missions with the legendary Flying Tigers, who shot down 286 Japanese aircraft during World War II. 

After World War II, the property was given to McIntosh County for guardianship and use as a 

municipal airport. Due to county mismanagement of the land resources, Harris Neck was transferred 

to the Federal Aviation Administration. On May 25, 1962, the U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and 

Wildlife (forerunner of the Service) acquired the property and established the area as a migratory bird 

refuge (Sullivan 2001). 

Pinckney Island NWR 

Pinckney Island NWR is archaeologically rich, with numerous prehistoric and historic sites identified. 

Analysis of the prehistoric sites indicate human occupation dating from the Archaic Period (8000 - 

1000 BC), with intensive use during the Mississippian Period (1000 - 1500 AD). 

Historic artifacts indicate that small-scale, impermanent settlements were made on Pinckney by 

French and Spanish groups in the 16th and 17th centuries. Permanent settlements did not occur 

until 1708 when Alexander Mackay, an Indian trader, obtained title to 200 acres of Pinckney Island. 

By 1715, Mackay had acquired the rest of Pinckney and most of the other islands which compose the 

present refuge. In 1736, Mackay's widow sold the islands to Charles Pinckney, father of General 

Charles Cotesworth Pinckney. General Pinckney was a commander during the Revolutionary War, a 

signer of the United States Constitution and, in 1804 and 1808, a presidential candidate. Pinckney 

was an absentee landowner until 1804, when he moved to the island and began managing the 

property. The Pinckney family developed the islands into a plantation, removing much of the 

maritime forest and draining and tilling the fertile soil. 

The plantation flourished until the Civil War when it was occupied by Union Troops. Small skirmishes 

took place on Pinckney Island. The most significant incident occurred on August 21, 1862, when the 

Confederate Beaufort Light Artillary/11th Infantry attacked the camp of Company H, Third Regiment, 

New Hampshire Volunteers, killing four Union soldiers and wounding ten men (eight Confederate, two 

Union). Army records also reflect that black troops were recruited for the Union Army from the area. 

Five military (U.S. Colored Infantry) headstones are located in a cemetery on the northwest side of 

Pinckney Island, indicating the possibility that slaves living on the plantation during the Civil War were 

recruited by the United States Army. 

After the war, the plantation did not prosper, and by the 1930s, was virtually abandoned. In 1937, 

after over 200 years of Pinckney ownership, the plantation was sold to Ellen Bruce, wife of James 

Bruce, a New York banker who used the property as a hunting preserve. Hardwoods and pines were 

planted, ponds were built to attract waterfowl and for irrigation, and 70 percent of the farm fields were 

placed back into cultivation. 

Edward Starr and James Barker purchased the islands in 1954 and continued to manage them as a 

game preserve. In 1975, the islands were donated to the Service to be managed exclusively as a 

national wildlife refuge and as a nature and forest preserve for aesthetic and conservation purposes 

(see Deed of Donation, 1975, in bibliography). 
78 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Savannah NWR 

The area surrounding the Savannah NWR, which includes the port city of Savannah, Georgia, is rich 

in history. After thousands of years of use by various Indian tribes and cultures, the first European 

visitor arrived in 1526. James Oglethorpe established the city of Savannah in 1773. By the mid-18th 

century, rice planters were farming much of the land that is now part of the refuge. The old rice 

levees, which were built by hand, form the basis for our current impoundment dikes. Remnants of the 

original rice field trunk water control structures and narrow dikes are still visible in some places. 

Within the impoundment system there are numerous historic and prehistoric archaeological sites 

which have been located and inventoried. 

Tybee NWR 

This 400-acre migratory bird refuge began as a 1-acre oyster shoal. The Corps of Engineers, while 

engaged in river and harbor improvements, used the shoal as a spoil site. Accumulated spoil created 

Oysterbed Island (the nucleus of the present refuge). Title to Oysterbed Island was conveyed to the 

United States by the State of Georgia on December 30, 1820. Since that time, the Corps of 

Engineers has continued to use the area as a spoil site. Accumulated spoil eventually joined 

Oysterbed Island and Jones Island to form the north bank of the Savannah River. 

Tybee NWR was established by Executive Order No. 7882 on May 9, 1938, "in order to effectuate 

further the purposes of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act." In the enabling legislation, the United 

States Coast Guard retained control over a 1-acre site known as the Oysterbed Lighthouse 

Reservation and the Corps of Engineers retained the authority to deposit soil on the refuge. The 

legislation does stipulate "that any accretions thereto resulting directly or indirectly from river and 

harbor improvement work shall when formed become part of the refuge." The Coast Guard 

transferred the Day Beacon Tower and surrounding area (formerly the Oysterbed Lighthouse 

Reservation) to the Service on February 17, 1960. 

Wassaw NWR 

Wassaw's recorded history began with Anthony Odingsell who owned Little Wassaw Island during the 

early 1800s. During the Civil War, the islands were successively occupied by Confederate and Union 

troops. Blowing sand once revealed the unmarked grave of a soldier, bones intact, along with a 56-

caliber bullet and a uniform button of the First Georgia Regiment. Cannon balls were found the full 

length of the northern end of the island indicating heavy shelling, possibly by Union troops. 

In 1866 the islands were purchased by George Parsons, a wealthy businessman who dealt in 

railroads, banks, real estate, and cotton. During the following years, he built the existing housing 

compound as a private hideaway for his family and friends. These houses reflect the New England 

background of the Parsons and are filled with memorabilia of the family including a family log which 

recalls the island's colorful history. 

In October 1969, after 103 years of Parsons' family ownership, the islands were sold (except for a 180-

acre in-holding) to The Nature Conservancy for $1 million. The Conservancy, in turn, for the sum of $1, 

deeded the land to the U.S. Department of the Interior to be managed as a wildlife refuge. The primary 

purpose of the refuge is to maintain and enhance habitat for migratory birds, the loggerhead sea turtle, 

other resident and non-resident wildlife, and to protect and preserve this unique barrier island. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 79

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS AND ECONOMY 

A chain of seven national wildlife refuges totaling 56,949 acres form the Complex that extends along 

the southeastern Atlantic coastline from near Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, to near Darien, 

Georgia, a span of about 100 miles. This 100-mile span of coastline includes five counties in Georgia 

(McIntosh, Liberty, Bryan, Chatham and Effingham) and two counties in South Carolina (Jasper and 

Beaufort). These seven counties - with a combined population of over 550,000 - account for a 

significant number of visitors to the Complex. The headquarters of the seven-refuge Complex is 

located on Savannah NWR in Jasper County, South Carolina. The city of Savannah, located on the 

Georgia-South Carolina border, is the largest metropolitan area in this 100-mile span of coastline and 

has a population of about 130,000. Chatham County, the sixth largest county in Georgia, has a 

population of over 240,000 and accounts for almost half of the total population of the entire sevencounty coastal area. Further, the population of the Savannah Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), 

consisting of Bryan, Chatham, and Effingham Counties, is over 320,000 and accounts for almost 65 

percent of the population for the entire seven-county coastal area (U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of 

Economic Analysis, and Bureau of Labor Statistics). 

Demographic and socioeconomic data for the Complex area is given in Table 11. The Coastal Plain 

of Georgia and the Carolinas has in the past been regarded as an economically depressed region; 

however, recent efforts at the local, state, and national levels are leading to improved economic 

conditions in the area. A 2003 Pew Oceans Commission Report states that more than half of the 

United States population resides in coastal counties while composing only 17 percent of the nation’s 

land area, resulting in a coastal population density almost five times the national average. Between 

1970 and 2000, the coastal counties of Georgia grew approximately 16 percent per decade. 

Population growth in the coastal region has been, and is, predicted to continue to outpace adjacent 

areas, the state, and the nation (Pew Oceans Commission 2003; and Georgia Department of 

Community Affairs, October 2005). 

Per capita income in the coastal area - the five Georgia counties and the two South Carolina counties 

- is 89 percent and 108 percent of the national average, respectively. The percent of individuals living 

below the poverty level are 15.3 percent and 12.8 percent, for the five Georgia counties and the two 

South Carolina counties respectively, compared with a national poverty rate of 12.7 percent. 

Savannah historically has been the main economic engine of Georgia's (and southern South 

Carolina's) coastal region. Not only is Savannah a major tourist attraction and a thriving deepwater 

port, but the entire coastal economy is quite diverse with manufacturing, retail, tourism, ports 

operations, and military sectors forming a strong supportive network. The number of jobs in the 

Savannah MSA is growing twice as fast as that of the state and of the nation as a whole (Chattam 

County, Finance Staff 2005). 

Commercial fishing and forestry historically have been the most important economic activities of the 

20th century for the coastal regions of Georgia and southern South Carolina. Today, six industries 

account for nearly three-quarters of the jobs in the Savannah MSA: manufacturing (9.1 percent), retail 

trade (11.7 percent), professional and business services (12.5 percent), educational and health 

services (13.4 percent), leisure and hospitality (12.7 percent) and state and local governments (12 

percent). In 2007, employment in manufacturing approached 16,000 workers in Bryan, Chatham, 

Effingham, and Liberty Counties. Manufacturing employment continues to rise – the manufacturing 

sector represents about 10 percent of the regional employment base, supports about 17 percent of total 

employment, generates 22 percent of total labor income, and is responsible for 36 percent of total 
80 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

business in the region. In 2006, tourism in the Savannah area was 6.88 million visitors and visitor 

spending was estimated at $1.84 billion, resulting in over 22,000 direct jobs. The Port of Savannah, 

which includes the Garden City and Ocean terminals, is the nation's fastest growing port, the second 

busiest container port on the east coast, and the fourth busiest in the nation. The total vessel calls have 

increased 19 percent from 1,745 (FY05) to 2,073 (FY09) (GPA 2009). Ft. Stewart (the largest military 

installation east of the Mississippi River) in Bryan and Liberty Counties and Hunter Army Airfield in 

Chatham County are coastal Georgia's largest employers with approximately 25,000 military personnel 

and 3,900 civilian personnel (Savannah Area Chamber of Commerce 2007). 

OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL ECONOMICS 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1999) estimates that coastal tourism and 

recreation account for 85 percent of all United States tourism revenues. The natural resources of the 

Complex provide numerous sites for hiking, recreational fishing, and wildlife observation, and are 

vitally important economically to the Georgia and South Carolina coastal regions. As our country's 

population increases and the number of places left to enjoy wildlife decreases, the refuges will 

become even more important to our community. The refuges benefit the community directly by 

providing recreational and employment opportunities for the local population and indirectly by 

attracting tourists from outside the area to generate additional income to the local economy. Whether 

it is gas used to travel to and from the refuge, a meal at a local restaurant, ammunition, or an 

overnight at a local motel, visitors to the Complex add substantially to the regional economy. 

Table 12 presents information summarizing the economic value of hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching 

in Georgia and South Carolina by U.S. residents, taken from the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, 

Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. It estimates over 3.5 million people participated in fishing, 

hunting and wildlife watching in Georgia and over 2 million in South Carolina; and total expenditures from 

these activities were over $3.3 billion in Georgia and over $2.2 billion in South Carolina in 2006. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 81

Table 11. Demographics and socioeconomics for the Savannah Coastal NWR Complex 

Characteristic McIntosh County Liberty County Bryan County Chatham County Effingham County 5-County Georgia Summary State of Georgia Jasper County Beaufort County 2-County S.Carolina Summary State of S.Carolina United States 

DemographicPopulation (2006 estimate) 11,248 62,571 29,648 241,411 48,954 393,832 9,363,941 21,809 142,045 163,854 4,321,249 299,398,484 Percent Change (4/1/00 to 7/1/06) 3.7% 1.6% 26.6% 3.9% 30.4% 7.7% 14.4% 5.5% 17.4% 15.7% 7.7% 6.4% Total Land Area (sq. miles) 433.4 519.0 441.7 438.1 479.4 2,311.6 57,906.0 656.1 586.9 1,243.0 30,109.0 3,537,438 Population Density (pop./sq. mile) 26 121 67 551 102 170 162 33 242 132 144 85 

Race/Ethnicity

 (% of Population)

White 64.3% 50.2% 82.0% 55.2% 85.1% 60.4% 65.8% 48.6% 75.9% 72.3% 68.5% 80.1% Black/African American 34.0% 43.7% 14.5% 40.9% 13.0% 35.7% 29.9% 50.0% 21.5% 25.3% 29.0% 12.8% Hispanic/Latino (of any race) 1.0% 6.5% 2.4% 2.8% 1.9% 3.2% 7.5% 10.4% 8.9% 9.1% 3.5% 14.8% Asian 0.4% 2.0% 1.2% 2.3% 0.5% 1.9% 2.8% 0.6% 1.0% 0.9% 1.1% 4.4% Education 

 (% of population over 25)

High School degree, 2000 71.2% 86.8% 79.0% 80.2% 78.9% 80.7% 78.6% 65.2% 87.8% 84.8% 76.3% 80.4% College degree, 2000 11.1% 14.5% 19.3% 25.0% 13.6% 21.1% 24.3% 8.7% 33.2% 29.9% 20.4% 24.4% 
Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 82

Characteristic McIntosh County Liberty County Bryan County Chatham County Effingham County 5-County Georgia Summary State of Georgia Jasper County Beaufort County 2-County S.Carolina Summary State of S.Carolina United States 

EconomicMedian Household Income, 2004 $31,055 $37,048 $54,365 $38,248 $51,185 $40,673 $42,679 $29,717 $48,577 $46,067 $39,454 $44,334 Per capita Income, 2005 $21,801 $23,209 $29,363 $34,053 $26,426 $30,679 $30,914 $23,696 $39,308 $37,230 $28,285 $34,471 Persons below poverty level, 2004 17.5% 15.6% 9.9% 16.9% 10.1% 15.3% 13.7% 21.6% 11.4% 12.8% 15.0% 12.7%Employment Growth, 2006 1.8% 4.5% 5.7% 3.0% 6.1% 3.8% 3.2% 1.5% 2.6% 2.5% 2.4% 1.9%Unemployment Rate, 2006 4.2% 5.5% 3.5% 4.0% 3.3% 4.1% 4.6% 5.1% 5.0% 5.0% 6.5% 4.6%a U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Economic Analysis, and Bureau of Labor Statistics (April 14, 2008), http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/ b Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Regional Economic Conditions (RECON), http://www4.fdic.gov/RECON/
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 83

Table 12. Activities in Georgia and South Carolina by U.S. Residents 

 Georgia South Carolina

Fishing 

 Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,107,000 810,000 

Days of fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,375,000 12,325,000 

Average days per angler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 15 

Total expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,023,343,000 $1,407,205,000 

 Trip-related . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $370,743,000 $525,937,000 

 Equipment and other . . . . . . . $652,600,000 $881,268,000 

Average per angler . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $924 $1,737 

Average trip expenditure per day . . .. . . . . . . . . $21 $43 

Hunting 

Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481,000 208,000 

Days of hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,228,000 4,318,000 

Average days per hunter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 21 

Total expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $677,762,000 $278,640,000 

 Trip-related . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $237,162,000 $121,953,000 

 Equipment and other . . . . . . . $440,600,000 $156,686,000 

Average per hunter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,409 $1,340 

Average trip expenditure per day . . . . . . . . . . . $29 $28 

Wildlife Watching 

Total wildlife-watching participants . . . . . . . . . . . 1,987,000 1,115,000 

Nonresidential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438,000 447,000 

Residential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,798,000 924,000 

Total expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,615,316,000 $550,777,000 

 Trip-related . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $146,722,000 $195,804,000 

 Equipment and other . . . . . . 1,468,593,000 $354,973,000 

Average per participant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $812 $494 

Source: USFWS and U.S. Census Bureau. 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated 

Recreation - Georgia and South Carolina. http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/fhw06-nat.pdf
84 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

REFUGE ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT 

LAND PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

The refuge consists of the 5,618 acres of which there are 1,163 acres of freshwater impoundments, 

2,000 acres of saltwater marsh, 2,115 acres of pine and oak forests, and 340 acres of sand beach. 

Approximately 3,000 acres of the southern and western portion of the refuge are a designated 

Wilderness Area. The refuge consists of a long narrow strip of oceanfront beach backed by a broad 

band of dunes, maritime forests, and salt marsh and is located in McIntosh County, approximately 18 

miles off the coast of Darien, Georgia, and about 45 miles south of Savannah. There are additional 

islands in the near vicinity that may be considered for acquisition at some future date. Figure 19 

details Blackbeard Island NWR’s protected land designations. 

Harris Neck NWR 

The refuge consists of the 2,824 acres of which there are 157 acres of man-made freshwater ponds; 

705 acres of open fields; 663 acres of pine/oak forests; 1,297 acres of salt marsh; and 2 acres of 

forested wetland. It is located about 40 miles south of Savannah, near Darien, Georgia, in McIntosh 

County. There are additional lands in the near vicinity that may be considered for acquisition at some 

future date, after the completion of a boundary expansion. Figure 20 details Harris Neck NWR’s 

protected land designations. 

Pinckney Island NWR 

The refuge consists of five islands: Corn, Little Harry, Big Harry, Buzzard and Pinckney Island 

(and numerous small hammocks). The refuge totals 4,053 acres, of which approximately 2,700 

acres are salt marsh and tidal creeks. Pinckney Island (the largest island) comprises about 1,200 

acres, and is the only island open for public use. The refuge entrance is 1/2-mile west of Hilton 

Head Island, South Carolina, off of U.S. Highway 278. The island lies between Skull Creek (the 

Intracoastal Waterway) and Mackay Creek. There are additional islands and hammocks in the 

near vicinity that may be considered for acquisition at some future date. Figure 21 details 

Pinckney Island NWR’s protected land designations. 

Savannah NWR 

Savannah NWR, located in Savannah, Georgia, near the mouth of the Savannah River, consists of 

over 29,000 acres (about 15,000 in South Carolina and 14,000 in Georgia) of freshwater marshes, 

tidal rivers and creeks, and bottomland hardwoods. Managed freshwater pools make up about 3,000 

of these acres. This refuge is the largest of the seven refuges within the Complex. Commercial and 

residential development around the refuge and annexation proposals by the city of Savannah are 

issues of concern that continue to impact the refuge. To conserve the integrity of existing refuge 

lands, providing adequate buffers and wildlife migration corridors is very important. Acquisition of 

additional public lands will also provide more opportunity for public use. Population growth and 

development hamper refuge expansion; however, there are additional lands in the near vicinity that 

may be considered for acquisition at some future date. Figures 22 and 23 detail Savannah NWR’s 

protected land designations and acquisition opportunities. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 85

Tybee NWR 

Tybee NWR, originally a 1-acre oyster shoal (Oysterbed Island) at the mouth of the Savannah River, 

now consists of 400 acres of accumulated spoil from river and harbor dredging activities. Accretions 

to Oysterbed Island continue to expand Tybee NWR's acreage. There are no current plans for refuge 

development or refuge expansion. Figure 24 details Tybee NWR’s protected land designations. 

Wassaw NWR 

The refuge consists of a single barrier island (Wassaw Island), tidal salt marsh, two smaller islands (Little 

Wassaw Island and Pine Island), and several small hammocks. The refuge is composed of 76 percent 

salt marsh and 24 percent beach dune and upland forest and upland forest communities. The refuge is 

located about 14 miles southeast of the city of Savannah and is accessible only by boat. There are 

additional islands in the near vicinity that may be considered for acquisition at some future date. In the 

event the 180-acre in-holding ever becomes available, it would be the highest priority for the refuge with 

respect to acquisition. Figure 25 details Wassaw NWR’s protected land designations. 

VISITOR SERVICES 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

Blackbeard NWR (over half of which is a designated Wilderness Area) is accessible only by boat. 

There are approximately 11,000 visitors to the refuge annually. About 90 percent of total visitation 

occurs during the Memorial, Independence, and Labor Day weekends on the north and south 

beaches. The beaches, sea breeze, and remote, pristine setting are the primary visitor attraction. 

Saltwater fishing, sunbathing, swimming, and bird watching are popular pastimes in the summer. 

Bird watching is excellent due in part to the location of the refuge along the Atlantic Flyway, which 

makes it a vital resting and feeding area for hundreds of different kinds of migratory birds. Many 

visitors enjoy the miles of Atlantic coastline by taking private water craft to the island, and archery 

hunting for deer is a traditional recreational pursuit. The Wilderness Area is bordered by beach that 

has become a popular place for boaters and beach users, compromising the wilderness 

characteristics because of overcrowding, boats, noise, litter, dogs, alcohol, etc. 

Public use opportunities on Blackbeard include: Hiking/biking/trails (approximately 20 miles of roads 

and trails are open to the public year-around); wildlife observation and photography; hunting and 

fishing (shrimping/crabbing); environmental education/interpretation; sea kayaking and daytime 

beach use. Figure 26 details Blackbeard NWR public use areas. 

 Wildlife Observation and Photography

Wildlife observation, especially bird watching, is excellent throughout the year on Blackbeard 

Island. In winter months, waterfowl utilize the marshland and man-made freshwater pools, while 

songbirds abound in the wooded acres in the spring and fall. The existing trails and roads provide 

hikers and bicyclers with scenic paths ideal for nature study. 

 Environmental Education and Interpretation

Guided interpretive tours for individuals and families can be arranged through our special use 

permit holders. These are private, commercial or non-profit organizations that maintain a permit 

with the Service in order to conduct business on the refuge. Eight such outfits hold permits for 

conducting guided interpretive tours on Blackbeard Island NWR. 
86 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 19. Protected lands of Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge 

 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 87

Figure 20. Protected lands of Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge 
88 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 21. Protected lands of Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 89

Figure 22. Protected lands of Savannah National Wildlife Refuge 
90 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 23. Acquisition boundary of Savannah National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 91

Figure 24. Protected lands of Tybee National Wildlife Refuge 
92 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 25. Protected lands of Wassaw Island National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 93

Figure 26. Location of public use areas on Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge 
94 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 27. Location of public use areas on Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 95

 Hunting and Fishing

Two, 3-day deer hunts are scheduled in the fall and winter every year. Both hunts are non-quota, 

archery hunts, and feral hogs may be taken, as well as deer, on each. Hunters must carry a 

signed hunt permit with them at all times during the hunts, as well as all required state licenses. 

The saltwater creeks which pass through refuge marshland are open to fishing the entire year. 

Due to the degraded condition of the refuge’s freshwater ponds, freshwater fishing opportunities 

no longer exist on Blackbeard Island NWR. 

Pinckney Island NWR 

Pinckney Island NWR, adjacent to Hilton Head, South Carolina, is an island of habitat surrounded by 

a "sea of development." There are approximately 200,000 visitors to Pinckney Island NWR annually, 

the most of any of the seven refuges in the Complex. The island is used exclusively as a nature and 

forest preserve. Deed restrictions put in place when the Pinckney Island NWR was established limit 

the ability of the refuge to provide some visitor services (see Deed of Donation, 1975, in bibliography; 

also see Easement Exchange Agreement, 1981). Studying, viewing, and photographing the island's 

wildlife and scenery are the most popular activities throughout the year. Visitor facilities at Pinckney 

Island NWR include a kiosk, information panels, parking area, and trails. 

Public use opportunities on Pinckney Island NWR include: wildlife observation and photography; 

hiking/biking/trails; environmental education/interpretation; and hunting and fishing. Figure 28 details 

Pinckney Island NWR’s public use areas. 

 

 Wildlife Observation and Photography

Studying, viewing, and photographing the island's wildlife and scenery are popular activities 

throughout the year. There are nine named trails, all originating at the parking area near the 

refuge entrance. There are 14 miles of trails open to hiking and bicycling; however, no motorized 

vehicles are allowed north of the parking area. Wildlife viewing is best during the spring and fall 

months when migrations are at their peak. 

 Environmental Education and Interpretation

Environmental education programs and interpretive tours are available for school, civic and 

conservation groups by appointment. These tours are generally given by trained refuge 

volunteers and therefore require a minimum of two weeks’ notice. Guided interpretive tours for 

individuals and families can be arranged through our special use permit holders. These tours are 

provided by private, commercial, or non-profit organizations that maintain a permit with the 

Service in order to conduct business on the refuge. Currently, there are five permit holders for 

Pinckney Island NWR who offer guided interpretive tours. 

 Hunting and Fishing

Each year the refuge holds a one-day quota deer hunt to ensure that population numbers remain 

in balance with the surrounding habitat. Applications for this hunt must be received at the SCRC 

headquarters office by August 31. Freshwater fishing is not permitted on the refuge. Saltwater 

fishing is permitted by boat only in the surrounding waters of Skull and Mackay Creeks. Boaters 

may access these areas from the public boat ramp (Last End Point) located off U.S. Highway 278 

across from the refuge entrance and are not allowed to come ashore or moor their boats at any 

other point on Pinckney Island NWR. Likewise, shellfishing is permitted by boat only in 

designated areas. 
96 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 28. Location of public use areas on Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 97

Harris Neck NWR 

There are approximately 90,000 visitors to Harris Neck NWR annually, with the primary public use 

being wildlife observation and photography. There is a small visitor contact area in the lobby of the 

office. This area has an artifacts table, posters, and portable exhibits. The information desk is 

usually staffed from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. by volunteers. There is a large effort to recruit, build, and 

maintain a volunteer program at Harris Neck NWR. 

Public use opportunities on Harris Neck NWR include: Hiking/biking/trails (5 trails); auto tour route 

(4.2-mile Wildlife Drive); wildlife observation and photography; hunting and fishing 

(shrimping/crabbing); and environmental education/interpretation. Figure 27 details Harris Neck 

NWR’s public use areas. 

 Wildlife Observation and Photography

Because of the great variety of habitats found on Harris Neck NWR, many different species of 

birds are attracted to the refuge throughout the year. In the summer, thousands of egrets, 

herons, and wood storks nest in the swamps, while in the winter, large concentrations of ducks 

(especially mallards, gadwall, and teal) gather in the marsh land and freshwater pools. Over 15 

miles of paved roads and trails provide the visitor easy access to these areas. 

 Environmental Education and Interpretation

Environmental education programs and interpretive tours are available for school, civic, and 

conservation groups by appointment only. These tours are generally given by either staff or 

trained refuge volunteers and require a minimum of two weeks’ notice. Guided interpretive tours 

for individuals and families can also be arranged through our special use permit holders (fees 

may apply.) These are private, commercial, or non-profit organizations that maintain a permit with 

the Service in order to conduct business on the refuge. Three such outfits currently hold permits 

for conducting guided interpretive tours at Harris Neck NWR. 

 Hunting and Fishing

Two managed deer hunts are conducted on the refuge each year. The first, in the fall, is a nonquota, archery hunt, and the second, in the winter, is a quota, shotgun hunt. Feral hogs can also 

be taken during both of these hunts. The refuge has six freshwater impoundments that are 

managed for wading birds and endangered wood storks that are not open to fishing. However, 

the refuge has two public boat ramps and two fishing piers that provide public access and 

opportunities for saltwater fishing. 

Savannah NWR 

The Savannah NWR has approximately 170,000 visitors annually. There are over 38 miles of river 

and 25 miles of streams and creeks within the refuge. Visitors have access to a 4-mile wildlife drive 

(Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive) and two trails, as well as over 30 miles of levees for hiking. The refuge 

offers seven different hunting events annually. Currently, there is no visitor center or visitor contact 

facility located at the refuge. A visitor center located off of U.S. Highway 17, 6 miles north of the city 

of Savannah, will open in 2010. 
98 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 29. Location of public use areas on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge (South) 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 99

Figure 30. Location of public use areas on Savannah National Wildlife Refuge (North) 
100 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Public use opportunities on Savannah NWR include: wildlife observation and photography; 

interpretation; hiking and bicycling; fishing and hunting (deer, turkey, feral hog and squirrel); 36 miles 

of dikes are open seasonally to foot traffic; and the 4-mile Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive is open to 

vehicular traffic throughout the year. Figures 29 and 30 detail Savannah NWR’s public use areas. 

 Wildlife Observation and Photography

All dikes are open to foot travel during daylight hours, unless otherwise posted, and provide 

excellent wildlife observation points. Waterfowl are most abundant from November through 

February, while alligators and other reptiles are frequently seen from March through October. 

Birdwatching opportunities are good year-round, but are best from October through April when 

temperatures are mild and many species of waterfowl and other wintering birds are present. 

Motorists are welcome on the Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive, off South Carolina Highway 170, which 

meanders along 4 miles of earthen dikes through managed freshwater pools and hardwood 

hammocks. The Cistern Trail and other walking routes are also available to the visiting public. 

From December 1 to February 28, entry into the impoundment area north of South Carolina 

Highway 170 is prohibited to reduce disturbance while wintering waterfowl numbers are at a peak. 

However, during this period, one designated route remains open to access the Tupelo Trail. 

 Environmental Education and Interpretation

Environmental education programs and interpretive tours are available for school, civic, and 

conservation groups by appointment. These tours are generally given by trained refuge 

volunteers and therefore require a minimum of two weeks’ notice. Guided interpretive tours for 

individuals and families can also be arranged through our special use permit holders. These are 

private, commercial, or non-profit organizations that maintain a permit with the Service in order to 

conduct business on the refuge. Five such outfits hold permits for conducting guided interpretive 

tours at Savannah NWR. 

 Hunting and Fishing

The refuge administers deer, feral hog, and squirrel hunts during the fall and winter, and turkey 

hunting in the spring. The archery hunting season for white-tailed deer and feral hogs extends 

from October 1 through October 31 each year. The firearm season for deer, feral hogs, and 

squirrel extends from November 1 through November 30 of each year. Designated areas are 

open to wheelchair-dependent hunters for a 2-day hunt in November. In March, a 9-day feral hog 

hunt is open to gun hunters. During April there is a 16-day turkey hunt. Waterfowl hunting is 

permitted in designated areas during state (Georgia and South Carolina) seasons. A portion of 

the refuge in Georgia is set aside for a youth archery hunt (October 1-31) and waterfowl hunt (6 

days in December).

Fishing, although not heavily promoted as a major public use on the refuge, is allowed year-round 

in the creeks and rivers throughout the refuge. There are four county owned and maintained boat 

launch areas, immediately outside the refuge boundaries, which provide access to fishing the 

navigable waterways within the refuge. Fishing is also allowed within the impoundment system 

(freshwater pools) between March 1 and November 30 of each year from sunrise to sunset and is 

governed by South Carolina and refuge regulations. Bank fishing from the Laurel Hill Wildlife 

Drive is permitted year-round. A brochure containing all hunting and fishing regulations as well as 

all necessary permits for the current year is printed each year around July 1. 

Tybee NWR 

Tybee NWR is closed to public use. There are no docking facilities or other amenities located on the 

refuge. The refuge's small size provides minimal habitat for wildlife. Visitor use is not compatible 

with the nesting, feeding, and resting activities of the refuge’s birdlife, since disturbance is a factor in 

such a limited area. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 101

Wassaw NWR 

There are approximately 15,000 visitors to Wassaw NWR each year, with most visitations occurring on 

weekends and holidays during the summer. Wassaw Island has remained largely undisturbed and 

unspoiled as a result of the island's inaccessibility and protection efforts to provide wildlife-dependent 

recreation. Access to the refuge is only by boat. Most people anchor their boats off the north or south 

ends of the island. The refuge has a boat dock at the small headquarters office on Wassaw Creek. 

The public is welcome to load or unload passengers at the dock to access trails or obtain visitor 

information; however, due to the small size of the dock, only temporary mooring is allowed. 

The refuge offers pristine and natural conditions and provides outstanding opportunities for solitude 

and primitive recreation. There are 7 miles of undeveloped beach to provide nesting habitat for the 

threatened loggerhead sea turtle. There is no public pier or dock and no potable drinking water 

available on the refuge. There is a 20-mile system of dirt roads and trails for hiking and wildlife 

observation and photography. Public use occurs primarily on the beach with popular activities 

including hiking, bicycling, wildlife photography, saltwater and surf fishing, sea kayaking, and 

beachcombing. Figure 31 details Wassaw NWR’s public use areas. 

 

 Wildlife Observation and Photography

The 20 miles of dirt roads on Wassaw NWR and 7 miles of beach provide an ideal wildlife 

trail system for both hikers and bicyclers. The beautiful, undeveloped beach provides ideal 

nesting habitat for the threatened loggerhead sea turtle, as well as bountiful feeding grounds 

for numerous species of shorebirds. The island also supports rookeries for egrets and 

herons and becomes particularly fruitful for birdwatching during the spring and fall 

migrations. 

 Environmental Education and Interpretation

Guided interpretive tours for individuals and families can be arranged through special use 

permit holders. These are private, commercial, or non-profit organizations that maintain a 

permit with the Service in order to conduct business on the refuge. Currently, there are 

eight groups holding permits that offer guided interpretive tours on Wassaw NWR.

 Hunting and Fishing

Two 3-day deer hunts are scheduled in the fall and winter every year: one primitive weapon and 

one gun hunt. The salt waters of the refuge marshland are open to fishing, crabbing, and 

shrimping throughout the year. Surf fishing is permitted on the beach and saltwater fishing is 

popular in the refuge's many tidal creeks. However, freshwater fishing from any source on the 

refuge is prohibited. Boat ramps available to visitors include: Coffee Bluff; Delegal; Skidaway 

Narrows; Isle of Hope; Bull River; and Fort McAllister.

PERSONNEL, OPERATIONS, AND MAINTENANCE 

Staffing 

The Complex administers seven wildlife refuges between Georgia and South Carolina. This chain of 

national wildlife refuges extends from Pinckney Island NWR near Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, 

to Wolf Island NWR near Darien, Georgia. Between these are Savannah (the largest unit in the 

Complex), Wassaw, Tybee, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island NWRs. Together they span a 100-

mile coastline and total more than 56,000 acres. The Complex is administered from headquarters 

located in Savannah, Georgia, and has a combined staff of 30 full-time members. 
102 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Figure 31. Location of public use areas on Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 103

Volunteer groups spend many hours helping with refuge tasks. The Ogeechee Audubon Society 

(OAS) currently serves as the refuge support group for the Savannah NWR. OAS joined the 

Audubon Refuge Keeper (ARK) program in the early 1990s as part of a national thrust to support 

refuges. A recently formed Friends Group, separate from the OAS, will serve as the main support 

group for the Complex. The new organization, Friends of the Savannah Coastal Wildlife Refuges, will 

be active in raising needed funds for developing facilities and promoting best management practices 

on the refuge (i.e., handicapped accessible fishing piers, invasive aquatic plant management, and 

recovery efforts for endangered and threatened species). 

Blackbeard Island NWR 

No Service staff is assigned full-time to Blackbeard Island NWR. Maintenance of refuge facilities and 

equipment is handled by the four full-time staff assigned to Harris Neck NWR. In addition, other 

Complex staff members contribute time and expertise to the management of the refuge. There are 

three refuge law enforcement officers assigned to the Complex, one of which lives in refuge housing 

on Harris Neck NWR and spends 50 percent of his time at Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and Wolf 

Island NWRs. The refuge has a boat dock, a residence and bunkhouse, a maintenance building, and 

several smaller buildings, including a walk-in deer cooler for hunters. Many of the facilities are old, 

but well-maintained. Distance to mainland docks, high fuel costs, structural longevity, weather, and 

termites are contributing factors to high maintenance costs. Approximately 20 miles of roads and 

trails are maintained and kept open to the public year-round. 

Primary management tools used on the refuge include: 

 Mowing/disking 

 Prescribed fire and wildfire suppression 

 Mechanical/chemical control of invasives 

 Public hunting for deer population management 

 Education/Interpretation 

 Law enforcement 

 Partnerships 

 Sea turtle nest monitoring 

The southern 3,000 acres of Blackbeard Island NWR are designated as wilderness. Natural 

processes are allowed to take their course. Law enforcement is required to monitor public use in this 

part of the refuge. 

Harris Neck NWR 

The refuge is staffed by four full-time employees and a good core of dedicated volunteers. The office and 

visitor contact area in the lobby of the office are staffed by volunteers. There is a large effort to recruit, 

build, and maintain the volunteer program at Harris Neck NWR. Other facilities include a 41⁄2-mile autotour, two recreational fishing boat ramps, a commercial fishing dock, portable toilets, and an informational 

kiosk. There are three refuge law enforcement officers assigned to the Complex, one of which lives in 

refuge housing on Harris Neck NWR and spends 50 percent of his time at Harris Neck, Blackbeard 

Island, and Wolf Island NWRs. There are over 15 miles of paved road and trails which are maintained. 

Primary management tools used on the refuge include: 

 Water level management for waterfowl, shorebirds, wood storks, and wading birds 

 Mowing and disking 

 Prescribed fire and wildfire suppression 

 Mechanical and chemical control of noxious plants 
104 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Timber management 

 Public hunting for deer population management 

 Education/interpretation 

 Law enforcement 

 Partnerships 

Pinckney Island NWR 

No Service staff is assigned full time to Pinckney Island NWR. Facilities at Pinckney Island NWR 

include approximately 4 miles of gravel roads, 10 miles of grass trails, a visitor contact 

point/interpretive exhibit kiosk, 9 interpretive-wayside exhibits, a parking lot with bus parking, and a 

county-managed boat ramp and fishing pier. Most of the maintenance of these facilities is done by 

volunteers and staff from Savannah NWR. Staff and volunteers that may be working on the refuge 

do not have a regular schedule. 

Primary management tools used on the refuge include: 

 Water management for wading bird rookeries

 Mechanical/chemical treatment of invasives

 Prescribed fire and wildfire supperssion

 One annual, quota deer hunt

 Partnerships

 Education/Interpretation

 Law enforcement

 Timber management

Savannah NWR 

There are seven full-time employees assigned to Savannah NWR. Nine additional full-time fire staff 

report to Savannah NWR; however, fire staff are assigned to the wildland fire crew which serves a 

designated fire district that includes other refuges in South Carolina and North Carolina, in addition to 

the seven refuges within the Complex. A visitor center, located off of U.S. Highway 17, 6 miles north 

of the city of Savannah, opened in 2010. The 4-mile Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive and 30 miles of levees 

provide opportunities for wildlife observation. An information kiosk with interpretive displays and 

wayside exhibits, as well as two portable toilets, are located along the drive. Savannah NWR 

contains approximately 6,000 acres of impounded freshwater wetlands. About 3,000 acres of former 

rice fields are now maintained in 19 water-controlled impoundments to provide feeding areas and 

sanctuary for birds. Maintenance of the 3,000-acre impoundments system, 50 miles of levees and 

dikes, and the 4-mile Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive require constant mowing during the growing season. 

Primary management tools used on the refuge include: 

 Water level management on 3,000 acres for the benefit of waterfowl, wading birds, and 

shorebirds 

 Prescribed fire and wildfire suppression.

 Mechanical/chemical treatment of undesirable and/or noxious plants

 Deer and feral hog management with public hunting

 Education/Interpretation

 Law enforcement
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 105

Tybee NWR 

Tybee NWR is closed to public use and there are no Service personnel or staff assigned to the 

refuge. Employees of the Complex staff are utilized to manage the refuge. 

Primary management tools used on the refuge include: 

 Law enforcement (to discourage human disturbance on the refuge)

 Environmental education/interpretation

 Wildfire suppression

Wassaw NWR 

There is one full-time Service staff person assigned responsibilities for Wassaw NWR; however, the 

Complex does not receive funding and there are no permanent staff assigned to Wassaw NWR. 

Maintenance of refuge facilities and equipment is handled by one employee stationed at the Complex 

headquarters office. In addition, other Complex staff members contribute time and expertise to the 

management of the refuge. The refuge has a boat dock, a residence/bunkhouse, a maintenance 

building, and several smaller buildings, which all serve an administrative function. There is also a 

walk-in cooler that is made available to hunters during refuge hunts to hang their deer. At this time, 

there is no public pier or dock for public convenience; the government dock may be used for loading 

and unloading only. Mooring is an established use in state waters immediately adjacent to the 

refuge. There is a primitive camp site established adjacent to the refuge compound which is 

available to hunters only during refuge hunts. Two portable toilets are also maintained throughout the 

year. Potable drinking water must be carried over from the mainland. There is a 20-mile system of 

dirt roads and trails maintained for hiking and wildlife observation and photography. 

Primary management tools used on the refuge include: 

 Prescribed fire and wildfire suppression 

 Sea turtle nest monitoring - This is done on Wassaw Island through a partnership with the 

Savannah Science Museum and their "Caretta Research Project" 

 Managed white-tailed deer hunts 

 Mechanical and chemical control of invasives 

 Law enforcement 

 Education/Interpretation 

Funding 

Funding is received as part of the Complex funding allocation. In Fiscal Year 2008, the budget for the 

Complex totaled $3,500,000. 

Facilities 

The Complex has a good base of facilities and equipment to support management operations for the 

56,949 acres that span the seven refuges. Facilities and equipment to support management 

operations on the seven refuges include: Complex Office and Visitor Center located on Savannah 

NWR, Office/Visitor Center at Harris Neck NWR; maintenance shop facilities and associated storage 

buildings and outbuildings located on Savannah, Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Blackbeard Island, 

and Wassaw NWRs. There is a public boat ramp and parking lot at Harris Neck NWR along with a 

commercial dock under lease to local watermen. At Pinckney Island NWR there is a public boat ramp 

and associated parking area managed under agreement with Beaufort County, South Carolina. 
106 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 107

III. Plan Development 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND THE PLANNING PROCESS 

In accordance with Service guidelines and NEPA recommendations, public involvement has been a 

crucial factor throughout the development of this CCP for the Complex. This CCP has been written 

with input and assistance from interested citizens, conservation organizations, and employees of 

local and state agencies. The participation of these stakeholders and their ideas has been of great 

value in setting the management direction for the refuge. The Service, as a whole, and the Complex 

staff, in particular, are very grateful to each one who has contributed time, expertise, and ideas to the 

planning process. The staff remains impressed by the passion and commitment of so many 

individuals for the lands and waters administered by the Complex. 

Development of this CCP was initiated in October 2007. The planning team responsible for its 

development was established in January 2008. It includes natural resource management 

professionals representing all six national wildlife refuges. The Service established a biological 

review team for each refuge, with representatives from local and regional Service offices and state 

and federal agencies, including both Georgia and South Carolina Departments of Natural Resources, 

which conducted on-site evaluations and completed Biological Review Reports. Individual visitor 

services review teams were established for each refuge that presented recommendations to the 

refuge staff and prepared Visitor Services Review Reports (USFWS 2007 and 2008). 

Public input for the development of this CCP was obtained, in part, through three public scoping 

meetings held in the vicinity of the refuges. News releases, word of mouth, and radio and website 

announcements were utilized to advertise the meetings to the public. These meetings were held 

during June 2008, and were attended by approximately 42 people. During the public scoping 

process, both written and verbal comments were received. Comments received during this process 

are listed in Appendix D. In addition to the public meetings, the Complex sent out written notices to 

local, state, and federal agencies to invite input in the CCP process. Several letters or comments 

were received in response to this intergovernmental scoping letter. 

In identifying key issues to be addressed during the planning process, the planning team considered 

recommendations from the Biological Reviews and Visitor Services Review Reports; comments 

received through the public scoping meetings and intergovernmental scoping letters; and input from 

open planning team meetings, comment packets, and personal contacts of planning team members. 

In addition, the team considered opportunities for coordination with other relevant conservation plans; 

applicable legal mandates; the purposes of all national wildlife refuges, as well as the mission, goals, 

and policies of the Refuge System; and evaluations and documentation required by Service 

procedures for refuge planning. 

The Service expanded the planning team’s identified issues and concerns to include those generated by 

the agencies, organizations, businesses, and citizens from the local community. These issues and 

concerns formed the basis for the development and comparison of the different alternatives described in 

the environmental assessment. The Service made the draft comprehensive conservation plan and 

environmental assessment available for public review September 15, 2010 through October 15th, 2010. 

A summary of the public scoping comments and the draft comprehensive conservation plan and 

environmental assessment comments, as well as the Service’s response, are provided in Appendix D. 
108 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES, CONCERNS, AND OPPORTUNITIES 

The planning team identified a number of issues, concerns, and opportunities related to fish and 

wildlife protection, habitat management and restoration, visitor and educational services, and refuge 

administration. Issues and concerns are based on the professional judgment of the team. In 

addition, recommendations and discussions with personnel from other conservation agencies and 

refuges and comments from the public were considered. Key issues included water management, 

forest management, threatened and endangered species management, migratory bird and waterfowl 

nesting habitats, hunting and fishing program management, invasive species, refuge access, law 

enforcement, saltwater intrusion, and expanding environmental education and interpretation 

programs. The planning team considered applicable local ordinances, regulations, and plans, as well 

as federal and state mandates. 

All public and advisory team comments were considered; however, some issues important to the 

public fall outside the scope of the decisions made within this planning process. The team 

considered all issues that were raised throughout the planning process, and has developed a plan 

that attempts to balance the competing opinions relating to important issues. The team identified the 

issues that, in its best professional judgment, are most significant to the Complex. A summary of the 

significant issues follows. 

FISH AND WILDLIFE POPULATION MANAGEMENT 

Threatened and Endangered Species 

The protection of threatened and endangered plants and animals is an important responsibility 

delegated to the Service and the Refuge System. Federal threatened and endangered species are 

known to occur on many of the habitats within the Complex. These include flatwoods salamander, 

West-Indian manatee, sea turtles, wood stork, piping plover, Kirtland’s warbler, and Atlantic and 

shortnosed sturgeon. 

Flatwoods salamanders breed in isolated pond cypress dominated depressions often with a smaller 

component of blackgum or slash pine. These ponds are isolated within pine forests. Suitable 

wetlands have a marsh-like appearance with grasses growing throughout and other herbaceous 

species in the shallow water edges. A relatively open canopy is necessary to maintain appropriate 

vegetation, which serves as cover for salamander larvae and their aquatic invertebrate prey. The 

major threats to this species are habitat destruction, deterioration, and fragmentation. 

Kirtland’s warblers may stop-over on the Savannah NWR during their migration. Protection and 

management of the existing bottomland habitat will benefit this species. 

Five species of sea turtles inhabit the coastal waters of Georgia. These include the loggerhead, 

Kemp’s ridley, leatherback, green, and hawksbill sea turtles. The most common sea turtle, the 

loggerhead, is listed as threatened and the other four species are listed as endangered. The 

loggerhead is the primary turtle nesting in Georgia waters (approximately 1,200 nests per year); 5 to 

10 nests per year can be contributed by all the other species combined throughout Georgia. 

Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs provide nesting habitat for the northern loggerhead sea turtle 

subpopulation in the western North Atlantic, and some of the longest recorded nesting data comes 

from these two beaches. These islands consistently have high densities of nests and are considered 

some of the most important index beaches within the northern subpopulation. Beach restoration and 

nest protection will benefit these species. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 109

West-Indian manatees range up and down the Georgia coast in the warmer months, appearing as 

early as March and staying as late as December, depending on the weather, water temperature, and 

sources of warm water. These same manatees spend the winter along the Atlantic coast of Florida 

before migrating back to Georgia. The general pattern for manatees is one of directed movements to 

specific core areas that are used for prolonged periods. Manatees have used waters within or 

adjacent to Savannah, Pinckney Island, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island NWRs 

during the summer, feeding in the tidal creeks on various marsh plants. Several recent sightings 

have occurred on the Barbour River. One of the greatest dangers to this species is the threat of 

injury by boats. 

In Georgia and South Carolina, the coastal barrier islands are important for wintering piping plovers, 

and the most important wintering area for the endangered Great Lakes population. Because overwinter survival of young may be the most critical conservation issue for this species, the availability of 

high-quality winter roosting and foraging habitat may be crucial for recovery of piping plovers. This 

species requires a mosaic of beach habitat including some areas of high beach to provide roosting 

areas during high tides or storm events. They will use a variety of habitats for foraging, including 

everything from heavy peat relict marsh mud to all other exposed habitats at low tide. Wassaw and 

Blackbeard Island NWRs contribute to the recovery of this species by providing critical habitat. 

The endangered shortnose sturgeon and the Atlantic sturgeon occur within the rivers on the 

Savannah, Blackbeard Island, and Wassaw NWRs. Issues identified concerning the sturgeon are 

that public education and law enforcement efforts should be increased to inform local fishermen that 

take of either of these species is prohibited. In addition, boaters should be informed of the dangers to 

these species as they tend to breach the water surface and have been known to collide with boats. 

The endangered wood stork is found using the impoundments and tidal marshes of various refuges. 

Harris Neck NWR provides a variety of habitats necessary for their survival and recovery, as do 

several of the other refuges. They breed in a colony in Harris Neck NWR’s Woody Pond, forage in 

other wetlands/marshes on or near the refuge, and roost in wetlands on-site. Management activities 

have resulted in this being one of the most stable and productive colonies in the United States, as 

well as an excellent location for research. Further nesting restoration and protection, along with 

providing additional feeding opportunities, will benefit this species. 

Invasive and Nuisance Species 

An “invasive species” is defined as a species that is non-native (or alien) to the ecosystem under 

consideration, and whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic harm, environmental 

harm, or harm to human health (Executive Order 13112). These species are normally introduced by 

direct or inadvertent human actions. 

According to 2006 Refuge Annual Performance Planning (RAPP) data, two million acres of Refuge 

System lands are infested with invasive plants. There are 4,471 invasive animal populations 

recorded as well. While refuge personnel are doing their best to control these populations, only about 

14 percent of infested acres have been treated thus far. 

Plant, insect, and animal nuisance and invasive species currently occur within the Complex. Animal 

species such as feral hogs compete with native species for limited food supplies and can be 

destructive to habitats. Removal of hogs has been attempted opportunistically by refuge staff and 

hunting programs offered to the public. 
110 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The exotic ambrosia beetle with its associated fungus can kill a full-sized red bay tree in a matter of 

days. The beetle arrived in the area in 2002 in a shipment at the Port of Savannah and spread 

rapidly. By 2004, most of the Complex’s refuges were infested due to being in close proximity to the 

point of entry. Presently, most red bay trees over 4 feet tall are dead. The beetles’ fungus on 

species in the Laurel family has been termed “Laurel Wilt.” 

Other invasive plant species found on the refuges include Chinese tallow and Phragmites. Because 

of the opportunistic and resilient nature of these invasive plant species, they have thrived. The 

Complex has tried to control invasive plant species through several different means, including 

chemical and mechanical treatments. One of the worst cases within the Complex is the spread of 

invasive aquatic vegetation in the ponds and water management units at Harris Neck NWR. Native 

plants, such as greenbriar and cattail, can also be classified as invasive when densities are high 

enough to suppress all other plant growth and a mono-specific composition prevails. 

Resident Wildlife

While the Service’s primary goal is the protection of federal trust species, the refuges’ purposes also 

include improving natural diversity of resident fish and wildlife species. Therefore, it is the 

responsibility of the refuges to manage resident wildlife within the refuge boundaries. This 

management needs to be performed in conjunction with, and not to the detriment of, migratory, birds 

and threatened and endangered species within the refuges. Arrays of wildlife species indigenous to 

the Southern Coastal Plain Ecosystem inhabit the Complex. The most widely recognized species 

include white-tailed deer, bobcat, coyote, river otter, raccoon, gray fox, red fox, opossum, beaver, wild 

turkey, cottontail and marsh rabbit, eastern gray squirrel, fox squirrel, and skunk. 

The Coastal Plain of South Carolina and Georgia is a very important region for herpetofauna with 

high species and habitat diversity and several rare, threatened, and endangered species. Of the 

approximately 142 species of amphibians and reptiles found in the states, 113 occur in the Coastal 

Plain, 50 of these are endemic to the coast in South Carolina. Resident reptiles and amphibians 

include alligators, various snakes, frogs, skinks, salamanders, and turtles. 

Each biological review team recognized that the refuges within the Complex lacked specific data on 

many resident wildlife species, particularly non-game wildlife, such as reptiles, amphibians, mussels, 

insects, small mammals, and their habitats. Most efforts to collect data on resident wildlife species 

has focused on studying and management of game species, such as white-tailed deer. The needed 

studies on species and habitats will require additional staff and funding to come to fruition. 

Migratory and Resident Birds

A primary purpose of most of the refuges is to provide wintering and nesting habitats for migratory 

and resident birds: waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and songbirds. The operation and 

management of the refuges provide for the basic needs of these species, including feeding, resting, 

and breeding. Complex management measures include water level management of units that cater 

to a variety of different species; control of invasive land and aquatic plant species to provide proper 

nesting and foraging habitat; and providing artificial nesting structures to accommodate particular 

species needs. Comments from the biological review team and the public expressed a desire to 

support and expand these efforts. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 111

Waterfowl 

A major issue facing the refuges is the reduction in migrating waterfowl utilizing the refuges. Possible 

reasons for this could be mild winters in the northern U.S., declines in some populations, and/or the 

reduction in food and critical habitats locally. 

The Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) planning region includes all of the refuges within the 

Complex. Within the ACJV, focus areas have been identified for South Carolina and Georgia and 

associated waterfowl habitat and population goals. In the South Carolina Low Country, the habitat 

goals are to protect 20,000 additional acres and enhance an additional 10,000 acres. In the 

Savannah River region of Georgia the habitat goal is to protect, enhance, and restore 126,000 

additional acres for the benefit of priority waterfowl species. 

The Georgia and South Carolina coastal marshes are a historic migration corridor for waterfowl that 

use the Atlantic Flyway. Populations vary greatly from year-to-year, depending on water levels and 

weather conditions farther up the flyway. Species range from dabbling ducks, such as mallards, 

gadwall, and teal, to diving ducks, such as scaup and ring-necked ducks. 

Wintering waterfowl numbers on Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs are insignificant compared to 

those of refuges or management areas farther north within the Atlantic Flyway; therefore, waterfowl 

are not the primary focus of management efforts. On Blackbeard Island NWR, open freshwater 

impoundments once provided wintering waterfowl habitat, but due to hydrologic changes have closed 

in with cattail. Artesian wells on the islands have ceased to flow due to a cone of depression created 

by industrial withdrawal from the Floridan aquifer. This coupled with severe drought has resulted in 

the near elimination of open water habitat on the island. 

Wood ducks nest on the refuges within natural cavities and provided artificial cavities known as 

nesting boxes. Wood duck nest boxes were once located within most refuge ponds and water 

management units. However, some programs were suspended after staff observations indicated that 

alligators were attracted to the boxes and consuming most hatchlings when they landed in the water 

following emergence from the box. Additional box placement needs to be evaluated and, if boxes are 

installed, nest success and initial chick survival monitored. 

Nongame Birds 

These birds are a broad group that includes breeding forest landbirds, breeding scrub/shrub 

landbirds, transient songbirds, marsh and grassland birds, shorebirds, wading birds, and raptors. 

Shorebirds: Opportunities to provide habitat for this group of birds is greatest within managed 

wetland habitat. Higher numbers of shorebirds are moving through the Southeast Coastal Plains 

during spring migration than during the fall. However, inland feeding habitat may be limited during fall 

migration, since most of this habitat is provided through impoundments managed for waterfowl 

requiring a spring drawdown. Opportunities for habitat management directed at shorebirds are 

limited. To the extent that drawdowns for wintering waterfowl or foraging wading birds can be timed 

with peak migration times, the impoundments may provide excellent shorebird habitat. Within the 

Complex, thousands of acres of impoundment habitat are managed for moist-soil vegetation and can 

be manipulated to provide mudflat habitat seasonally; however, the need to setback vegetation 

annually is very time consuming and expensive. 
112 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The Southeastern Coastal Plain – Caribbean Shorebird Conservation Plan calls for an annual habitat 

objective to provide 4,000 acres of suitable shorebird foraging habitat (e.g., mudflats) during both the 

south-bound and north-bound migration for shorebirds. 

Biological review teams devised several different options to provide additional shorebird habitat within 

the Complex. It was suggested that drawdown of ponds and water management units could be 

rotated from year-to-year and/or staggered to provide both spring and fall feeding habitat for 

migratory shorebirds. Pond draw downs would supplement feeding habitat for spring migration by 

adding additional acres. An additional option could be implemented by delaying draw down until midJuly (after young wading birds have fledged), thus providing additional feeding habitat for fall 

migratory shorebirds. 

Neotropical birds: Many nearctic-neotropical migratory landbirds orient southeastward during autumn 

migration to their tropical (primarily West Indian and South American) wintering areas. The South Atlantic 

coastline and peninsular Florida, particularly maritime woodlands, appear to be critically important during 

this migration. The vast majority of Bicknell's thrushes, Cape May, Black-throated blue, Wayne’s Blackthroated green (coastal populations), and presumably all federally endangered Kirtland's warblers migrate 

to and from their Bahamian wintering grounds, crossing the South Atlantic coastline. Despite these 

generalities, each nearctic-neotropical migratory species has its own distinctive seasonal pattern of 

migration during fall (August - October) and spring (late March-late May). 

In many areas of the South Atlantic Coastal Plain, maritime forest has been destroyed for urban 

development. Forest fragmentation, invasive exotic vegetation, and poor stand quality are issues 

affecting forest breeding and neotropical migratory birds. Forest stand quality can be improved or 

maintained through the use of appropriate silvicultural treatments. Many breeding forest birds and 

migratory species are dependent upon dense understory and ground vegetation for nesting and foraging.

Historically, maritime scrub/shrub encompassed 1.6 million acres in the southeastern United States. 

Presently, these habitats are less than 10 percent and largely restricted to the Atlantic coast, 

especially on the Sea Islands. The maritime scrub/shrub community is composed primarily of yaupon 

holly, wax myrtle, sabal palmetto, and saw palmetto growing in dense thickets. These habitats are 

relatively resistant to salt spray, sun, wind, drought, and nutrient-poor soils. Along with maritime 

forest, maritime scrub/shrub represents the most important habitat for neotropical migratory birds 

moving to and from their tropical wintering grounds. 

Scrub/shrub or early successional bird species as a group have continued to decline in the 

southeastern United States and would benefit from maintenance and restoration of habitat. Early 

successional habitat is currently being provided throughout the Complex in support of the highest 

priority scrub/shrub species, including painted bunting. However, some refuge areas have the 

potential to be maintained in an early successional condition, possibly with the use of prescribed fire, 

on a 5- to 10-year rotation. Harris Neck NWR currently has an extensive scrub/shrub edge 

component between grasslands and forest, in addition to the under/mid story component of the forest 

itself. Buffer strips along forest field edges and crop fields and narrow corridor linkages between 

forest patches should be managed as scrub/shrub habitat. This would benefit the highest priority 

scrub/shrub species as well as other important species including field sparrow, orchard oriole, whiteeyed vireo, and northern bobwhite. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 113

HABITAT MANAGEMENT 

Regionally, the southern coastal plain extends from South Carolina and Georgia through much of 

central Florida, and along the Gulf coast lowlands of the Florida Panhandle, Alabama, and 

Mississippi. This ecoregion is lower in elevation with less relief and wetter soils than the southeastern 

plains. Once covered by a variety of forest communities that included longleaf pine, slash pine, pond 

pine, beech-magnolia, and mixed upland hardwoods, land cover in the region is now predominantly 

slash and loblolly pine plantations with cypress-gum, bay swamp, and bottomland hardwoods in lowlying areas. Ecoregional subdivisions of the southern coastal plain include the Okefenokee Plains, 

Sea Island Flatwoods, Okefenokee Swamp, Bacon Terraces, Floodplains and Low Terraces, and 

Sea Islands/Coastal Marsh (GADNR 2005). 

Although the refuges within the Complex are situated within the same ecoregion, each has individual 

habitat types and management concerns that make it unique. See Section A, Chapter II, for a 

complete listing of habitat sizes and types within each refuge. 

Water Management Units and Aquatic Habitat Management 

Moist-soil management refers to providing moist-soil conditions during the growing season to promote the 

natural production of beneficial plants. Seeds produced by these plants often attract and concentrate 

waterfowl and other wetland wildlife species. Preferred moist-soil plants provide seeds and other plant 

parts (e.g., leaves, roots, and tubers) that generally have low deterioration rates after flooding and provide 

substantial energy and essential nutrients less available to wintering waterfowl in common agricultural 

grains such as corn, milo, and soybeans. Moist-soil impoundments also support diverse populations of 

invertebrates, an important protein source for waterfowl. The plants and invertebrates available in moistsoil impoundments provide food resources necessary for wintering and migrating waterfowl to complete 

critical aspects of the annual cycle such as molt and reproduction. 

Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs contain thousands of acres of estuarine emergent wetlands 

dominated by smooth cordgrass. During high tide, the wetlands can be completely inundated. As the 

water level rises in the marsh, it carries with it aquatic organisms including fish, crustaceans, and 

other invertebrates. Estuarine wetlands are very important as nursery habitat for juvenile fish, crabs, 

and shrimp that take refuge among the vegetation for protection from predators. When the tide 

recedes, these organisms often remain in the marsh trapped in pools of water at lower elevations 

until the next high tide. Such pools provide excellent foraging opportunities for birds as the aquatic 

organisms may be highly concentrated. The wide variety of organisms supported by estuarine 

marshes is linked to the range of salinities that occur. When rain falls upstream, it flows downstream 

and discharges into the estuaries surrounding Blackbeard Island, Pinckney Island, and Wassaw 

NWRs. This freshwater temporarily lowers the salinity in the estuaries, making them habitable for 

organisms that prefer fresher water. Alternatively, when rainfall is limited and salinity levels rise in the 

estuaries, more saline tolerant species can move in from the Atlantic Ocean and those intolerant of 

high salinity migrate upstream into the river system. 

The diversity and abundance of aquatic fish and invertebrates in the estuary are very important for 

shorebirds and fish eating waterbirds. Terns, gulls, and skimmers forage in the top centimeters to 

meter of the water column of tidal creeks and wetland edges, looking for small fishes or shrimp. 

Pelicans also use these resources but may dive deeper as do loons, grebes, and diving ducks. 

Shorebirds utilize shallow flooded or exposed mudflats, especially in the interior of the marsh at low 

tide. During higher tides, these areas are flooded and available for fish-eating birds such as wading 

birds, terns, and skimmers. The constantly changing environment of the coastal islands and their 
114 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

associated wetlands support a diversity of aquatic organisms representing one of the most productive 

habitat types in the world. 

Scrub/Shrub 

Scrub/shrub communities are areas dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet tall. The 

vegetation includes true shrubs, young trees, and trees or shrubs that may be stunted because of 

environmental conditions. These areas are sometimes referred to as early successional 

communities. There are many areas within the Complex that contain this type of plant composition. 

They include edges between climax tree stands and open fields, mature tree stands and water (either 

salt of fresh), old fields, open areas, or holes created in a climax tree stand canopy from either biotic 

or abiotic factors (death of trees, disease, hurricanes, tornados, fire, fire breaks or drought). These 

habitats are utilized by many species of wildlife. 

Fire Management 

Fire is a natural process that historically shaped the habitats within the Complex. Fire management 

within the Complex consists of both wildland fire suppression and prescribed burning activities. 

Prescribed burning is the application of fire by man to achieve land use objectives under specific 

conditions. In contrast, wildland fires that occur on the refuges are started by lightning strikes or from 

human activities. 

Pine forest and grassland vegetation communities evolved in the presence of fire and often plants 

require this type of disturbance to complete their life cycle. The natural fire cycle, however, is often 

interrupted by human activities. As a result, the vegetation communities often have moved through 

succession away from their historical assemblages. In addition, fire may be a very useful tool for 

managing invasive exotic plants. In both cases, fire is a necessary tool for improving and managing 

wildlife habitat. Comments were made by internal parties that adaptive habitat management should 

be utilized to evaluate habitat and wildlife response to fire management practices. 

There are many challenges to prescribed burning within the Complex. The biggest challenge is 

managing smoke in the presence of major roads and interstates and the proximity of some of the 

refuges to residential areas. In addition to the challenges of smoke management, water levels can 

also limit the window of opportunity for prescribed burning in certain areas within the Complex. 

Beaches and Dunes 

Because of dredging operations in the Savannah River, the barrier island refuges in coastal Georgia 

are sand starved. Littoral drift occurs from north to south; therefore, sand that historically came out of 

the Savannah River harbor drifted south to deposit along the barrier islands. This sand is now 

dredged from the river and deposited on upland disposal sites, robbing the system of its sand supply. 

Currently, the Complex’s beaches are eroding, especially at the north end Wassaw NWR. 

Dunes, beaches, and sand bars are critical for migratory shorebirds as nesting, feeding, loafing, and 

roosting habitat. Even more critical for shorebirds are the invertebrate prey populations these 

habitats support. Sea turtles nest on barrier island beaches and feed in offshore waters. Lack of 

sand, as a result of dams and dredging, is having a negative impact on these habitats. 

Several comments were made by the public and members of the biological review teams that 

reinforced the need to restore or to reduce erosion of the beaches and dunes. One comment 

recommended the use of beneficial spoil from a local dredging operation to help with this effort. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 115

Additional comments from the public raised issues about detrimental impacts of beach access and 

the presence of pets on the beaches and the need to address these issues. 

RESOURCE PROTECTION 

Cultural Resources 

In addition to biological assets, the Complex has cultural sites relating to human settlement that date 

back as far as 4,000 years ago. Several archaeological investigations have been performed and 

have produced artifacts and evidence that range from 500 A.D. to post Civil War. Most of these 

resources are not featured as public use areas due to the likelihood of theft and other adverse 

affects. It is unlikely that these areas will be open to the public. However, with the increased demand 

for public recreation and the economic value of artifacts, it may be necessary to increase law 

enforcement efforts in these areas (Sassaman 2006 and Sanders 2000). 

Pollution Prevention 

Several refuges that make up the Complex are located adjacent to urban and industrial areas. Water 

quality and contaminant issues continue to be a major concern for the Complex and adjacent lands. 

Non-point pollution is on the rise according to GADNR and SCDNR, and will only continue to get 

worse with new housing developments being constructed around the refuges. Several sources of 

pollution may be present on the refuge caused by off-refuge sources. Pollutants such as heavy 

metals can have long-term effects when deposited into the soil column and bio-concentrated through 

the food chain. Pollutant effects on water quality also are exacerbated by drought, saltwater 

intrusion, and flooding. Presence of any high contaminant levels should be identified and 

documented. Keeping lands “Green” has been discussed with the local governments and small steps 

are being taken to minimize the impact of development in and around the marshes. 

Several comments were made by both Complex staff and the public concerned about urban 

development encroachment and the effects of pollution from harbor dredging and local industry. 

VISITOR SERVICES 

Six priority public uses on refuge lands have been identified and approved by the Improvement Act. 

These uses include fishing, hunting, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. Other uses on refuge lands must be determined appropriate and 

compatible for each specific refuge. 

Hunting and Fishing 

Hunting and fishing opportunities are of great public interest. Some refuges within the Complex offer 

quota deer hunts to ensure that population numbers remain in balance with the surrounding habitat. 

Savannah NWR, because of it vast size, has a more liberal hunting season to achieve this balance. 

Several comments expressed the desire to continue or to enhance hunting opportunities within the 

Complex. There were also comments to ban these activities. 

Both saltwater and freshwater fishing opportunities are available within the Complex. There are also 

facilities, fishing piers, and boat ramps provided to cater to fishermen. 
116 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Wildlife Observation and Photography 

The principal opportunities identified to improve wildlife observation and photography on refuge lands 

includes the installation of observation platforms, trails, and towers. Providing additional parking and 

better access for observation and photography opportunities are anticipated to perpetuate additional 

use. There also may be opportunities to improve wildlife viewing by selectively managing vegetation 

and food plots in some areas adjacent to refuge roads. 

Environmental Education and Interpretation 

The environmental education programs offered by the refuges include both on-site and off-site 

components. Because environmental education is a priority public use, this plan should include a 

visionary look at how this will be addressed. Recommendations from the visitor service teams 

included task items to be completed now, intermediately, and long-term. These included the need to 

look at staffing options, adding additional trails and guided tours, maintaining an accurate teacher 

contact database, and enhancing the intern and volunteer programs as environmental education 

support. 

Several public comments brought up the need for additional outreach and educational opportunities, 

especially those designed for youth. One comment wanted the refuges to offer a more safari-like 

experience for the public. 

REFUGE ADMINISTRATION 

 

Law Enforcement

The demand for recreation, the need to provide visitor safety, and the enforcement of refuge 

regulations prompted a recommendation for additional law enforcement presence within the 

Complex. Several different law enforcement issues were brought up by refuge staff and will need to 

be addressed, such as poaching, illegal trespassing, and drug-related offenses. 

 

Staffing and Facility Needs 

The Complex administers seven national wildlife refuges located in both Georgia and South Carolina. 

Five of the seven refuges do not have permanently assigned staff; however, management and law 

enforcement are conducted on all refuges in the Complex. Additional resources, including facilities, 

are needed to meet the refuges’ goals and visions for the next 15-years. This plan details these 

needs by establishing goals, objectives, and strategies. Several comments addressed the need for 

additional resources. 

Wilderness Review 

Refuge planning policy requires a wilderness review as part of the CCP process. The results of the 

wilderness review are included in Appendix H. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 117

IV. Management Direction 

INTRODUCTION 

The Service manages fish and wildlife habitats considering the needs of all resources in decisionmaking. But first and foremost, fish and wildlife conservation assumes priority in refuge management. 

A requirement of the Improvement Act is for the Service to maintain the ecological health, diversity, 

and integrity of refuges. Public uses are allowed if they are appropriate and compatible with wildlife 

and habitat conservation. The above-mentioned Act identified hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, 

wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation as priority wildlife-dependent 

public uses of the Refuge System. Hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and 

environmental education and interpretation are therefore emphasized in this CCP. 

Described below is the CCP for managing six refuges of the Complex over the next 15-years. This 

management direction contains the goals, objectives, and strategies that will be used to achieve the 

vision of each refuge. 

Three alternatives for managing six refuges within the Complex were considered in the draft 

comprehensive conservation plan and environmental assessment: 

A. Current Management (No Action Alternative) 

B. Increased Management (Enhanced Biological and Visitor Services Management -Proposed 

Alternative) 

C. Minimal Intervention Management 

Each of the alternatives was described in the Alternatives section of the Environmental Assessment. 

The Service chose Alternative B “Increased Management” as the preferred management direction. 

Implementing the preferred alternative will result in the restoration and improvement of refuge 

resources needed for wildlife and habitat management, while providing opportunities for a variety 

of additional compatible wildlife-dependent recreation, education, and interpretive activities. 

Alternative B aims to increase the knowledge base of the refuges by developing monitoring plans 

and programs. Additionally, this alternative largely focuses on the needs of threatened and 

endangered species, species of concern, and federal trust species. This alternative will also 

allow the refuges to provide additional staffing, providing support for wildlife and habitat 

management, visitor services, and law enforcement protection that adequately meets the 

demands of the refuges. The preferred alternative also focuses on issues that are detrimental to 

wildlife and habitats like invasive, exotic, and/or nuisance plant and animal species and climate 

change. Visitor services plans will be developed to better manage and expand, when 

appropriate, public use facilities and opportunities on the refuges. 

VISION 

Spanning a 100-mile stretch of the Atlantic Seaboard from Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, to the 

Altamaha River in Georgia, the Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex is part of a national system of 

lands managed to ensure and safeguard the future of wildlife and their habitat. The Complex will 

protect a unique network of bottomland hardwood forests, wetlands, grasslands, beaches, and 

aquatic habitats. In the midst of a rapidly developing coastal environment, these six refuges will lead 

the way in protection and management of highly diverse habitats. These refuges will contribute to the 
118 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

long-term conservation of migratory and native wildlife populations and the recovery of threatened 

and endangered species. 

When compatible, the Complex will offer quality, wildlife-dependent recreational activities. In 

collaboration with partners, a wide range of interpretive and environmental education programs and 

activities will be provided to diverse audiences. Visitors will leave with an understanding that this 

place of incredible diversity and ecological importance is part of a larger network of protected lands 

within the National Wildlife Refuge System, set aside specifically for wildlife. 

GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES 

The goals, objectives, and strategies presented are the Service’s response to the issues, concerns, and 

needs expressed by the planning team, the refuge staff and partners, and the public and are presented in 

hierarchical format. The projects associated with the various strategies are identified in Chapter V. 

These goals, objectives, and strategies reflect the Service’s commitment to achieve the mandates of the 

Improvement Act, the mission of the Refuge System, and the purposes and vision of the Complex. The 

Service intends to accomplish these goals, objectives, and strategies within the next 15-years. 

FISH AND WILDLIFE POPULATION MANAGEMENT 

Goal 1. Protect, maintain, enhance, and restore healthy and viable populations of migratory and 

resident fish, wildlife, and native plants, including all federal and state threatened and endangered 

species found within the Atlantic Coastal Plain, in a manner that supports state, national, and 

international treaties, plans and initiatives. 

Discussion: The refuges within the Complex provide habitat for a variety of resident and migratory 

wildlife. Many species of wading birds and shorebirds can be found on all refuges year-round. 

Migratory songbirds pass through in the spring and fall months, while a number of migratory 

waterfowl species spend the winters resting and feeding on the refuges. Sea turtles, namely the 

federally threatened loggerhead, utilize the beaches of the Wassaw and Blackbeard Island NWRs for 

nesting. Harris Neck NWR is home to one of the most successful endangered wood stork rookeries 

in the southeast. Each of these individual species has the same general requirements in that it 

requires food, water, and cover to survive. However, the particular food and cover requirements of a 

given species often are very specialized. The specific habitat needs of each species vary in some 

degree from those of every other kind of animal, although many different animals may occupy the 

same general area. A diversity of habitats encourages and supports a diversity of wildlife species. 

Waterfowl and Wetland-Dependent Birds 

Discussion: The Georgia and South Carolina coastal marshes are a historic migration corridor for 

migratory waterfowl that use the Atlantic Flyway. Populations and distribution of waterfowl vary 

greatly from year-to-year, depending on water levels and weather conditions. Species range from 

dabbling ducks such as mallards, gadwall, and teal; diving ducks such as scaup and ring-necked 

ducks using near-shore emergent and open water habitats; and sea ducks such as black and whitewinged scoters using offshore habitats. Savannah NWR has the most extensive waterfowl habitat 

and thus management of any of the refuges composing the Complex. It is included in the South 

Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative (SAMBI) bi-monthly wintering waterfowl survey conducted October 

through March annually. These bi-monthly counts are standardized by surveying the same 

management units consistently throughout the season. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 119

Wintering waterfowl are not the primary focus of management efforts for the other refuges in the 

Complex. Wading bird rookeries are present on Savannah, Pinckney Island, Harris Neck, Wassaw, 

and Blackbeard Island NWRs and monitoring and protection of rookery sites from disturbance should 

be a priority for these refuges. Coordinated surveys for wading birds are currently conducted only for 

the wood stork rookery at Harris Neck NWR. Minimal or opportunistic surveying and monitoring take 

place on the other refuges for wetland-dependent birds but provide only anecdotal information. 

Loss of estuarine emergent wetlands has occurred throughout the southeast as development 

pressures have increased. Several marsh bird species occur on the refuges within these habitats 

including clapper rail, king rail, yellow rail, Virginia rail, sora, purple gallinule, common moorhen, and 

American coot. Black rail is likely to occur in the salt marsh habitat year-round, but this species is 

quite rare, secretive, and very difficult to locate. Surveys for high-priority marsh birds are challenging 

but would provide useful information on species occurrence and abundance on the refuges. 

Swallow-tailed and Mississippi kites feed on flying insects over the moist-soil impoundments during 

July and August. Savannah NWR has been noted by the Complex as an important staging area for 

these two species during their southward migration. During the last decade, it has been common to 

observe from 20 to 50 swallow-tailed kites and more than 75 Mississippi kites daily during late 

summer. Additional monitoring will help assess the need for habitat improvement allowing 

Complex staff to actively adapt habitat management strategies to focus on critical needs. 

Additional monitoring, where feasible, will help assess the need and efficacy of habitat 

management, thus allowing Complex staff to actively adapt habitat management strategies to 

focus on critical needs where appropriate. In addition, this monitoring will evaluate the 

contributions of the Complex to relevant regional and national bird plans. 

Objective 1.1.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Wetland-Dependent Birds: Within 5 years of the date 

of this CCP, develop a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for representative wetlanddependent birds. 

Strategies: 

 Identify and map any potential and current wading bird nesting sites and establish a 

monitoring program. 

 Implement priority bird surveys for better understanding of distribution, species diversity, 

management response, and numbers using standard survey protocols. Input survey data into 

appropriate databases.

Objective 1.1.b: Harris Neck NWR – Wetland-Dependent Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this 

CCP, develop a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for representative wetlanddependent birds. 

Strategies: 

 Monitor waterfowl use within all ponds; two surveys per month during October through 

February. Input these data into the SAMBI database. 

 Implement priority bird surveys for a better understanding of distribution, species diversity, 

management response, and numbers using standard survey protocols. Input survey data into 

appropriate databases. 
120 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Evaluate the need for addition or removal of wood duck boxes on the refuge and monitor 

productivity. 

Objective 1.1.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Wetland-Dependent Birds: Within 5 years of the date of 

this CCP, develop a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for representative wetlanddependent birds. 

Strategies: 

 Implement surveys of priority birds for a better understanding of distribution, species diversity, 

management response, and numbers using standard survey protocols. Input survey data into 

appropriate databases. 

 Assess the need for research on wetland-dependent birds and facilitate research to address 

these needs. 

Objective 1.1.d: Savannah NWR – Wetland-Dependent Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this 

CCP, develop a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for representative wetlanddependent birds. 

Strategies: 

 Conduct secretive marsh bird (i.e., king rail) call-back surveys every 3-5 years for all managed 

impoundment and tidal freshwater habitats using standard protocols. 

 Identify and map any potential and current wading bird nesting sites and establish monitoring 

program. 

 Implement surveys of priority birds for a better understanding of distribution, species diversity, 

management response, and numbers using standard survey protocols. Input survey data into 

appropriate databases. 

Objective 1.1.e: Wassaw NWR – Wetland-Dependent Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this 

CCP, develop a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for representative wetlanddependent birds. 

Strategies: 

 Conduct roost counts for wading birds seasonally. 

 Identify potential nesting sites for wading birds and initiate monitoring. 

 Implement priority bird surveys for a better understanding of distribution, species diversity, 

management response, and numbers using standard survey protocols. Input survey data into 

appropriate databases. Continue to conduct an annual mid-winter waterfowl survey. 

Objective 1.1.f: Savannah NWR – Waterfowl: Over the 15-year life of the CCP, continue to conduct 

waterfowl surveys and provide quality breeding as well as quality migration and wintering habitat to 

support 10-15 percent of South Carolina’s total wintering dabbling and diving duck population. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 121

Strategies: 

 Conduct bi-monthly waterfowl ground counts in all suitable habitats (Oct.-Mar.) to document 

response to management actions following the SAMBI protocols, and enter data into the 

SAMBI web-based database. 

 Meet annual pre-season wood duck banding quota. 

Shorebirds 

Discussion: Higher numbers of shorebirds are moving through the southeast coastal plains during 

spring migration than during the fall. However, inland feeding habitat may be limited during fall 

migration since most of this habitat is provided through impoundments managed for waterfowl 

requiring a spring drawdown. During the fall and spring shorebird migration, large groups of birds 

take advantage of draw downs on managed impoundments. American avocets, greater and lesser 

yellowlegs, stilt sandpipers, and dowitchers are species more commonly observed. During the 

growing season, impoundments are managed in moist-soil. These areas produce ample loads of 

detritus. This net biomass combined with a diverse flooding and draw-down regime helps ensure 

adequate and dependable invertebrate forage for waterfowl and shorebirds (USFWS, March 2008). 

Objective 1.2.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Shorebirds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

develop a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for all high-priority shorebird populations. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate shorebird use of refuge beaches by continuing to participate in the Georgia count in 

January, implementing ISS, and entering shorebird survey data into SAMBI database. 

 Conduct research to determine best management actions for shorebirds. 

 Minimize human disturbance on beaches by increasing signage, law enforcement presence, 

locating and marking individual nests, restricting beach access during nesting season, and 

requiring all-terrain vehicle operation below high tide line. 

Objective 1.2.b: Harris Neck NWR – Shorebirds: Within the 15-year life of this CCP, develop a 

comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for all high-priority shorebird populations. 

Strategies: 

 As needed, evaluate shorebird use of refuge impoundments. 

 As needed, conduct research to determine best management actions for shorebirds. 

Objective 1.2.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Shorebirds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop 

a comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for all high-priority shorebird populations. 

Strategies: 

 Establish shorebird surveys in cooperation with SCDNR using ISS protocol and enter 

shorebird survey data into SAMBI database. 

 Reduce and/or prevent disturbance to American oystercatcher nesting sites annually (April-July). 

 Conduct periodic surveys to document winter roost sites for American oystercatcher habitat 

adjacent to, on, or nearby Pinckney Island NWR in coordination with SCDNR. 
122 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 1.2.d: Savannah NWR – Shorebirds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop a 

comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for all high-priority shorebird populations. 

Strategies:

 Conduct shorebird surveys during fall and spring migration using standard protocol and store 

and manage data in the SAMBI database. 

 Evaluate efficacy of modifying management of some impoundments to provide habitat for 

spring and fall migration stopover sites. 

Objective 1.2.e: Tybee NWR – Shorebirds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop a 

comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for all high-priority shorebird populations. 

Strategy: 

 Conduct shorebird surveys during fall and spring migration using ISS protocol and store and 

manage data in the SAMBI database. 

Objective 1.2.f: Wassaw NWR – Shorebirds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop a 

comprehensive surveying and monitoring program for all high-priority shorebird populations. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate shorebird use of refuge beaches by continuing to participate in the Georgia count in 

January, implementing ISS, and entering shorebird survey data into SAMBI database. 

 Conduct research to determine best management actions for shorebirds. 

 Minimize human disturbance on the north and south end of island by increasing beach 

signage and law enforcement presence, locating and marking individual nests, closing beach 

during the nesting season, and educating volunteers to reduce speed and stay below high tide 

line when using all-terrain vehicles. 

Non-game Birds 

Discussion: In many areas of the South Atlantic Coastal Plain, the maritime forest has been 

destroyed for urban development. Forest fragmentation, invasive exotic vegetation, and poor stand 

quality are issues affecting forest breeding and neotropical migratory birds. Many breeding forest 

birds and migratory species are dependent upon dense understory and ground vegetation for nesting 

and foraging. Thus, desired future conditions in much of the existing mature forest stands would 

emphasize increasing structural diversity by providing a more open overstory canopy to allow sunlight 

to reach the ground in support of increased ground and understory cover. High-priority, non-game 

bird species include prothonotary warbler, red-headed woodpecker, brown-headed nuthatch, wood 

thrush, Kentucky warbler, swallow-tailed kite, Swainson’s warbler, northern parula, yellow-throated 

warbler, hooded warbler, worm-eating warbler, prairie warbler, Henslow’s sparrow, field sparrow, 

painted bunting, logger-head shrike, and American woodcock. 

Currently, three of the Complex refuges, with the aid of partners, conduct Christmas bird counts 

annually. The refuges also provide important habitat for forest breeding birds, many of whose 

populations have been in decline nationwide in recent years. Due to the decrease in migration 

numbers over the past several years and the destruction of habitat from natural disasters, it is 

important to increase monitoring to determine the overall health of the ecosystem. Additional 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 123

monitoring will help assess the need for habitat recovery, allowing refuge staff to actively adapt 

habitat management strategies to focus on critical needs. 

Objective 1.3.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Non-game Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this 

CCP, evaluate a seasonal monitoring protocol to reveal population trends and response of non-game 

bird populations to management actions. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate appropriate breeding bird surveys to monitor non-game birds using the refuge. 

 Establish protocol for monitoring non-game bird use of the refuge during migrating and 

wintering. 

 Continue to participate in the painted bunting monitoring program.

Objective 1.3.b: Harris Neck NWR – Non-game Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

evaluate a seasonal monitoring protocol to reveal population trends and response of non-game bird 

populations to management actions. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate and/or continue appropriate migratory bird surveys. 

 Continue to participate in the painted bunting monitoring program. 

 Annually conduct survey for Henslow’s and LeConte’s sparrows. 

 Continue to participate in Christmas bird counts. 

Objective 1.3.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Non-game Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

evaluate a seasonal monitoring protocol to reveal population trends and response of non-game bird 

populations to management actions. 

 

Strategies: 

 Continue to participate in the painted bunting monitoring program. 

 Continue to participate in Christmas bird counts. 

 Evaluate appropriate breeding bird surveys to monitor non-game birds using the refuge. 

 Establish protocol for monitoring non-game bird use of the refuge during migration and 

wintering. 

Objective 1.3.d: Savannah NWR – Non-game Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

continue and expand where applicable seasonal monitoring to reveal population trends and response 

of non-game bird populations to management actions. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate appropriate breeding bird surveys to monitor non-game birds using the refuge. 

 Establish protocol for monitoring non-game bird use of the refuge during migrating and 

wintering. 

 Identify non-game bird research needs. 

 Continue to participate in Christmas bird counts 
124 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 1.3.e: Wassaw NWR – Non-game Birds: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

continue, and expand where applicable, seasonal monitoring to reveal population trends and 

response of non-game bird populations to management actions. 

Strategies: 

 Continue to participate in the painted bunting monitoring program. 

 Continue Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship operation. 

 Evaluate appropriate breeding bird surveys to monitor non-game birds using the refuge. 

 Establish protocol for monitoring non-game bird use of the refuge during migrating and 

wintering. 

Threatened and Endangered Species 

Discussion: The Complex supports a variety of valuable habitats that are home to both federal and 

state threatened and endangered species and species of special concern. These include: flatwoods 

salamander, wood stork, piping plover, loggerhead sea turtle, shortnose sturgeon, and West Indian 

manatee. 

The flatwoods salamander breeds in isolated pond cypress-dominated depressions, often with a 

smaller component of blackgum or slash pine. These ponds often are isolated within pine forests. 

Suitable wetlands have a marsh-like appearance with sedges and grasses growing throughout and 

other herbaceous species in the shallow water edges. A relatively open canopy resulting from 

seasonal prescribed burns is necessary to maintain appropriate vegetation, which serves as cover for 

salamander larvae and their aquatic invertebrate prey. The major threats to this species are habitat 

destruction, deterioration, and fragmentation.

The federally endangered wood stork has found the impoundments and tidal marshes of the Complex 

to provide a variety of habitats necessary for its survival and recovery. It breeds in a colony in Harris 

Neck NWR’s Woody Pond, forages in other wetlands/marshes on or near some of the refuges, and 

roosts in wetlands. Management activities by the refuge have resulted in this being one of the most 

stable and productive colonies in the United States relative to colony growth and productivity, as well 

as an excellent location for research. 

The endangered shortnose sturgeon occurs within the rivers of the Complex. While this species of 

sturgeon is less abundant within the Newport River, it is common within the Altamaha and Savannah 

Rivers. Public education and law enforcement efforts should be increased to inform local fishermen 

that take of this species is prohibited. In addition, boaters should be informed of the dangers from 

this species as they tend to breach the water surface and have been known to collide with boats. 

Current threats to the species are related to harbor development; the proposed harbor deepening 

project near Savannah NWR could be a threat. 

West Indian manatees range the Georgia coast in the warmer months, appearing as early as March 

and staying as late as November and December depending on the weather, water temperature, and 

whether sources of warm water can be found. These manatees spend the winter along the Atlantic 

Coast of Florida before migrating back to Georgia. The general pattern for manatees is one of 

directed movements to specific core areas that are used for prolonged periods. Calves learn the 

locations of key resources and migratory routes from their mothers, and there is more site fidelity to a 

manatee’s warm season range than to its winter range (Deutsch et al. 2003). 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 125

Manatees use the rivers adjacent to the refuges during the summer, likely feeding in the tidal creeks 

on various marsh plants. Potential problems exist with warm water releases from industrial effluents 

along the Savannah River, which have been known to hold manatees longer causing cold stress. 

There are occasional sightings of manatees in the waters around the refuges. The Complex has an 

interest in informing the public and working with partners for the protection of this species. 

Five species of sea turtles inhabit the coastal waters of Georgia. These include the loggerhead, 

Kemp’s ridley, leatherback, green, and hawksbill sea turtles. The most common sea turtle, the 

loggerhead, is protected under the Endangered Species Act, and is listed as threatened. The other 

four species are listed as endangered. The loggerhead is the primary turtle nesting on Georgia 

beaches (approximately 1,200 nests per year); 5 to 10 nests per year can be attributed to all the other 

species combined throughout Georgia. 

Piping plovers occur in three distinct nesting populations: (1) The Atlantic including North Carolina to 

Maine in the United States and the Canadian Maritime Province (about 1,700 pairs); (2) the Great 

Lakes group (fewer than 50 pairs); and (3) the Plains population including the Plains states in the 

United States, and Alberta and Saskatchewan in Canada (about 1,400 pairs). Individuals from all 

three populations migrate through or winter along the Atlantic Coast, with Critical Habitat specifically 

designated with respect to the endangered Great Lakes population. 

Objective 1.4.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Sea Turtles: 

Over the 15-year life of this CCP, expand management and research activities which contribute to the 

recovery of sea turtles as indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategies: 

 Survey all beaches nightly and continue to document nesting and hatching parameters to 

accomplish recovery goals. 

 Evaluate the efficacy of continuing the long-term saturation tagging program. 

 Continue to implement predator control for feral hogs, raccoons, and other predators on the 

beaches.

 Continue to participate in sea turtle stranding and salvage networks. 

 Develop partnerships and seek additional funding for sea turtle monitoring. 

 Assess future research needs for sea turtles and solicit proposals from universities or other 

research institutions to meet these needs.

Objective 1.4.b: Blackbeard Island NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Piping Plovers: 

Over the 15-year life of this CCP, expand management and research activities which contribute to the 

recovery of piping plovers as indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategies: 

 Minimize disturbance to foraging and roosting birds by posting signs readable from offshore at 

key landing sites to educate people about disturbance. 

 Coordinate with GADNR to augment surveys currently being conducted. Initiate monthly 

surveys (July – April) to monitor use (surveys should occur at a minimum in September, 

February, and April). 

 Evaluate distribution and abundance of food for piping plovers by initiating benthic 

invertebrate and water quality sampling. 
126 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 1.4.c: Blackbeard Island NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Other: Over the 

15-year life of this CCP, monitor for additional threatened and endangered species and implement steps 

towards recovery as indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategies: 

 Coordinate with appropriate federal and state agencies in monitoring for potential threatened 

and endangered species. 

 Conduct surveys and, if appropriate, additional research of wood stork feeding activities; 

breeding and post breeding seasons. 

 Require refuge staff to routinely fill out manatee sighting forms in coordination with GADNR. 

Objective 1.4.d: Harris Neck NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Wood Stork: 

Within 2 years of the date of this CCP, evaluate and expand management and research activities 

which contribute to the recovery of wood storks as indicated by the recovery plan. 

Strategies: 

 Continue to work with partners in research of wood stork biology. 

 Increase size of potential cypress nesting areas through additional cypress plantings. 

Objective 1.4.e: Harris Neck NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Other: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, monitor for additional threatened and endangered species and implement steps 

towards recovery as indicated by recovery plans. 

 

Strategy: 

 Coordinate with appropriate federal and state agencies in monitoring for potential threatened 

and endangered species. 

Objective 1.4.f: Pinckney Island NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species: Over the 15-year 

life of this CCP, monitor for threatened and endangered species and implement steps towards 

recovery as indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategy: 

 Coordinate with appropriate federal and state agencies in monitoring for potential threatened 

and endangered species. 

Objective 1.4.g: Savannah NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species: Over the 15-year life 

of this CCP, monitor for threatened and endangered species and implement steps towards recovery 

as indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategies: 

 Coordinate with appropriate federal and state agencies in monitoring for potential threatened 

and endangered species. 

 Monitor nesting and roosting habitat for Rafinesque’s big-eared bats (state endangered – 

South Carolina). 

 Monitor wood stork use of managed impoundments and East Marsh. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 127

 Coordinate, where appropriate, with federal and state agencies in surveying for flatwoods 

salamanders. 

Objective 1.4.h: Tybee NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, monitor for threatened and endangered species and implement steps towards recovery as 

indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategy: 

 Coordinate with appropriate federal and state agencies in monitoring for potential threatened 

and endangered species. 

Objective 1.4.i: Wassaw NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Sea Turtles: Over the 

15-year life of this CCP, expand management and research activities which contribute to the recovery 

of sea turtles as indicated by recovery plans. 

Strategies: 

 Survey all beaches nightly and continue to document all nesting and hatching parameters to 

accomplish recovery goals. 

 Evaluate the efficacy of continuing the long-term saturation tagging program. 

 Continue to implement predator control for feral hogs, raccoons, and other predators on the 

beaches.

 Continue to participate in sea turtle stranding and salvage networks. 

 Develop partnerships and seek additional funding for sea turtle monitoring. 

 Assess future research needs for sea turtles and solicit proposals from universities or other 

research institutions to meet these needs. 

Objective 1.4.j: Wassaw NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Piping Plovers: Within 

5 years of the date of this CCP, expand management and research activities which contribute to the 

recovery of piping plovers as indicated by the recovery plan. 

Strategies: 

 Minimize disturbance to foraging and roosting birds by posting signs readable from offshore at 

key landing sites to educate people about disturbance. 

 Coordinate with GADNR to augment surveys currently being conducted. Initiate monthly 

surveys (July – April) to monitor use (surveys should occur at a minimum in September, 

February, and April). 

 Evaluate distribution and abundance of food for piping plovers by initiating benthic 

invertebrate and water quality sampling. 

Objective 1.4.k: Wassaw NWR – Threatened and Endangered Species - Other: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, monitor for additional threatened and endangered species and implement steps 

towards recovery as indicated by recovery plans. 
128 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Strategies: 

 Coordinate with appropriate federal and state agencies in monitoring for potential threatened 

and endangered species. 

 Conduct surveys of wood stork feeding activities; breeding and post breeding seasons. 

 Continue to work with partners in research of wood stork biology. 

Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants 

Discussion: 

Resident Wildlife 

Population and habitat monitoring is an important component of resident wildlife management. Resident 

game species on the Complex vary by refuge, but include white-tailed deer, turkey, quail, squirrel, and 

feral hog. Public hunts are held each year to maintain a healthy deer herd and to control feral hogs. 

There has been no recent evidence of deer herd health problems. Harvested deer examined by refuge 

biologists have been healthy; however, the health checks are not held on an annual basis. 

Species lists of small mammals for the Complex need to be compiled to provide baseline information for 

future management and research considerations. A survey of bats on the Complex also should be 

conducted. There are possibly three species of bats within the Complex that are considered rare for the 

State of Georgia: Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, northern yellow bat, and southeastern myotis. Surveys 

could be conducted by volunteers using cavity searches with a hand-held mirror and q-beam. 

Furbearers seen within the Complex include otter, gray fox, and raccoon. There is no current 

management directed to enhance these species or any trapping season. Currently, the Complex is 

doing very little to monitor most resident wildlife activity. The implementation of monitoring will help 

assess the need for both wildlife management and habitat improvement, allowing Complex staff 

to actively adapt habitat management strategies to focus on critical needs. 

Amphibians and Reptiles 

A diverse array of reptiles and amphibians occur within the Complex, including many different species 

of frogs, snakes, turtles, and salamanders. This can be attributed to the large acreage of suitable 

habitat provided by the various wetlands and forested ecosystems. Initial inventories of amphibian 

and reptile species have been conducted on several of the Complex refuges. However, there is little 

active management, including monitoring and surveying, taking place on the refuges for reptiles and 

amphibians. The implementation of monitoring will help assess the need for both population 

management and habitat improvement, allowing Complex staff to actively adapt habitat 

management strategies to focus on critical needs. 

Amphibians are the most threatened group of animals worldwide. Since 1970, scientists have 

observed precipitous population declines and entire disappearances of numerous amphibian species 

(Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation). The Coastal Plain in South Carolina and Georgia 

is a very important region for herpetofauna with high habitat and species diversity and several rare, 

threatened, and endangered species occurring within the area. Of the approximately 142 species of 

amphibians and reptiles found in these states, 113 occur in the Coastal Plain, with 50 of these 

endemic to South Carolina (SCDNR 2005.) 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 129

Aquatic Resources 

The waters within the Complex support fresh, brackish, and saltwater aquatic ecosystems, in addition 

to healthy sport and commercial fisheries. The lifeblood of the fishery production is the cycle of tidal 

flow in the estuarine marshes. Salt marshes provide important nursery habitat for a variety of marine 

organisms including many species of fish, shrimp, and oysters. These food resources are the basis 

of the food chain and support higher level predators such as larger sport fish and birds. In addition to 

the estuarine resources, freshwater ponds and impoundments support fisheries. 

Objective 1.5.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Over the 15-year life 

of this CCP, establish a comprehensive inventorying and monitoring program for other fish, wildlife, 

and plants. 

 

Strategies: 

 Coordinate with GADNR on Georgia Wildlife Action Plan. 

 Complete baseline survey of flora and fauna by 2020. 

 Assess research needs for other fish, wildlife, and plants and facilitate research requests, 

where applicable. 

Objective 1.5.b: Harris Neck NWR – Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, establish a comprehensive inventorying and monitoring program for other fish, wildlife, and 

plants. 

Strategies: 

 Complete baseline surveys of flora and fauna by 2020. 

 Coordinate with GADNR on Georgia Wildlife Action Plan. 

 Initiate gopher tortoise and habitat studies for species/burrow densities and associated flora 

and fauna.

Objective 1.5.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Over the 15-year life 

of this CCP, establish a comprehensive inventorying and monitoring program for other fish, wildlife, 

and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Complete baseline surveys of flora and fauna by 2020. 

 Coordinate with SCDNR on South Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. 

 Assess research needs for other fish, wildlife, and plants and facilitate research requests, 

where applicable 

Objective 1.5.d: Savannah NWR – Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

establish a comprehensive inventorying and monitoring program for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Repeat Southeast Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative sampling scheme/protocol at 

survey points across the refuge at 5- to 10-year intervals. 

 Complete baseline surveys of flora and fauna by 2020. 
130 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Coordinate with SCDNR and GADNR on state wildlife action plans. 

 Assess research needs for other fish, wildlife, and plants and facilitate research requests, 

where applicable. 

Objective 1.5.e: Wassaw NWR – Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

establish a comprehensive inventorying and monitoring program for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Complete baseline surveys of flora and fauna by 2020. 

 Coordinate with GADNR on Georgia Wildlife Action Plan. 

Climate Change/Sea Level Rise 

Discussion: Global climate change poses risks to human health and to terrestrial and aquatic 

ecosystems by significantly affecting weather and rainfall patterns, decreasing snow and ice cover, 

and in rising sea levels that are changing entire ecosystems, especially those in the coastal regions. 

Important economic resources, such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and water, may be affected. 

For the coastal region of the southeastern United States, this can result in more extreme precipitation 

events, greater likelihood of hotter and drier summers, and wetter and warmer winters. 

Additional factors such as population growth, landscape-level changes in land use, and pollution 

exacerbate these environmental changes especially within the coastal regions. For example, a recent 

study of the effects of climate change on eastern United States’ bird species concluded that as many as 

78 bird species could decrease by at least 25 percent while as many as 33 species could increase in 

abundance by at least 25 percent due to climate and habitat changes (Matthews et al. 2004).

Objective 1.6.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Establish active 

partnerships to monitor and model the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise on 

wildlife populations, especially threatened and endangered species. 

Strategies: 

 Monitor changes in population characteristics potentially associated with climate change/sea 

level rise through surveys of key population parameters. 

 Initiate modeling of potential effects of climate change and sea level rise to the vulnerability 

and risk of species via partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center; 

universities; and other local, state, and federal partners. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

 Evaluate the relationship between marsh restoration and carbon sequestration. 

Objective 1.6.b: Harris Neck NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Establish active 

partnerships to monitor and model the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise on 

wildlife populations, especially threatened and endangered species. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 131

Strategies: 

 Monitor changes in population characteristics potentially associated with climate change/sea 

level rise through surveys of key population parameters. 

 Initiate modeling of potential effects of climate change and sea level rise to the vulnerability 

and risk of species via partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center; 

universities; and other local, state, and federal partners. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys.

 Evaluate the relationship between marsh restoration and carbon sequestration.

Objective 1.6.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Establish active 

partnerships to monitor and model the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise on 

wildlife populations, especially threatened and endangered species. 

Strategies: 

 Monitor changes in population characteristics potentially associated with climate change/sea 

level rise through surveys of key population parameters. 

 Initiate modeling of potential effects of climate change and sea level rise to the vulnerability 

and risk of species via partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center; 

universities; and other local, state, and federal partners. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

 Evaluate the relationship between marsh restoration and carbon sequestration. 

Objective 1.6.d: Savannah NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Establish active partnerships 

to monitor and model the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise on wildlife populations, 

especially threatened and endangered species. 

Strategies: 

 Monitor changes in population characteristics potentially associated with climate change/sea 

level rise through surveys of key population parameters. 

 Initiate modeling of potential effects of climate change and sea level rise to the vulnerability 

and risk of species via partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center; 

universities; and other local, state, and federal partners. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

 Evaluate the relationship between marsh restoration and carbon sequestration. 

Objective 1.6.e: Tybee NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Establish active partnerships to 

monitor and model the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise on wildlife populations, 

especially threatened and endangered species. 

Strategies: 

 Monitor changes in population characteristics potentially associated with climate change/sea 

level rise through surveys of key population parameters. 
132 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Initiate modeling of potential effects of climate change and sea level rise to the vulnerability 

and risk of species via partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center; 

universities; and other local, state, and federal partners. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys.

 Evaluate the relationship between marsh restoration and carbon sequestration.

Objective 1.6.f: Wassaw NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Establish active partnerships to 

monitor and model the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise on wildlife populations, 

especially threatened and endangered species. 

Strategies: 

 Monitor changes in population characteristics potentially associated with climate change/sea 

level rise through surveys of key population parameters. 

 Initiate modeling of potential effects of climate change and sea level rise to the vulnerability 

and risk of species via partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center; 

universities; and other local, state, and federal partners. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

 Evaluate the relationship between marsh restoration and carbon sequestration. 

HABITAT MANAGEMENT 

Goal 2. Protect, maintain, enhance, and where appropriate, restore suitable habitat for the 

conservation and management of migratory and resident fish, wildlife, and native plants, including all 

federal and state threatened and endangered species endemic to the region. Preserve and enhance 

wilderness values of designated Wilderness, consistent with the establishing purposes. 

Discussion: The Complex is located in the Southern Coastal Plain Ecoregion. This ecoregion is 

lower in elevation with less relief and wetter soils than the more inland, adjacent Southeastern Plains 

Ecoregion. This area represents some of the most important estuarine river systems in the 

southeastern United States. It is characterized by extensive salt, brackish, and freshwater wetlands, 

supporting one of the most biologically productive systems in the world. The primary threat to this 

region is urban development, which contributes to increased storm water runoff, pollution, and 

sedimentation of these important habitats. 

This region was once covered by a variety of forest communities that included longleaf pine, slash 

pine, pond pine, beech-magnolia, and mixed upland hardwoods; land cover in the region is now 

predominantly slash and loblolly pine plantations with cypress-gum, bay swamp, and bottomland 

hardwoods in low-lying areas (GADNR 2005). 

The habitat types within the Complex, characterized by beaches, wetlands, open water, forests, 

scrub/shrub, and grasslands are managed primarily for the conservation, enhancement, and restoration of 

forested habitats; moist-soil management; and endangered species protection. The ecosystem approach 

guides the Service’s efforts to enhance, restore, and conserve the natural functional processes and 

habitat types, while maintaining economic productivity and recreational opportunities. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 133

Habitat Management Plan 

Discussion: The need to develop and implement a habitat management plan was identified in the 

scoping stage of the comprehensive conservation planning process. This management plan will 

identify resource needs and establish habitat restoration and management programs based on goals, 

objectives, and strategies identified in this CCP. 

Objective 2.1.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Habitat Management Plan: Develop and implement a 

habitat management plan by 2015. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a habitat management plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2015. 

Objective 2.1.b: Harris Neck NWR – Habitat Management Plan: Develop and implement a habitat 

management plan by 2015. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a habitat management plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2015.

Objective 2.1.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Habitat Management Plan: Develop and implement a 

habitat management plan by 2015. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a habitat management plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2015. 

Objective 2.1.d: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management Plan: Develop and implement a habitat 

management plan by 2015. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a habitat management plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2015. 

Objective 2.1.e: Tybee NWR – Habitat Management Plan: Develop and implement a habitat 

management plan by 2015. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a habitat management plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2015.
134 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 2.1.f: Wassaw NWR – Habitat Management Plan: Develop and implement a habitat 

management plan by 2015. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a habitat management plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2015.

Wilderness 

Discussion: The Wilderness Act of 1964 established the National Wilderness Preservation System 

and a process for federal land managing agencies to recommend wilderness areas to Congress. 

Wilderness, as defined by the Wilderness Act, is untrammeled (free from man's control), 

undeveloped, and natural, and offers outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation. 

The Refuge System manages refuge wilderness to secure an enduring resource of wilderness and to 

accomplish refuge purposes in a way that preserves wilderness character. 

The Wilderness Area on Blackbeard Island NWR is open to public use, and there is currently very 

little active management within the Wilderness. Nevertheless, the need for increased active 

management may occur in the future to control invasive species, or if necessary to restore heavily 

eroded beaches. Primary needs related to wilderness, as well as for endangered species and other 

priority fauna, would be to ensure high water quality and air quality standards. Wildfire occurring 

within the Wilderness Area will be assessed and procedures for appropriate management response 

will be implemented as outlined in the Complex’s Fire Management Plan. 

Objective 2.2.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Wilderness: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

enhance protection of and expand management activities for Blackbeard Island NWR Wilderness in 

accordance with 610 FW 1 Wilderness Stewardship Policy. 

Strategies: 

 Prepare a Wilderness Stewardship Plan (WSP) by 2016. 

 Conduct a Minimum Requirement Analysis for proposed management activities within 

Wilderness Area. 

 Monitor for spread of invasive species. 

 Continue to evaluate air quality data. 

 Restrict/close sensitive wildlife/wilderness areas seasonally to protect wildlife (i.e., Cabretta 

Inlet). 

Managed Impoundments, Marshes, and Other Wetlands 

Discussion: Savannah NWR contains approximately 6,000 acres of impounded freshwater wetlands. 

These impoundments were formerly plantation rice fields, which date back to the mid- or late-1700s. 

Approximately 3,000 acres of former fields are within 16 managed impoundments, providing 

sanctuary for waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and other wildlife. The remaining 3,000 acres are 

in the East Marsh Unit. This aquatic unit is dominated by woody and scrub/shrub wetland habitats. 

The managed freshwater impoundments are the most important managed habitat within the refuge. 

The impoundments are managed for a diverse array of wildlife and fish throughout the year. 

Specifically, they are the primary means of meeting one of the refuge’s objectives of providing high-
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 135

quality migrating and wintering habitat for waterfowl. Up to 22 species of waterfowl are known to use 

the impoundments in any given year. The freshwater plant communities within the impoundments are 

diverse and complex, making them ideal habitat for a diversity of wetland-dependent birds. The 

primary means of management is dependable water level control using rice trunks and stop-log riser 

water control structures, as well as a 9-mile diversion canal associated with this system. In addition 

to water level manipulations, prescribed fire, mechanical, and chemical treatments are used to 

manipulate plant succession and regulate undesirable and noxious plants. 

 

Harris Neck NWR is embedded with a variety of impounded waters, low-lying wet areas, and tidal 

marshes. Several of these areas (Snipe, Goose, and Greenhead Ponds) have been enhanced by 

management activities to provide better foraging habitat for wood storks and other wading birds. 

These management activities include: sub-dividing Snipe Pond to create smaller, more manageable 

habitats, maintaining/establishing water control structures (riser boards, rice trunk, etc.), seasonally 

adding water pumped through an aeration tower to enhance production of aquatic prey, mechanically 

contouring the impoundment floor to “pool” or hold water (and prey) longer during seasonal drawdowns, and adding prey (fish) to impoundments. 

Addition of fish to some of the impoundments occurred via purchasing from the Service’s National 

Hatchery System and occasionally receiving excess fish (typically bluegill or redbreast sunfish) from the 

same system. Fall/winter released fish were placed in impoundments that were later partially drained to 

provide forage for storks during or near the end of the breeding season. Timing of the draw down was 

determined by refuge personnel’s assessment of the local environmental conditions (wet or dry year) 

and the need to provide food earlier during the breeding season (to assist with fledging rate) or later in 

the breeding season (to provide habitat for the recently fledged young). In either scenario, the 

impoundments were typically “fished-out.” 

Estuarine wetlands are very important as nursery habitat for juvenile fish, crabs, and shrimp that take 

refuge among the vegetation for protection from predators. When the tide recedes, these organisms 

often remain in the marsh trapped in pools of water at lower elevations until the next high tide. Such 

pools provide excellent foraging opportunities for birds as the aquatic organisms that live in them may 

be highly concentrated. The wide variety of organisms supported by estuarine marshes is linked to 

the range of salinities that occur. When rain falls upstream in rivers, drainage then flows downstream 

and discharges into the estuaries. This freshwater pulse temporarily lowers the salinity in the 

estuaries, making them habitable for organisms that prefer fresher water. Alternatively, when rainfall 

is limited and salinity levels rise in the estuaries, more saline tolerant species can move in from the 

Atlantic Ocean and those intolerant of high salinity migrate upstream into the river system. 

The diversity and abundance of aquatic fish and invertebrates in the estuary are very important for 

shorebirds and waterbirds. Terns, gulls, and skimmers forage in the top centimeters or meters of the 

water column of tidal creeks and wetland edges, looking for small fishes or shrimp. Pelicans also use 

these resources but may dive deeper as do loons and grebes. Shorebirds utilize shallowly flooded or 

exposed mudflats, especially in the interior of the marsh at low tide. During higher tides, these areas 

are flooded and available for fish-eating birds such as wading birds, terns, and skimmers. The 

constantly changing environment of the coastal islands and their associated wetlands support a 

diversity of aquatic organisms, representing one of the most productive habitat types in the world.
136 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 2.3.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Managed Impoundments, Marshes, and Other 

Wetlands: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, evaluate management options for impoundments for 

priority species, and over the 15-year life of this CCP, protect and maintain marshes and other wetlands. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate the effectiveness of current water control structures and the hydrology associated 

with structures to restore habitat for priority species. 

 Control invasive species within ponds using chemical and mechanical techniques and 

prescribed fire. 

 Monitor marsh “die-off” effects and map affected areas when necessary. 

Objective 2.3.b: Harris Neck NWR – Managed Impoundments, Marshes, and Other Wetlands: 

Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, evaluate management of impoundments for priority species, 

and over the 15-year life of this CCP, protect and maintain marshes and other wetlands. 

Strategies: 

 Rehabilitate the wood duck banding site on Bluebill Pond. 

 Refine water management capabilities. 

 Conduct vegetation transects in July-October each year. 

 Continue monitoring water quality to ensure salinity levels do not impact managed wetlands.

 Control invasive species within ponds using chemical and mechanical techniques and 

prescribed fire. 

Objective 2.3.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Marshes and Other Wetlands: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, protect and maintain refuge marshes and wetlands. 

Strategies:

 Evaluate management capabilities and priorities for the freshwater ponds/marshes. 

 Monitor potential changes in water quality due to possible increases in salinity levels from 

various sources. 

 Control invasive species within ponds using chemical and mechanical techniques and 

prescribed fire. 

Objective 2.3.d: Savannah NWR – Managed Impoundments, Marshes, and Other Wetlands: 

Within 3 years of the date of this CCP, improve active management of the 3,000-acre impoundment 

system by completing annual vegetation transects to assess habitat quality and response to 

management actions. Expand active management to the 3,000-acre East Marsh. 

Strategies: 

 Conduct vegetation transects in July-October each year. 

 Continue monitoring water quality to ensure salinity levels do not impact managed wetlands. 

 Work with Ecological Service office in Charleston to design and implement monitoring 

program by 2012 to sample for contaminants (e.g., heavy metals). 

 Oversee monitoring to determine impacts of harbor modifications to tidal marsh. 

 Control invasive species within ponds, using chemical and mechanical techniques and 

prescribed fire. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 137

 Work closely with the USACE to ensure the long-term integrity of the fresh water diversion 

canal on the Savannah NWR. 

Objective 2.3.d: Wassaw NWR – Marshes and Other Wetlands: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, protect and maintain marshes and other wetlands. 

Strategy: 

 Monitor marsh “die off” effects and map affected areas annually.

Scrub/Shrub 

Discussion: Historically, maritime scrub/shrub encompassed 1.6 million acres in the southeastern 

United States. Presently, these habitats occupy less than 10 percent of their historic range and are 

largely restricted to the Atlantic coast, especially on the sea islands. The maritime scrub/shrub 

community is composed primarily of yaupon holly, wax myrtle, and satal palmetto growing in dense 

thickets. These habitats are relatively resistant to salt spray, sun, wind, drought, and nutrient-poor 

soils. Along with maritime forest, maritime scrub/shrub represents the most important habitat for 

migratory land birds moving to and from their wintering grounds. 

Early successional habitat is currently being provided in support of the highest priority scrub/shrub 

breeding species, including painted bunting and prairie warbler. However, other refuge areas have 

the potential to be maintained in an early successional condition, possibly with the use of prescribed 

fire, on a 5- to 10-year rotation. Harris Neck NWR is one of the refuges that currently has an 

extensive scrub/shrub edge component between grasslands and forest, in addition to the under/mid 

story component of the forest itself. Buffer strips along forest-field edges and crop fields and narrow 

corridor linkages between forest patches should be managed as scrub/shrub habitat. This would 

benefit the highest priority scrub/shrub species as well as other important species including field 

sparrow, orchard oriole, white-eyed vireo, and northern bobwhite.

Objective 2.4.a: Harris Neck NWR – Scrub/shrub: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, monitor, 

maintain, and investigate species composition in the native scrub/shrub community.

Strategies: 

 Maintain the early successional community with rotational prescribed burns and evaluate 

effectiveness related to refuge goals. 

 Evaluate the removal of old runway for habitat restoration.

Grasslands 

Discussion: All native temperate grasslands have experienced major losses from agriculture, range 

management, and urban development. In addition, habitat fragmentation and degradation have been 

severe. Habitat loss is most frequently viewed when grassland is converted to cropland or other 

uses, but loss of habitat also includes more subtle degradation such as unnatural grazing regimes, 

planting of exotic grasses, and the succession of grassland to shrubland. These less-obvious 

changes have resulted in the extirpations of many local bird populations. The highest priority should 

therefore be conservation and appropriate management of the largest tracts of existing native 

grasslands to avoid habitat fragmentation and degradation. 
138 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Unfortunately, refuges have defined boundaries containing many different types of habitats and 

large tracts of grassland are not always available. Also, intense human disturbances occurring 

on the land prior to it being acquired by the Service can also be an issue. Harris Neck NWR, for 

example had land cleared, farmed, and grazed, and housed an airfield. Miles of roads and 

runways were paved with asphalt, and exotic plants, including grasses, were introduced. The 

only remaining warm season bunch grasses identified by the staff are in the genera Andropogon, 

but a complete plant inventory of the refuge is needed. 

Native warm season grasses (NWSG) are planted primarily for wildlife cover and food. Because NWSG 

grow in bunches and vary in height, this creates open space on the ground around individual plants for 

animals to move while being concealed under the plants cover. This provides excellent protection from 

predators for foraging and nesting. Many species of animals utilize the NWSG for food with seeds 

available from late summer to late winter and insects found from spring to early winter. Species inhabiting 

NWSG fields at Harris Neck are: White-tailed deer, bobwhite quail, turkey, small mammals, reptiles, 

invertebrates, Henslow’s and LeConte’s sparrows, and many other songbirds including painted buntings. 

If the fields are planted near a pine/oak stand with a scrub/shrub component along the edge, the area can 

support a host of wildlife, but each habitat will need a different prescribed fire regime. If the field is 

isolated from other habitats as may occur within the runway at Harris Neck, some small scrub/shrub 

component within the field may increase animal attraction. 

Presently, the staff has been clearing open fields at Harris Neck NWR to bare ground (i.e., mowing, 

burning, and herbiciding) and either planting NWSG or allowing the natural seed bank to respond. 

The species of grasses are: big bluestem, little bluestem, switch grass, Indian grass, and the forb 

Black-eyed Susan. These grasses need an early season growth “spring green up” and a burn regime 

every year for the first 5 years after planting. Then a 3-year rotation should be established for 

maintaining a healthy and desirable field. The fields will have to be monitored closely, especially for 

the first 5 years, to monitor greenbrier intrusion in the fields. When a 3-year rotation is established, 

only one-third of all fields should be burned in a given year allowing two-thirds of all other fields to 

remain for wildlife food and cover.

Objective 2.5.a: Harris Neck NWR – Grasslands: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, establish, 

maintain, and monitor native grasses, where applicable. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate the need for establishment of native grasses for priority species. 

 Continue research into reduction of greenbrier by using mechanical and chemical methods 

and prescribed fire. 

Dune, Beach, and Sand Bars 

Discussion: South Carolina and Georgia’s coastal beaches and dunes represent critical habitats for 

sea turtles and shorebirds. Dunes, beaches, and sand bars are critical for migratory birds as nesting, 

feeding, loafing, and roosting habitat. Shorebirds depend on the invertebrate prey populations these 

habitats support to complete their migration. Intertidal sand beaches provide foraging habitat for a 

great number of shorebirds, including sandpipers, plovers, sanderlings, turnstones, and dowitchers. 

These birds feed on the abundant invertebrate fauna of intertidal areas and nest among the sparsely 

vegetated dunes and beach wrack. Sea turtles nest on barrier island beaches and feed in offshore 

waters and several rare plants are found in interdune or rear dune/bluff habitats. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 139

Lack of sand, as a result of dams and dredged harbors, is having a negative impact on these 

habitats. Because of dredging operations in the Savannah River delta, the barrier islands in coastal 

Georgia have become sand starved. Littoral drift occurs from north to south; therefore, sand 

historically came out of the mouth of the Savannah River and drifted south to deposit along the 

barrier islands including Blackbeard and Wassaw. This sand is now dredged from the river and 

deposited on upland disposal sites, robbing the system of its sand supply. Currently, the refuges’ 

beaches are eroding, especially at the north and middle sections of the islands. 

Beachfront property is perhaps the most highly prized real estate for residential development and 

recreation. Human activities have resulted in a wide variety of direct and indirect impacts to these 

important habitats. Impoundment of major rivers has reduced sediment input to the coastal sand-sharing 

system. In addition, construction of sea walls and jetties and dredging of tidal river channels have altered 

natural sand movement patterns along the coast, resulting in increased erosion of some beaches. Other 

activities impacting coastal beach and dune habitats include residential and commercial development, 

vehicular traffic, excessive herbivory (e.g., by feral horses), excessive predation (e.g., from feral hogs, 

raccoons, dogs, or cats), littering, artificial lighting, and unmanaged recreational use. Protection of these 

important habitats will require a concerted effort involving state, federal, and local governments, as well as 

local residents, educational groups, and civic organizations.

Objective 2.6.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Dune, Beach, and Sand Bars: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, protect, maintain, and enhance dune, beach, and sand bar habitat through active 

management and monitoring. 

Strategies: 

 Work with Corps of Engineers to change deposition sites from confined disposal areas and 

ocean disposal sites to nearshore, or onshore disposal sites to increase the amount of sand 

traveling down the coast. 

 Work with partners to procure funding to monitor impacts of near shore placement of dredge 

material on Georgia barrier island beaches. 

 Install sand fencing on beach for dune sand accretion. 

 GPS dune line annually and after major weather events. 

 Work with partners to clean up derelict fishing line, crab pots, etc., from refuge beaches and 

waters. 

Objective 2.6.b: Wassaw NWR – Dune, Beach, and Sand Bars: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

protect, maintain, and enhance dune, beach, and sand bar habitat through active management and 

monitoring. 

Strategies: 

 Work with partners to influence Corps of Engineers to change deposition sites from confined 

disposal areas and ocean disposal sites to nearshore, or onshore disposal sites to increase 

the amount of sand traveling down the coast. 

 Install sand fencing on beach for dune sand accretion. 

 Work with partners to procure funding to monitor impacts of nearshore placement of dredge 

material on Georgia’s barrier island beaches.

 GPS dune line annually and after major weather events 

 Work with partners to clean up derelict fishing line, crab pots, etc., from refuge beaches and 

waters. 
140 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Habitat Management - Waterfowl 

Discussion: The Southern Coastal Plain ecoregion is important for migrating and wintering waterfowl 

in North America. Savannah NWR provides vital foraging and resting (sanctuary) habitats within the 

Southern Coastal Plain for waterfowl and serves an integral role in a large, cooperative planning and 

habitat management effort known as the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). 

Concern over waterfowl population declines in the 1980s resulted in establishment of the NAWMP, 

which focused the attention of federal, state, and private conservation groups on critical wintering and 

breeding areas. The NAWMP is an international agreement among the United States, Canada, and 

Mexico to increase waterfowl populations by restoring critical wetland habitats across the continent. 

The Complex provides important habitat throughout the year for waterfowl with its expanse of 

impoundments and coastal wetlands and plays a role in the large, cooperative planning and habitat 

management effort of the NAWMP. As a result, the refuges are included in the Atlantic Coast Joint 

Venture (ACJV), a public-private partnership established under the auspices of the NAWMP to 

implement habitat conservation and restoration within important geographic areas for waterfowl. The 

ACJV has identified focus areas for South Carolina and Georgia along with associated waterfowl 

habitat and populations goals. In the South Carolina Low Country focus area the habitat goals are to 

protect 20,000 additional acres and enhance an additional 10,000 acres. In the Savannah River 

region of Georgia, the habitat goal is to protect, enhance, and restore 126,000 additional acres to 

benefit priority waterfowl species. 

Wood ducks are year-round residents of the southern United States. Preferred habitats include 

forested wetlands, wooded and shrub swamps, tree-lined rivers, streams, sloughs, and beaver 

ponds. Wood ducks seek food in the form of acorns, other soft and hard mast, weed seeds, and 

invertebrates found in shallow flooded timber, shrub swamps, and along stream banks. They loaf 

and roost in more secluded areas and dense shrub swamps. Wood ducks are cavity nesters, seeking 

cavities in trees within a mile of water. Brood survival is higher in situations where nests are close to 

water. Due to conversion of forest lands to urban sprawl, agriculture, some forestry practices, and 

competition for nest sites from a host of other species, the lack of natural cavities is known to limit 

reproduction. Nest boxes are commonly used to supplement natural cavities and increase local 

production of wood ducks. However, box programs are not an end to all nesting problems and in 

some cases can actually limit the breeding success of local populations. Wood duck nest boxes 

should be cleaned and repaired at least annually. Production can be increased by more frequent 

checks and cleaning of boxes, but this must be weighed with other time constraints. Refuges with 

active volunteer programs are often best equipped to adequately manage nest box programs through 

the use of volunteer man-power (USFWS 2008). 

Objective 2.7.a: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management - Waterfowl: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, manage impoundments to provide moist-soil vegetation or emergent and floating leafed 

vegetation to provide life-cycle needs during the migration and wintering periods to support 10-15 

percent of South Carolina’s total wintering dabbling and diving duck population. 

Strategies: 

 Actively manage 3,000 acres of impounded wetlands in semi-permanent flooded and/or moistsoil conditions to annually meet the current wintering population goals for waterfowl. 

 Maintain adequate open water to vegetation ratio in semi-permanently flooded impoundments. 

 Maintain and improve existing bottomland habitat in lieu of expanding or eliminating the 

current wood duck nest box program. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 141

Habitat Management – Non-game birds 

Objective 2.8.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Habitat Management - Non-game birds: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, provide through restoration and/or management a diversity of habitats to 

support priority species in the Southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate and maintain and/or increase priority non-game bird breeding, migrating, and 

wintering habitat. 

 Reduce mowing on levees to allow grasses to go to seed and confine mowing activities to late 

March. 

 Evaluate role of fire in managing habitats for priority non-game species. 

 Work with partners and/or volunteers to evaluate the effect of habitat management activities 

(i.e., increased surveys).

Objective 2.8.b: Harris Neck NWR – Habitat Management - Non-game birds: Over the 15-year 

life of this CCP, provide through restoration and/or management a diversity of habitats to support 

priority species in the Southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate and maintain and/or increase priority non-game bird breeding, migrating, and 

wintering habitat. 

 Evaluate role of fire in managing habitats for priority non-game species. 

 Work with partners and/or volunteers to evaluate the effect of habitat management activities 

(i.e., increased surveys).

Objective 2.8.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Habitat Management - Non-game birds: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, provide through restoration and/or management a diversity of habitats to 

support priority species in the Southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate and maintain and/or increase priority non-game bird breeding, migrating, and 

wintering habitat. 

 Evaluate role of fire in managing habitats for priority non-game species. 

 Work with partners and/or volunteers to evaluate the effect of habitat management activities 

(i.e., increased surveys).

Objective 2.8.d: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management - Non-game birds: Over the 15-year life 

of this CCP, provide through restoration and/or management a diversity of habitats to support priority 

species in the Southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Strategy: 

 Maintain existing or improve bottomland hardwood forest conditions that support priority 

species. 
142 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 2.8.e: Tybee NWR – Habitat Management - Non-game birds: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, protect and enhance maritime forest and scrub/shrub-dominated habitat for non-game birds. 

Strategies: 

 Assess and quantify current maritime scrub/shrub habitat. 

 Maintain and improve quality maritime scrub/shrub habitat by using fire and/or other means to 

control invasive species.

Objective 2.8.f: Wassaw NWR – Habitat Management - Non-game birds: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, provide through restoration and/or management a diversity of habitats to support priority 

species in the Southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate and maintain and/or increase priority non-game bird breeding, migrating, and 

wintering habitat. 

 Reduce mowing on and adjacent to roads to increase grass seed production; confine mowing 

activities to late March. 

 Evaluate the use of prescribed fire to manage habitat for painted buntings and other 

neotropical migratory and resident scrub/shrub birds.

Habitat Management – Wetland-dependent Birds 

Objective 2.9.a: Pinckney Island NWR – Habitat Management - Wetland-dependent Birds: 

Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, evaluate and expand habitat management for priority wading 

bird species. 

Strategies: 

 Restore/improve habitat in wetlands and ponds for priority wading birds. 

 Seasonally close nesting areas, as necessary, to prevent disturbance during April-August. 

Objective 2.9.b: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management - Wetland-dependent Birds: Within 5 

years of the date of this CCP, provide a mix of suitable habitat annually to meet the needs for 

wetland-dependent birds during critical life stages. 

Strategies: 

 Provide adequate shorebird habitat during north- and south-bound migration within managed 

impoundments. 

 Annually meet/discuss with the Corps of Engineers its management plans to target dredging 

operations to provide suitable beach nesting habitat. 

 Provide additional habitat for other wetland-dependent birds during appropriate seasons. 

 Pursue completing a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the Corps of Engineers to 

specify special use permit conditions and opportunities to place spoil on islands to maintain 

and enhance nesting habitat for this group of birds. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 143

Objective 2.9.c: Tybee NWR – Habitat Management - Wetland-dependent Birds: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, in partnership with the Corps of Engineers, protect and/or create nesting areas 

and high-tide roost areas. 

Strategy: 

 Pump dredge sand to create new nesting habitat in coordination with the Corps of Engineers.

Habitat Management –Threatened and Endangered Species 

Objective 2.10.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Habitat Management - Threatened and Endangered 

Species: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, expand management activities that contribute to the 

recovery of threatened and endangered species and state-listed species of special concern sufficient 

to discern population trends and effects of habitat management. 

Strategies: 

 Enhance existing wood stork habitat and explore rehabilitating impoundments to establish 

nesting colonies. 

 Evaluate methods to decrease dune erosion to provide optimum nesting habitat for 

loggerhead sea turtles. 

 Identify and manage, if appropriate, habitat for other federal- or state-listed species. 

Objective 2.10.b: Harris Neck NWR – Habitat Management - Threatened and Endangered 

Species: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, expand management activities that contribute to the 

recovery of threatened and endangered species and state-listed species of special concern sufficient 

to discern population trends and effects of habitat management. 

Strategies: 

 Continue to establish cypress stands for nesting purposes and supplement with artificial 

nesting platforms for wood storks. 

 Identify, maintain, and improve potential habitat for gopher tortoise and associated species by 

appropriate management techniques.

 Identify and manage, where appropriate, habitat for other federal- or state-listed species.

Objective 2.10.c: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management - Threatened and Endangered 

Species: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, expand management activities that contribute to the 

recovery of threatened and endangered species and state-listed species of special concern sufficient 

to discern population trends and effects of habitat management. 

Strategies: 

 Provide nesting and roosting habitat to benefit Rafinesque’s big-eared bats (state 

endangered) by maintaining large cavity trees and minimizing human disturbance. 

 Protect feeding areas for manatees by posting signs along the refuge access points in the 

Savannah River to make the public/boaters aware of manatees in the area. 

 Work with Georgia Port Authority (GPA) and local industries to manage effluent to prevent 

“thermally trapping” manatees in the Savannah River. 

 Continue to improve foraging habitat for wood stork. 
144 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Continue to work with GPA and Corps of Engineers to protect federally endangered shortnose sturgeon spawning habitat. 

 Identify and manage, where appropriate, habitat for other federal- or state-listed species. 

Objective 2.10.d: Wassaw NWR – Habitat Management - Threatened and Endangered Species: 

Over the 15-year life of this CCP, expand management activities that contribute to the recovery of 

threatened and endangered species and state-listed species of special concern sufficient to discern 

population trends and effects of habitat management. 

Strategies: 

 Enhance existing wood stork foraging habitat.

 Evaluate methods to decrease dune erosion to provide optimum nesting habitat for 

loggerhead sea turtles.

 Identify and manage, where appropriate, habitat for other federal- or state-listed species.

Habitat Management - Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants 

Discussion: The habitats of the Complex support a variety of mammals, including game species such 

as white-tailed deer and squirrels. Other non-game mammals include raccoon, beaver, opossum, 

striped skunk, coyote, bobcat, river otter, and gray fox. Other mammals are more rarely recorded on 

refuge lands but can be expected to include several species of rodents and bats. Several priority 

species “Species of Greatest Conservation Need” recognized by the States of South Carolina and 

Georgia are known to, or may, inhabit refuge lands. 

Deer utilize a wide range of habitats, and most Complex forest management actions aimed at priority 

species, such as migratory birds, will provide direct benefits to deer by increasing the quality of deer habitat. 

Such active management will provide a diversity and abundance of understory, midstory, and overstory 

stand components (i.e., complex forest stand structure) to meet the needs of a variety of non-game forest 

birds and resident wildlife, including deer. Bottomland forests provide ideal habitat for many species of 

mammals. Food and cover are abundant and diverse, and a variety of mammalian species is present. 

With the great variety of reptile and amphibian species, it is challenging to address all species with similar 

recommendations. However, common management concepts can provide benefits for many species in 

this group. Many reptile and amphibian species use multiple habitats for foraging, reproduction, 

hibernation, or dispersal and require connectivity between habitat types (e.g., shallow lakes and adjacent 

bottomland hardwood forests, cypress brakes, bottomland hardwood forests and adjacent uplands, 

temporary wetlands and adjacent uplands) to meet distinct life cycle habitat needs. Connectivity allows 

for important migration and dispersal corridors. Construction of barriers to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife 

such as improved roads should be discouraged and other alternatives such as road underpasses sought. 

Many reptiles and all amphibians are closely linked to aquatic habitats and respond positively to various 

inundation conditions. Wetland management should mimic natural hydrologic patterns, with year-to-year 

variation in rates, periods, and depths of inundation. Resident reptiles and amphibians should respond 

well through time as this (managed) natural cycle varies to create conditions that benefit a variety of 

species needs. Within upland sites, isolated seasonal wetlands are a particularly important and rare 

habitat type for reptiles and amphibians. Isolated seasonal wetlands are fish-free, and have high 

amphibian productivity when surrounded by complementary upland habitats. These features should be 

noted and protected, or alternatively restored as appropriate upland sites are acquired within refuge lands. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 145

Objective 2.11.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Habitat Management - Other Fish, Wildlife, and 

Plants: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, evaluate and expand, if appropriate, management 

activities to provide healthy habitats for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Continue to remove feral hog populations. 

 Maintain or reduce deer herd density through public hunting program to ensure herd health 

and to maintain habitat quality for other wildlife species. 

 Protect and/or restore habitat important to amphibian and reptile populations on the refuge by 

implementing recommended management guidelines and BMPs (see Southeast Partners in 

Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Habitat Management Guidelines). 

Objective 2.11.b: Harris Neck NWR – Habitat Management - Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: 

Over the 15-year life of this CCP, evaluate and expand, if appropriate, management activities to 

provide healthy habitats for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate the need and feasibility of creating more ephemeral ponds to address the needs of 

priority amphibians and reptiles. 

 Remove or control feral hog populations. 

 Maintain or reduce deer herd density through a public hunting program to ensure herd health 

and to maintain habitat quality for other wildlife species.

 Protect and/or restore habitat important to amphibian and reptile populations on the refuge by 

implementing recommended management guidelines and BMPs (see Southeast Partners in 

Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Habitat Management Guidelines). 

Objective 2.11.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Habitat Management - Other Fish, Wildlife, and 

Plants: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, evaluate and expand, if appropriate, management 

activities to provide healthy habitats for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Maintain or reduce deer herd density through public hunting program to ensure herd health 

and to maintain habitat quality for other wildlife species. 

 Protect and/or restore habitat important to amphibian and reptile populations on the refuge by 

implementing recommended management guidelines and BMPs (see Southeast Partners in 

Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Habitat Management Guidelines). 

Objective 2.11.d: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management - Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: 

Over the 15-year life of this CCP, evaluate and expand, if appropriate, management activities to 

provide healthy habitats for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Maintain or reduce deer herd density at a level to ensure herd health and to maintain habitat 

quality. 
146 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Consider partnership opportunities that might develop via the Southeast Bat Conservation 

Initiative to help meet the management goals for bat species listed in the South 

Carolina/Georgia Wildlife Action Plans.

 Provide habitat protection of amphibian and reptile populations through annual monitoring of water 

quality and preventing the loss of seeps. 

 Control feral hog populations with special emphasis on Solomon Tract and Dodge Tram Road. 

 Protect and/or restore habitat important to amphibian and reptile populations on the refuge by 

implementing recommended management guidelines and BMPs (see Southeast Partners in 

Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Habitat Management Guidelines). 

Objective 2.11.e: Wassaw NWR – Habitat Management - Other Fish, Wildlife, and Plants: Over 

the 15-year life of this CCP, evaluate and expand, if appropriate, management activities to provide 

healthy habitats for other fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Strategies: 

 Continue to remove feral hog populations. 

 Maintain or reduce deer herd density through public hunting program to ensure herd health 

and to maintain habitat quality for other wildlife species.

Habitat Management - Invasive Species 

Discussion: According to 2006 Refuge Annual Performance Planning (RAPP) data, 2 million acres of 

Refuge System lands are infested with invasive plants and 4,471 invasive animal species have been 

recorded. The Complex staff has been working to control invasive species on the refuges; however, 

at present only a small percentage of infested acres have been treated on most refuges. “Early 

detection, rapid response” is the key phrase used today when describing the need for action in 

control of these species. For example, the exotic ambrosia beetle with its associated fungus can kill a 

mature red bay tree in a matter of weeks. The beetle arrived in 2002 in a shipment at the Port of 

Savannah and the invasion was rapid. By 2004, refuges were most likely already infested 45 miles 

away from point of entry, and at present most, if not all, red bay trees are dead. The lethal affect of 

the beetles’ fungus to species in the Laurel family has been termed “Laurel Wilt.” Early detection of 

the beetle may not have helped in this case due to the rapid speed of infestation and no obvious 

means to control it as of today, but education and training is needed for the more detectable exotic 

species. It is important for the Complex staff to be trained in coastal Georgia’s most detrimental 

exotics and the best means to control them. 

The Complex has several documented native and non-native invasive plant species. These invasive 

species impact the refuge’s ability to carry out desired wildlife and habitat management objectives and at 

times also reduce the range of visitor service activities. Many invasive plant species are difficult to control 

without applying chemical treatments. The moist-soil conditions conducive to providing quality habitat for 

migratory waterfowl management frequently encourage germination of those invasive species. 

Intrusion of invasive plants can displace native plant and animal species and change habitat productivity 

through changes such as vegetative community, insect community, and structural environment. 

Native plants can be classified as invasive when high enough densities suppress all other plant 

growth and a mono-specific composition prevails. Cattails, Sesbania, and other emergent aquatic 

plants have the potential to choke most ponds. Eradication is not the goal, but control is necessary to 

keep open water in the impoundments. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 147

At Harris Neck NWR, the wood stork rookery and associated ponds require open water for the 

birds to nest and feed. This open water habitat also benefits numerous other water birds and 

animals. Leaving some emergent vegetation along the pond edge is also important for other 

refuge residents like redwing blackbirds, rails, etc. In 2005 and 2006, the refuge staff used 

chemical, mechanical, or a combination of to attempt to reduce the prevalent vegetation in 

different ponds. The best results were with a combination of both aquatic herbicide and using a 

marsh master to push or mow down the dead vegetation. There was over a 50 percent reduction 

of cattails in Woody Pond, resulting in open water with cattails around the edge. In Snipe Pond 

the vegetation composition went from 90 percent Sesbenia cover to 75 percent mixed flora that 

was beneficial to waterfowl and other fauna. The other ponds where only one method was used 

had a reduction in noxious unwanted plants but to a much lesser degree. 

Another native plant that has become invasive to Harris Neck NWR is greenbrier (Smilax sp.). A 3-year 

prescribed fire regime on most open fields, particularly within and around the runway, resulted in fields 

composed of almost entirely Smilax. The dormant season burns set back other vegetation but did not 

harm the extensive tuberous root system of Smilax. With the reduced competition from most other plants, 

Smilax flourished the fourth spring. Although some species like rabbits may utilize the habitat and deer 

and gopher tortoises will feed on it, the diversity of plant species in the fields was greatly reduced. 

Chinese tallow is a common invasive plant species throughout the Complex. It invades wet areas 

such as stream banks and ditches but can also grow in drier upland sites. It can tolerate salty soils, 

flooding, and shady environments. Chinese tallow tree is a serious threat because of its ability to 

invade high-quality undisturbed forests and marsh. Seed is dispersed both by birds and by water. 

Chinese tallow can displace native vegetation as well and alters the soil conditions due to the high 

amount of tannins present in its leaf litter. Control of this invasive plant needs to begin as soon as 

possible, before the ability to control it is lost and it severely impacts this delicate environment. 

Cogon grass, which is sold in nurseries as "Japanese Blood Grass" or "Red Baron," has been described 

as an even greater threat to native habitats than kudzu. The Georgia Forestry Commission is committed 

to keeping cogon grass out of Georgia. Neighboring states, including Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida, 

already are experiencing major infestations of this pest plant. Cogon grass spreads easily because the 

seeds are extremely fluffy and easily windblown. In addition, the seeds attach readily to machinery, such 

as mowers and harrows, so that when the equipment is moved to another area, seeds can disperse and 

the plant invades new habitat. Moving equipment from an area where cogon grass is present to barrier 

islands without completely cleaning equipment is very dangerous. Also, the plant burns extremely hot 

and wildfires could result in catastrophic damage to native vegetation. 

Nuisance animal species can also be a problem for the refuges within the Complex, as they are 

known to cause significant negative impacts on native populations through direct predation, 

disturbance, or destruction of site-specific plant communities (e.g., seasonal wetlands) and soil 

conditions. The spread of feral hogs to almost all habitats in the southeast constitutes a significant 

threat to wildlife habitat including the refuges of the Complex. This exotic threat to wildlife habitat is 

now common throughout the southeastern United States., continues to increase in range and 

intensity, and should be countered aggressively to keep population numbers severely reduced. 

Objective 2.12.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Habitat Management - Invasive Species: Within 5 

years of completion of the date of this CCP, prioritize the need for the removal or control of 

nuisance/exotic/invasive plants and animals on the refuge that are hindering the ability to meet 

habitat/population objectives. 
148 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Strategies: 

 Write an Integrated Pest Management Plan by 2016. 

 Complete a baseline inventory of all nuisance/exotic/invasive plant/animals by 2013. 

 Conduct annual inspections of the forest community for the presence of exotic or invasive species. 

 Develop a GIS layer of all invasive plant occurrences on the refuge by 2013. 

 Train refuge staff and volunteers in the detection, identification, and treatment of invasive species. 

 Systematically remove invasive species by mechanical and chemical methods and prescribed 

burning. 

 Support proposed research on invasive species. 

Objective 2.12.b: Harris Neck NWR – Habitat Management - Invasive Species: Within 5 years of 

the date of this CCP, prioritize the need for the removal or control of nuisance/exotic/invasive plants 

and animals on the refuge that are hindering the ability to meet habitat/population objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Write an Integrated Pest Management Plan by 2016. 

 Complete a baseline inventory, including a GIS layer, of all nuisance/ exotic/invasive 

plants/animals by 2013. 

 Conduct annual inspections of the forest community for the presence of exotic or invasive species. 

 Train refuge staff and volunteers in the detection, identification, and treatment of invasive species. 

 Systematically remove invasive species by mechanical and chemical means and by prescribed 

burning. 

 Support proposed research on invasive species.

Objective 2.12.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Habitat Management - Invasive Species: Within 3 

years of the date of this CCP, prioritize the need for the removal or control of nuisance/exotic/invasive 

plants and animals on the refuge that are hindering the ability to meet habitat/population objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Complete a baseline inventory of all nuisance/exotic/invasive plants/animals by 2012. 

 Develop a GIS layer of all invasive plants by 2012. 

 Write an Integrated Pest Management Plan by 2016. 

 Conduct annual inspections of the forest community for the presence of exotic or invasive species. 

 Systematically remove/control invasive species by mechanical and chemical means, and by 

prescribed burning. 

 Support proposed research on invasive species.

Objective 2.12.d: Savannah NWR – Habitat Management - Invasive Species: Within 5 years of 

the date of this CCP, prioritize the need for the removal or control of nuisance/exotic/invasive plants 

and animals on the refuge that are hindering the ability to meet habitat/population objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Write an Integrated Pest Management Plan by 2016. 

 Complete a baseline inventory of all nuisance/exotic/invasive plants/animals by 2013. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 149

 Conduct annual inspections of the forest community for the presence of exotic or invasive 

species. 

 Develop a GIS layer of all invasive plant occurrences by 2013. 

 Systematically control invasive species by mechanical and chemical means, and by 

prescribed burning. 

 Support research on invasive species. 

Objective 2.12.e: Tybee NWR – Habitat Management - Invasive Species: Within 5 years of the 

date of this CCP, prioritize the need for the removal or control of nuisance/exotic/invasive plants and 

animals on the refuge that are hindering the ability to meet habitat/population objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Complete a baseline inventory of all nuisance/exotic/invasive plant/animals on the refuge by 2011. 

 Develop a GIS layer of all invasive plant occurrences on the refuge by 2011. 

 Initiate phased removal of existing invasive species.

Objective 2.12.f: Wassaw NWR – Habitat Management - Invasive Species: Within 5 years of the 

date of this CCP, prioritize the need for the removal or control of nuisance/exotic/invasive plants and 

animals on the refuge that are hindering the ability to meet habitat/population objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Write an Integrated Pest Management Plan by 2016. 

 Complete a baseline inventory of all nuisance/exotic/invasive plants/animals by 2013. 

 Conduct annual inspections of the forest community for the presence of exotic or invasive species. 

 Develop a GIS layer of all invasive plants by 2013. 

 Train refuge staff and volunteers in the detection, identification, and treatment of invasive species.

Wildlife Disease 

Discussion: Wildlife, domestic animals, and humans share a large and increasing number of 

infectious diseases. The continued globalization of society, human population growth, and 

associated landscape changes will further enhance interfaces between wildlife, domestic animals, 

and humans, thereby facilitating potential emergence of infectious disease. The wildlife 

component of this triad has received inadequate focus in the past to effectively protect human 

health as evidenced by such contemporary diseases as SARS, Lyme disease, West Nile Fever, 

and a host of other emerging diseases. Further, habitat loss and other factors associated with 

human-induced landscape changes have reduced past ability for many wildlife populations to 

overcome losses due to various causes. This disease emergence and resurgence has reached 

unprecedented importance for the sustainability of desired population levels for many wildlife 

populations and for the long-term survival of some species (USGS 2009). The need to develop 

and implement a Complex-wide disease contingency/response plan was identified in the scoping 

stage of the CCP process. This management plan will identify actions and proper response 

procedures in the case of a wildlife disease outbreak.

Objective 2.13.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Wildlife Disease: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

plan for and appropriately respond to all wildlife disease threats. 
150 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Strategies: 

 Write a Complex-wide Refuge Disease Plan by 2016. 

 Enlist the services of the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study Group to evaluate 

deer herd health once every 5 years. 

Objective 2.13.b: Harris Neck NWR – Wildlife Disease: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, plan for 

and appropriately respond to all wildlife disease threats. 

Strategies: 

 Write a Complex-wide Refuge Disease Plan by 2016. 

 Enlist the services of the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study Group to evaluate 

deer herd health once every 5 years.

Objective 2.13.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Wildlife Disease: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

plan for and appropriately respond to all wildlife disease threats. 

Strategies: 

 Write a Complex-wide Refuge Disease Plan by 2016. 

 Enlist the services of the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study Group to evaluate 

deer herd health once every 5 years.

Objective 2.13.d: Savannah NWR – Wildlife Disease: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, plan for 

and appropriately respond to all wildlife disease threats. 

Strategies: 

 Write a Complex-wide Refuge Disease Plan by 2016. 

 Enlist the services of the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study Group to evaluate 

deer herd health once every 5 years. 

 Participate in Avain Influenza monitoring when duck banding, or during waterfowl hunts. 

Objective 2.13.e: Tybee NWR – Wildlife Disease: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, plan for and 

appropriately respond to all wildlife disease threats. 

Strategy: 

 Write a Complex-wide Refuge Disease Plan by 2016. 

Objective 2.13.f: Wassaw NWR – Wildlife Disease: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, plan for and 

appropriately respond to all wildlife disease threats. 

Strategies: 

 Write a Complex-wide Refuge Disease Plan by 2016. 

 Enlist the services of the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study Group to evaluate 

deer herd health once every 5 years.

 Participate in Avain Influenza monitoring when duck banding, or during waterfowl hunts. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 151

Fire Management 

Discussion: Fire is a natural process that historically shaped the habitats of the Complex. Pine forest 

and grassland vegetation communities evolved in the presence of natural fire and Native American 

use of fire. These fire-dependent and fire-adapted habitats require this type of disturbance to 

complete their life cycle. This natural fire cycle has been interrupted largely due to human activities 

and as a result, many vegetative communities have moved away from their historical succession. 

All landscapes have a natural burn regime; the variance is in the return interval, or how frequently an area 

naturally burns. Southeastern forests, consisting largely of fire-dependent or fire-adapted plants, grasses 

and trees, have relatively short fire return intervals. This is especially true of pine-dominated forests. 

Oak-dominated forests have longer fire return intervals and generally have less tolerance than pines for 

fire intensity and duration. The Complex has some unique challenges in that generally less is known 

about natural fire frequencies on barrier and back barrier islands. Research in like habitats are currently 

being conducted on- and off-refuge properties to assist in gaining a better understanding. Data collected 

from refuge wildfires occurring within the past 30 years confirm that coastal islands do indeed burn, and 

can burn with surprising intensity. On the Complex, fire is viewed as an essential ecological process that 

aids in the maintenance and improvement of habitat conditions. 

Objective 2.14.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Fire Management: Within 5 years of date of this 

CCP, maintain wildfire response programs and evaluate the use of prescribed fire to achieve healthy 

habitats and reduce fuels. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a fuels monitoring plan by 2015. 

 Annually monitor management units that were burned to evaluate habitat and wildlife 

response. 

 Evaluate and use prescribed fire, where appropriate, to accomplish annual wildlife habitat 

management objectives. 

 In accordance with Service policy (610 FW 1) and the Complex’s Wilderness Plan, develop 

MRA for wildfire suppression strategies in wilderness. 

Objective 2.14.b: Harris Neck NWR – Fire Management: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

maintain wildfire response programs and evaluate the use of prescribed fire to achieve healthy 

habitats and reduce fuels. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a fuels monitoring plan by 2015. 

 Annually monitor management units that were burned to evaluate habitat and wildlife 

response. 

 Evaluate and use prescribed fire, where appropriate, to accomplish annual wildlife habitat 

management objectives for forest (particularly pine forests), grasslands, old fields, and 

marsh (managed and natural) habitats. 

 Respond appropriately to all wildfires on refuge due to close proximity of highways and 

communities. 
152 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 2.14.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Fire Management: Within 5 years of the date of this 

CCP, maintain wildfire response programs and evaluate the use of prescribed fire to achieve healthy 

habitats and reduce fuels. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a fuels monitoring plan by 2015. 

 Evaluate and use, where appropriate, prescribed fire to accomplish annual wildlife habitat 

management objectives. 

 Annually monitor management units that were burned to evaluate habitat and wildlife 

response. 

 Respond appropriately to all wildfires on refuge due to close proximity of highways and 

communities.

Objective 2.14.d: Savannah NWR – Fire Management: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

maintain wildfire response programs and evaluate the use of prescribed fire to achieve healthy 

habitats and reduce fuels. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a fuels monitoring plan by 2015. 

 Annually monitor management units that were burned to evaluate habitat and wildlife 

response. 

 Evaluate and use, where appropriate, prescribed fire to accomplish annual wildlife habitat 

management objectives. 

 Respond appropriately to all wildfires on refuge due to close proximity of highways and 

communities. 

 Research impacts of burning tidal marsh. 

Objective 2.14.e: Wassaw NWR – Fire Management: Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, 

manage and maintain prescribed fire and wildfire response programs to achieve healthy habitats and 

reduce fuels. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a fuels monitoring plan by 2015. 

 Annually monitor management units that were burned to evaluate habitat and wildlife 

response. 

 Evaluate the potential for Appropriate Management Response to reduce fuel loads in areas 

that could benefit from fire. 

 Use photo points and vegetative transects to monitor annual changes in the vegetation since 

the 2007 wildfire. 

 Conduct tree mortality surveys in the area burned by the 2007 wildfire. 

 Support research through partnerships to determine benefits and effectiveness of burning salt 

marshes for wildlife management. 

 Maintain the permanent firebreak using mechanical methods such as mowing and disking. 

 Evaluate and use, where appropriate, prescribed fire to accomplish annual wildlife habitat 

management objectives.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 153

Forest Management 

Discussion: In the midst of the meandering bayous and rivers of the southern United States are 

extensive stands of bottomland hardwood and longleaf pine forests. From the rare yellow fringed 

orchid to the colorful cerulean warbler, the magnificent Southern Coastal Plain Forests teem with 

unique plants and wildlife, including more than 300 rare or endangered species (The Nature 

Conservancy 2009). 

The iconic trees that make up the Southern Coastal Plain Forests — such as longleaf pine, bald cypress, 

tupelo gum, and cherrybark oak — provide natural flood protection and resilience to climate change while 

sustaining migratory birds and rare animals like the gopher tortoise and Bachman's sparrow. 

Throughout the Southern Coastal Plain, areas that can sustain bottomland hardwood forests have 

been reduced by 90 percent, and longleaf pine forests have been reduced by more than 95 percent. 

Unsustainable forest management, agriculture, development, and the suppression of fire have 

diminished and degraded the south’s once extensive forests, putting wildlife and people at immediate 

risk. For the last decade, forest product companies have sold tens of millions of acres of land, 

threatening sustainable management of these forests and putting land at risk for development and 

fragmentation (The Nature Conservancy 2009). 

Forest stand quality can be improved or maintained through the use of appropriate silvicultural 

treatments. Many breeding forest birds and migratory species are dependent upon dense understory 

and ground vegetation for nesting and foraging. Thus, desired future conditions in much of the 

existing mature forest stands would emphasize increasing structural diversity by providing a more 

open canopy to allow sunlight to reach the ground in support of increased ground and understory 

cover. In addition, to provide benefits to various priority forest birds, where possible, forest stand 

treatments should encourage development of emergent trees that rise above the predominant forest 

canopy, retain large diameter class trees, provide large standing, dead or dying trees, contribute 

coarse woody debris to the forest floor, and retain small diameter cavity trees. Forest management 

would provide benefits to priority PIF forest birds as well as a suite of priority wildlife species 

dependent upon forests. 

In addition to managing existing forests, there may be opportunity for forest restoration. Forest 

restoration in areas adjacent to forest blocks increases block size to benefit more area sensitive 

breeding birds and might reduce potential implications of depredation and parasitism by brownheaded cowbirds. If forest restoration is considered, placement adjacent to current blocks would 

provide, for a window of time, habitat for early successional forest species such as prairie warbler and 

for forest edge species such as painted buntings. Over time, restoration would increase the 

contiguous forest block size. 

Objective 2.15.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Forest Management: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, expand active management of forests through the development of a forest management plan. 

Strategies: 

 Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop and implement a forest management plan. 

 Work with Georgia Forestry Commission to cooperate/coordinate forest management 

activities. 
154 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 2.15.b: Harris Neck NWR – Forest Management: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

expand active management of forests as outlined in a forest management plan. 

Strategies: 

 Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop and implement a forest management plan. 

 Work with Georgia Forestry Commission to cooperate/coordinate forest management activities. 

Objective 2.15.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Forest Management: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

expand active management of forests as outlined in a forest management plan. 

Strategies: 

 Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop and implement a forest management plan. 

 Work with South Carolina Forestry Commission to cooperate/coordinate forest management 

activities.

Objective 2.15.d: Savannah NWR – Forest Management: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

expand active management of forests as outlined in a forest management plan. 

Strategies: 

 Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop and implement a forest management plan. 

 Work with South Carolina Forestry Commission and Georgia Forestry Commission to 

cooperate/coordinate forest management activities. 

Objective 2.15.e: Wassaw NWR – Forest Management: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, expand 

active management of forests as outlined in a forest management plan. 

Strategies: 

 Within 5 years of the date of this CCP, develop and implement a forest management plan. 

 Work with Georgia Forestry Commission to cooperate/coordinate forest management activities. 

Habitat Management – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise 

Discussion: Global climate change poses risks to human health and to terrestrial and aquatic 

ecosystems. Important economic resources such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and water 

resources also may be affected. Warmer temperatures, more severe droughts and floods, and sea 

level rise could have a wide range of impacts. All of these stresses can add to existing stresses on 

resources caused by other influences such as population growth, land-use changes, and pollution. 

Georgia 

[EPA, September 1997, “Climate Change in Georgia”] 

Over the next century, climate in Georgia could experience changes. For example, based on 

projections made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and results from the United 

Kingdom Hadley Centre’s climate model (HadCM2), a model that accounts for both greenhouse 

gases and aerosols, by 2100 temperatures in Georgia could increase by about 2°F in summer (with a 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 155

range of 1-4°F), 3°F in winter and spring (with a range of 1-7°F), and 4°F in fall (with a range of 2-

9°F). Precipitation is estimated to increase by about 10% in winter and spring and by 15-40% in 

summer and fall. Other climate models may show different results, with winter precipitation 

increasing more than summer precipitation. In summer and fall, the amount of precipitation on 

extreme wet days is likely to increase. The frequency of extreme hot days in summer would increase 

because of the general warming trend. Although it is not clear how severe storms such as hurricanes 

would change, an increase in the frequency and intensity of summer thunderstorms is possible. 

Sea level rise could lead to flooding of low-lying property, loss of coastal wetlands, erosion of 

beaches, saltwater contamination of drinking water, and decreased longevity of low-lying roads, 

causeways, and bridges. In addition, sea level rise could increase the vulnerability of coastal areas 

to storms and associated flooding. 

Georgia’s coastline, only about 100 miles long, has a barrier island system that includes 14 

islands — The Golden Isles of Georgia. The barrier islands play a vital role in protecting the 

mainland from storm surges and tidal action. Behind the barrier islands of the Georgia coast lie 

extensive salt marshes dominated by smooth cordgrass. These 375,000 acres of salt marshes 

make up one-fourth of the remaining salt marshes in the eastern United States. The highly 

productive marshes provide homes for oysters and clams and serve as nursery grounds for 

young shrimp, crab, and fish. The marshes protect the shorelines from erosion and also act as a 

purification system by filtering out many pollutants added to the waters by human activities. Five 

major river systems drain into Georgia’s small coastal area. At Fort Pulaski, sea level already is 

rising by 13 inches per century, and it is likely to rise another 25 inches by 2100 (EPA September 

1997). Wetlands along the low-lying coasts of Georgia are subsiding and may be either flooded 

or washed away as sea levels rise. Possible responses to sea level rise include building walls to 

hold back the sea, allowing the sea to advance and adapting to it, and raising the land (e.g., by 

replenishing beach sand, elevating houses and infrastructure). Each of these responses will be 

costly, either in out-of-pocket costs or in lost land and structures. For example, the cumulative 

cost of sand replenishment to protect the coast of Georgia from a 20-inch sea level rise by 2100 

is estimated at $154 million to $1.3 billion (EPA September 1997). 

Water resources are affected by changes in precipitation as well as by temperature, humidity, and 

wind. Changes in stream flow tend to magnify changes in precipitation. Water resources in drier 

climates tend to be more sensitive to climate changes. Because evaporation is likely to increase with 

warmer climate, it could result in lower river flow and lower lake levels, particularly in the summer. If 

stream flow and lake levels drop, groundwater also could be reduced. In addition, more intense 

precipitation could increase flooding. Rivers in Georgia drain into the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic 

Ocean. The Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River System flows south into the Gulf; those draining 

east into the Atlantic include the Savannah, the Altamaha, and several smaller rivers. Atlanta’s water 

supply is provided by Lake Lanier, a large reservoir in the upper Chattahoochee River basin. Several 

large reservoirs in the Savannah River basin along the Georgia-South Carolina border provide flood 

control, recreation, and hydropower for the region. The major effects of climate change in these river 

systems would result from precipitation changes rather than increased evaporation from warmer 

temperatures. Significant increases in precipitation could increase flood risk, whereas significant 

decreases could adversely affect power production, navigation, and recreation. 

Ecosystems in Georgia consist largely of extensive forests and diverse wetlands, including the 

Okefenokee Swamp, extensive coastal tidal marshes, tidal creeks, and riparian forests, all of which 

are sensitive to changes in climate, especially changes in rainfall. Many species in Georgia’s 

ecosystems are already near their range limits; given extensive human activity in the state, climate 

change could harm many of them. These include several endangered or threatened species such as 
156 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

the wood stork, loggerhead sea turtle, piping plover, alligator, and manatee. Changes in rainfall 

would alter stream flow and flooding patterns of wetlands, which are very sensitive to fairly small 

changes in water levels. Some warm water species that are sensitive to water temperature, such as 

the black crappie, could lose much of their habitat. 

Trees and forests are adapted to specific climate conditions, and as climate warms, forests will 

change. Changes in tree species, geographic range, and the health and productivity of forests can 

be expected with a warmer climate. If conditions also become drier, the current range of forests 

could be reduced and replaced by grasslands and pasture. Even a warmer and wetter climate could 

lead to changes; trees that are better adapted to warmer conditions, such as tropical evergreens, 

would prevail over time. Under these conditions, forests could become denser. These changes 

could occur during the lifetimes of today’s children, particularly if change is accelerated by other 

stresses such as fire, pests, and diseases. Some of these stresses would themselves be worsened 

by a warmer and drier climate. 

In Georgia, longleaf and slash pine forests are likely to expand northward, and they could replace 

some of the forests currently dominated by loblolly and shortleaf pines. Wetter conditions would favor 

expansion of oak and hickory deciduous forests and the gum and cypress forests found along the 

southeastern seaboard. In contrast, under drier conditions, 10-15 percent of current forested areas in 

the west-central area of the state could be replaced by grasslands (EPA September 1997). 

South Carolina 

[EPA 1998, “Climate Change in South Carolina”] 

Over the last century, the average temperature in Columbia, South Carolina, has increased 1.3°F, 

and precipitation has increased by up to 20 percent in many parts of the state. These past trends 

may or may not continue into the future. Over the next century, climate in South Carolina may 

change even more. For example, based on projections made by the Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change and results from the United Kingdom Hadley Centre’s climate model (HadCM2), a 

model that accounts for both greenhouse gases and aerosols, by 2100 temperatures in South 

Carolina could increase by 3°F (with a range of 1-5°F) in all seasons (slightly less in winter and 

summer, slightly more in spring and fall). Precipitation is estimated to increase by 15 percent (with a 

range of 5-30 percent) in spring, slightly more in summer and fall, and slightly less in winter. Other 

climate models may show different results, especially regarding estimated changes in precipitation. 

The impacts described in the sections that follow take into account estimates from different models. 

The frequency of extreme hot days in summer would increase because of the general warming trend. 

It is not clear how the severity of storms such as hurricanes might be affected, although an increase 

in the frequency and intensity of summer thunderstorms is possible. 

Sea level rise could lead to flooding of low-lying property, loss of coastal wetlands, erosion of 

beaches, saltwater contamination of drinking water, and decreased longevity of low-lying roads, 

causeways, and bridges. In addition, sea level rise could increase the vulnerability of coastal areas 

to storms and associated flooding. There are 2,876 miles of tidally influenced shoreline in South 

Carolina. Historical rates of accretion and erosion vary considerably across the state’s coastline — 

erosion has been most severe on a 20-mile section of the Grand Strand and parts of the Santee 

delta, while Kiawah Island is accreting at a rate of 9 feet per year. Erosion is likely to increase under 

a 1- 3-foot rise in sea level. The potential for increased storm damage as a result of sea level rise is 

particularly high along the densely developed Grand Strand. At Charleston, sea level already is rising 

by 9 inches per century, and it is likely to rise another 19 inches by 2100. The cumulative cost of 

sand replenishment to protect the coast of South Carolina from a 20-inch sea level rise by 2100 is 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 157

estimated at $1.2-$9.4 billion. However, sand replenishment may not be cost-effective for all coastal 

areas in the state, and therefore some savings could be possible. 

Along the Coastal Plain, increased groundwater pumping in areas such as Hilton Head-Beaufort and 

Myrtle Beach has resulted in saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. Increased use of 

groundwater for irrigated agriculture in the Coastal Plain also has resulted in declining groundwater 

levels and may have accelerated the formation of sinkholes in the region’s limestone terrain. 

These conditions, particularly if accompanied by sea level rise, could be exacerbated by warmer, drier 

conditions. Lower flows and higher temperatures could worsen current water quality concerns such as 

the excessive growth of aquatic weeds in lakes and the impacts of wastewater discharges on shellfish 

harvests and recreation. Higher rainfall could mitigate these effects, but would contribute to local 

flooding. Higher rainfall also could increase erosion and exacerbate levels of pesticides and fertilizers 

in runoff from agricultural areas. It also could increase pollution in runoff from urban areas. The effect 

of buried hazardous wastes on groundwater quality, particularly in Barnwell County and near the 

Savannah River Plant, is a concern in South Carolina. Although the effects of climate change on the 

movement of pollutants are not well understood, changes in infiltration rates could affect the rate at 

which pollutants migrate throughout an aquifer. Increased precipitation could contribute to groundwater 

contamination by increasing the inflow of contaminants into nearby aquifers. 

South Carolina is dominated by coastal ecosystems that provide critically important habitat for 

threatened and endangered species such as the American alligator, Bachman’s warbler, loggerhead 

sea turtle, piping plover, red-cockaded woodpecker, shortnose sturgeon, and wood stork. Important 

wetland habitats include Carolina bays and pocosins, both of which contain a number of endangered 

plants, many with restricted ranges. Terrestrial habitats include large areas of oak-hickory-pine forest 

and the extreme southern part of the Appalachian highlands. 

Sea level rise under a changed climate could threaten many low-lying coastal ecosystems. A study at the 

Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge revealed that at the current rate of sea level rise (9 inches per 

century), the refuge’s marshlands and barrier islands could be reduced in size by as much as 58 percent 

by 2100 (EPA 1998). Changes in climate could increase this rate. Endangered birds such as the 

Bachman’s warbler and red-cockaded woodpecker will lose more than 50 percent of their habitat. The 

intrusion of seawater from rising seas also will threaten the viability of freshwater systems. Extensive 

human coastal development is an impenetrable barrier to the landward migration of coastal wetland 

habitats. Habitat for warm water fish could also be reduced by hotter temperatures. In the forests of the 

western part of the state, pine seeds and seedlings, able to tolerate extreme environmental conditions, 

may come to dominate hardwood stands at the expense of oak and hickory. 

Trees and forests are adapted to specific climate conditions, and as climate warms, forests will change. 

These changes could include changes in species composition, geographic range, and health and 

productivity. If conditions also become drier, the current range of forests could be reduced and 

replaced by grasslands and pasture. Even a warmer and wetter climate could lead to changes; trees 

that are better adapted to warmer conditions, such as subtropical evergreens, would prevail over time. 

Under these conditions, forests could become denser. These changes could occur during the lifetimes 

of today’s children, particularly if the change is accelerated by other stresses such as fires, pests, and 

diseases. Some of these stresses would themselves be worsened by a warmer and drier climate. 

Commercial timber production could also be affected by resulting changes in growth rates, plantation 

acreage and management, and market conditions. In South Carolina, longleaf and slash pine forests 

are likely to expand northward, and could replace some of the forests currently dominated by loblolly 

and shortleaf pines. Wetter conditions would favor expansion of oak and hickory deciduous forests as 

well as the gum and cypress forests found along the southeastern seaboard. In contrast, under drier 
158 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

conditions, 10-15 percent of the forested areas in the northwestern part of the state could be replaced 

by grasslands and pasture. Maritime forests, important for their recreational and aesthetic value and for 

their role in coastal hydrology, could be affected adversely by changes in the frequencies of large 

storms associated with climate change (hurricanes in the late summer and fall, nor’easters in the winter 

and spring). Warmer and drier conditions could increase the frequency and intensity of fires, and result 

in increased losses to important commercial timber areas. Even warmer and wetter conditions could 

stress forests by increasing the winter survival of insect pests. 

Objective 2.16.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Monitor and 

evaluate the effects of climate change and sea level rise on habitats through active surveys and 

partnerships. 

Strategies: 

 Develop partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and other 

climate change-oriented research entities such as universities and local, state, and federal

partners in developing and refining models to predict potential short- and long-term changes 

to habitats from climate change/sea level rise on coastal ecosystems. 

 Monitor changes in local climate and hydrologic metrics through installation of weather 

stations and monitoring wells. 

 Develop adaptive management approaches to priority habitats that mitigate the long-term 

effects of climate change and sea level rise. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

Objective 2.16.b: Harris Neck NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Monitor and evaluate the 

effects of climate change and sea level rise on habitats through active surveys and partnerships. 

Strategies: 

 Develop partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and other 

climate change-oriented research entities such as universities and local, state, and federal

partners in developing and refining models to predict potential short- and long-term changes 

to habitats from climate change/sea level rise on coastal ecosystems. 

 Monitor changes in local climate and hydrologic metrics through installation of weather 

stations and monitoring wells. 

 Develop adaptive management approaches to priority habitats that mitigate the long-term 

effects of climate change and sea level rise. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys.

Objective 2.16.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Monitor and evaluate 

the effects of climate change and sea level rise on habitats through active surveys and partnerships. 

Strategies: 

 Develop partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and other 

climate change-oriented research entities such as universities and local, state, and federal

partners in developing and refining models to predict potential short- and long-term changes 

to habitats from climate change/sea level rise on coastal ecosystems. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 159

 Monitor changes in local climate and hydrologic metrics through installation of weather 

stations and monitoring wells. 

 Develop adaptive management approaches to priority habitats that mitigate the long-term 

effects of climate change and sea level rise. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

Objective 2.16.d: Savannah NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Monitor and evaluate the 

effects of climate change and sea level rise on habitats through active surveys and partnerships. 

Strategies: 

 Develop partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and other 

climate change-oriented research entities such as universities and local, state, and federal

partners in developing and refining models to predict potential short- and long-term changes 

to habitats from climate change/sea level rise on coastal ecosystems. 

 Monitor changes in local climate and hydrologic metrics through installation of weather 

stations and monitoring wells. 

 Develop adaptive management approaches to priority habitats that mitigate the long-term 

effects of climate change and sea level rise. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys. 

Objective 2.16.e: Tybee NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Monitor and evaluate the 

effects of climate change and sea level rise on habitats through active surveys and partnerships. 

Strategies: 

 Develop partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and other 

climate change-oriented research entities such as universities and local, state, and federal

partners in developing and refining models to predict potential short- and long-term changes 

to habitats from climate change/sea level rise on coastal ecosystems. 

 Monitor changes in local climate and hydrologic metrics through installation of weather 

stations and monitoring wells. 

 Develop adaptive management approaches to priority habitats that mitigate the long-term 

effects of climate change and sea level rise. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys.

Objective 2.16.f: Wassaw NWR – Climate Change/Sea Level Rise: Monitor and evaluate the 

effects of climate change and sea level rise on habitats through active surveys and partnerships. 

Strategies: 

 Develop partnerships with USGS Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and other 

climate change-oriented research entities such as universities and local, state, and federal

partners in developing and refining models to predict potential short- and long-term changes 

to habitats from climate change/sea level rise on coastal ecosystems. 

 Monitor changes in local climate and hydrologic metrics through installation of weather 

stations and monitoring wells. 
160 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Develop adaptive management approaches to priority habitats that mitigate the long-term 

effects of climate change and sea level rise. 

 Monitor potential changes in floral and faunal characteristics through appropriate systematic 

and periodic surveys.

VISITOR SERVICES 

Goal 3. Where appropriate and compatible, provide environmental education, wildlife interpretation, 

and wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities. Public use will be consistent with the Refuge 

System mission and provide visitors a greater understanding and enjoyment of fish, wildlife, and their 

habitats on the Complex. 

Discussion: The Improvement Act states that compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses are the 

priority public uses of the Refuge System (e.g., hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife 

photography, and environmental education and interpretation) and will receive enhanced 

consideration over the other general public uses. The Service will permit other uses only when they 

have been proven to be both appropriate and compatible (See 605 FW 1, General Guidance, and 

603 FW 1, Appropriate Refuge Uses). 

A variety of public use opportunities are available on the Complex. Tybee NWR is the only refuge in 

the Complex (covered in this CCP) that is closed to all public use. 

Blackbeard Island NWR (over half of which is a designated Wilderness Area) is accessible only by 

boat. There are approximately 11,000 visitors to the refuge annually. About 90 percent of total 

visitation occurs during weekends on the north and south beaches. The beaches, sea breeze, and 

remote, pristine setting are the primary visitor attraction. 

There are approximately 90,000 visitors to Harris Neck NWR annually, with the primary public 

use being wildlife observation and photography. Visitor facilities include a Wildlife Drive, trails, 

fishing docks, and interpretive signs and kiosks. There is a small visitor contact area in the lobby 

of the office which has a few portable exhibits. The information desk is usually staffed from 10 

a.m. to 4 p.m. by volunteers. There is a continuing effort to recruit, build, and maintain a 

volunteer program at Harris Neck NWR. 

Pinckney Island NWR, adjacent to Hilton Head, South Carolina, is an island of wildlife habitat 

surrounded by a "sea of development." There are approximately 200,000 visitors to Pinckney Island 

NWR annually, the most of any of the seven refuges in the Complex. The island is used exclusively 

as a nature and forest preserve. Studying, viewing, and photographing the island's wildlife and 

scenery are the most popular activities throughout the year. Visitor facilities at Pinckney Island NWR 

include a kiosk with information/interpretive panels, wayside exhibits, parking area, and trails. 

The Savannah NWR has approximately 170,000 visitors annually. There are over 38 miles of river 

and 25 miles of streams and creeks within the refuge. Visitors have access to a 4-mile wildlife drive 

(Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive) and two trails, as well as over 30 miles of levees for hiking. The refuge 

offers seven different hunting events annually. A new visitor center is located off of U.S. Highway 17, 

6 miles north of the city of Savannah. 

There are approximately 15,000 visitors to Wassaw NWR each year, with most visits occurring on 

weekends and holidays during the summer. Wassaw Island has remained largely undisturbed and 

unspoiled as a result of the island's inaccessibility and protection efforts. Access to the refuge is only 

by boat, and most visitors anchor their boats off the north or south ends of the island. The refuge has 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 161

a boat dock at the small headquarters office on Wassaw Creek. The public is welcome to load or 

unload passengers at the dock to access trails or obtain visitor information; however, due to the small 

size of the dock, only temporary mooring is allowed. 

Visitor Services Plan 

Discussion: The need to develop and implement a visitor services management plan was identified 

in the visitor services review, held in the scoping stage of the CCP process. This management plan 

will identify resource needs and establish visitor service programs based on goals, objectives, and 

strategies identified in this CCP.

Objective 3.1.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Visitor Services Plan: Develop and implement a 

visitor services plan by 2016. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a visitor services plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2016. 

Objective 3.1.b: Harris Neck NWR – Visitor Services Plan: Develop and implement a visitor 

services plan by 2016. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a visitor services plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2016.

Objective 3.1.c: Pinckney Island NWR - Visitor Services Plan: Develop and implement a visitor 

services plan by 2016. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a visitor services plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2016. 

Objective 3.1.d: Savannah NWR – Visitor Services Plan: Develop and implement a visitor 

services plan by 2016. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a visitor services plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2016. 

Objective 3.1.e: Wassaw NWR – Visitor Services Plan: Develop and implement a visitor services 

plan by 2016. 

Strategy: 

 Designate staff to develop and implement a visitor services plan. This plan should be 

completed by the year 2016. 
162 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Interpretation 

Discussion: Interpretive opportunities communicate important fish, wildlife, habitat, and other resource 

issues to visitors of all ages and abilities. The Refuge System tailors messages and delivery methods to 

specific audiences, presents them in appropriate locations, and encourages visitors to take positive 

actions supporting refuge goals and the Refuge System mission (See 605 FW 7, Interpretation). The 

Complex offers a diverse slate of guided and unguided interpretive trails, bike paths, wildlife drives, and 

kiosks. Interpretive tours of Harris Neck, Savannah, and Pinckney Island NWRs are available for 

school, civic, and conservation groups by appointment only. These tours are generally given by 

either staff or trained refuge volunteers and require a minimum of 2-weeks’ notice. Guided 

interpretive tours for individuals and families are available for all of the refuges except for Tybee NWR 

and can also be arranged through the special use permit holders (fees may apply.) These are 

private, commercial, or non-profit organizations that maintain a permit with the Service to conduct 

business on the refuge. A number of outfits currently hold permits for conducting guided interpretive 

tours on each refuge. 

Objective 3.2.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Interpretation: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

maintain and where possible expand interpretive opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Add interpretation about cultural resources and Wilderness to kiosk, printed materials, and 

website. 

 Integrate interpretive plans and themes that reflect wilderness significance to the refuge and 

the Refuge System. 

 Provide wilderness ethics information to visitors using the refuge for the designated 

Wilderness Area. 

 Include a section about “What Makes Blackbeard Island NWR Unique” to hunting/fishing 

brochure. 

 Develop a trail guide/map. 

 Develop a wayside exhibit at Barbour River Landing to interpret key resources. 

 Develop portable exhibit. 

 Develop video, PowerPoint, and virtual tour programs. 

 Develop and implement interpretive programs and provide increased visitor contacts on 

holiday weekends. 

 Provide standard refuge-specific messages to commercial guides and other groups, and 

ensure that those messages are included in the programs they offer. 

Objective 3.2.b: Harris Neck NWR – Interpretation: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain 

and where possible, expand interpretive opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop wayside exhibits and interpretive fact sheets related to cultural and/or natural 

resources. 

 Plan for the development of Visitor Center/Environmental Education facility at Harris Neck 

NWR entrance. 

 Include a section about “What Makes Harris Neck NWR Unique” to hunting/fishing brochure. 

 Develop portable exhibit. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 163

 Provide standard refuge-specific messages to commercial guides and other groups, and 

ensure that those messages are included in the programs they offer.

Objective 3.2.c: Pinckney Island NWR - Interpretation: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

maintain and where possible, expand interpretive opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Update the interpretive exhibits at the parking lot kiosk. 

 Provide additional wayside exhibits at the most popular spots on the trail system. 

 Form a group of volunteers to provide regularly scheduled interpretive tours. 

 Create a select team of volunteers to function as “roving interpreters” during the peak 

visitation periods. 

 Include a section about “What Makes Pinckney NWR Unique” to hunting/fishing brochure. 

 Plan for the development of Visitor/Welcome Center at Last End Point. 

 Evaluate impacts from current visitor use levels. 

 Develop portable exhibit. 

 Provide standard refuge-specific messages to commercial guides and other groups, and 

ensure that those messages are included in the programs they offer. 

Objective 3.2.d: Savannah NWR – Interpretation: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand interpretive opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Install wayside exhibit about neotropical migratory songbirds at the Cistern and Tupelo Trails. 

 Offer volunteer-led interpretive tours on wildlife drive. 

 When visitor center is open, add an environmental educator to the staff with additional duties 

to include development and presentation of interpretive programs. 

 Develop additional interpretive materials. 

 Develop portable exhibit. 

 For consistency, use the themes developed for the visitor center exhibits for other interpretive 

displays throughout the refuge. 

 Provide standard refuge-specific messages to commercial guides and other groups, and 

ensure that those messages are included in the programs they offer. 

 Include a section about “What Makes Savannah NWR Unique” to hunting/fishing brochure. 

Objective 3.2.e: Wassaw NWR – Interpretation: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand interpretive opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Add interpretation about barrier island ecology to kiosk, printed materials, and website. 

 Include a section about “What Makes Wassaw NWR Unique” to hunting/fishing brochure to 

communicate non-consumptive messages. 

 Develop a trail guide/map. 

 Develop portable exhibit. 

 Develop a Wassaw NWR interpretive exhibit for the Savannah NWR Visitor Center. 

 Develop a video, PowerPoint, and virtual tour program for Wassaw NWR. 
164 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Provide standard refuge-specific messages to commercial guides and other groups, and 

ensure that those messages are included in the programs they offer. 

Environmental Education 

Discussion: The Complex conducts limited environmental education programs with partners (e.g., 

non-profit organizations and educational institutions). Staff and/or volunteers address all 

environmental education programming requests on a case-by-case basis, developing individual 

programs as needed. Environmental education programs are developed with minimal staff 

involvement; however, refuge staff conducts an annual Complex-wide refuge orientation/educational 

program for all special use permit holders. 

Blackbeard Island NWR accommodates few environmental education programs and activities on the 

refuge due to limited staffing and the lack of reliable, affordable transportation of groups to the refuge. 

However, a partnership with the University of Georgia’s Marine Education Center and Aquarium 

provides instructors and transportation for classes on Wassaw NWR. 

Currently, Harris Neck NWR does not have an established environmental education plan, nor are the 

on-site environmental education programs based entirely on Georgia State Curriculum Standards. 

Staff does work with area educators to accommodate site-visits and/or arrange to send a volunteer to 

the school for off-site programming. 

Pinckney NWR relies on partners to conduct environmental education programs. Currently, the 

Coastal Discovery Museum has a partnership with the state to develop curriculum-based 

environmental education programs and brings several school groups to the refuge annually. While 

the refuge is an ideal outdoor classroom, there are no public restrooms or environmental education 

facilities to support classes of more than a few hours duration. 

Most of the formal environmental education programming on the Savannah NWR is conducted by 

Wilderness Southeast by special use permit. Wilderness Southeast brings selected middle school 

classes from Chatham County to the refuge amounting to approximately 10 classes per year. The 

children, mostly inner city, are taken on a pontoon boat tour in the Savannah River and are taught 

about the value of tidal freshwater marshes to the coastal Georgia ecosystem. Being a nonprofit 

organization, Wilderness Southeast relies entirely on grants for all its environmental education 

programming and the refuge staff collaborates with Wilderness Southeast to secure grants from 

refuge partners, such as the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. 

Objective 3.3.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Environmental Education: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand environmental education opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop environmental education materials that support state curriculum standards and can 

be downloaded from refuge website. 

 Expand partnerships with university and other educational organizations to provide programs 

and internships. 

 Recruit and train volunteers to provide educational programs. 

 Acquire grants through Friends group and partners to provide online educational materials, 

student field trips, and onsite teacher workshops. 

 Develop an environmental education shelter near headquarters. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 165

Objective 3.3.b: Harris Neck NWR – Environmental Education: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

maintain, and where possible, expand current environmental education opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Expand the use of volunteers to provide on- and off-site environmental education programs. 

 Develop 2-3 refuge-specific programs. 

 Expand/strengthen current educational partnerships. 

 Recruit and train volunteers to provide environmental education programs. 

 Provide downloadable environmental education materials on the refuge website about the 

wildlife and habitats that correspond to state curriculum standards. 

 Plan for the development of Visitor Center/Environmental Education facility at Harris Neck 

NWR entrance. 

 Develop collaborative environmental education programs with area county schools that have a 

laboratory/classroom component utilizing the facilities of the new visitor center.

Objective 3.3.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Environmental Education: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand current environmental education opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop 2 to 3 refuge-specific environmental education programs. 

 Recruit and train volunteers to provide environmental education programs. 

 Develop an environmental education pavilion near Nini Chapin Pond. 

 Plan for the development of Visitor/Welcome Center at Last End Point that will include 

classroom facilities. 

 Provide downloadable environmental education materials on the refuge website about the 

wildlife and habitats that correspond to State Curriculum Standards. 

Objective 3.3.d: Savannah NWR – Environmental Education: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

maintain, and where possible, expand environmental education opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop refuge-specific environmental education programs to conduct on request. 

 Construct an environmental education classroom/laboratory facility. 

 Recruit and train volunteers to provide environmental education programs. 

 Provide downloadable environmental educational materials on the refuge website about the 

wildlife and habitats that correspond to State Curriculum Standards. 

Objective 3.3.e: Wassaw NWR – Environmental Education: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

maintain, and where possible, expand environmental education opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate and determine the effectiveness of all environmental education activities. 

 Provide downloadable environmental educational materials on the refuge website about the 

wildlife and habitats that correspond to State Curriculum Standards.

 Expand educational partnerships. Include information about barrier island ecology. 

 Recruit and train volunteers to provide educational programs. 
166 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Acquire grants through Friends group and partners to provide online educational materials, 

student field trips, and on-site teacher workshops. 

 Develop an environmental education shelter near headquarters. 

Wildlife Observation and Photography 

Discussion: Wildlife observation and wildlife photography (reference 605 FW 4, Wildlife Observation, 

and 605 FW 5, Wildlife Photography) are appropriate wildlife-dependent recreational uses of refuge 

lands, when compatible. 

At Blackbeard Island NWR a diversity of wildlife is available to observe and photograph, including 

wading birds, songbirds, mammals, and reptiles. Since the refuge is over 50 percent wilderness 

and accessible only by boat, traditional structures, such as driving tours, observation towers, and 

boardwalks, are not suitable and therefore not provided for the public. Access to the various 

areas of the refuge for wildlife observation and photography is by foot, bicycle, and boat. Typical 

visitors spend most or all of their time on the beach. Birdwatchers and nature photographers hike 

on the trails in the interior of the island, primarily in cooler months of spring and autumn. The 

approximate 20 miles of roads and trails are open to the public year-round, unless posted as 

closed and during hunts. Most visitors use a small percentage of the trails, mainly to access the 

beach from the dock on Blackbeard Creek. 

Currently, visitors to Harris Neck NWR have excellent wildlife observation opportunities on over 15 

miles of paved roads and trails. Wildlife photography opportunities are good even without improved 

facilities, such as photo blinds. The 4-mile wildlife drive is accessible by either automobile or bicycle 

and provides visitors easy access to wildlife observation areas. From the wildlife drive visitors can 

park and access five trails, by foot or bike, which includes three unimproved levee observation areas. 

There are three trails, totaling 6 miles, further along the wildlife drive on the remnant roads and 

runways of the former army air base that are open to both foot and bicycle traffic. The wildlife drive 

intersects all three of these trails, which allows visitors a great deal of flexibility in parking and 

exploring these areas. Snipe Pond Loop (2 miles), Airfield Perimeter Route (2.7 miles), and Goose 

Pond Loop (1.3 miles) all provide observation and photography opportunities for wading birds, 

shorebirds, waterfowl, and songbirds. 

Pinckney Island NWR has over 9 miles of trails open to hiking and biking. All of the trail surfaces are 

sand, gravel, or grass; none are wheelchair accessible. Visitors on these trails can see a variety of 

wading birds, shorebirds, and songbirds as well as alligator, deer, and squirrels. Several of the 

freshwater ponds provide nesting areas for herons, egrets, and ibis. 

The focal point of wildlife viewing at Savannah NWR is the Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive located off South 

Carolina Highway 170. The one-way drive is 4 miles long. It is open sunrise to sunset and has an 

electronic gate. Visitors traveling the wildlife drive can see a variety of ducks, shorebirds, wading 

birds, songbirds, alligators, raptors, and mammals. 

All levees within the impoundment area north of South Carolina Highway 170 are open for 

walking and biking except from December 1 through February. During this 3-month period, the 

northern impoundments are closed to reduce disturbance to wintering waterfowl. However, the 

levees leading from South Carolina Highway 170, across from the wildlife drive exit, to the Tupelo 

Trail remain open. Cistern Trail, Tupelo Trail, and all levees and dikes are open year-round for 

visitors to walk and view wildlife. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 167

On Wassaw NWR, a 20-mile system of dirt roads and trails provides excellent opportunities for 

visitors to observe and photograph a diversity of wildlife. Access to the various areas of the refuge for 

wildlife observation and photography is by foot, bicycle, and boat. Most visitations occur at the north 

end of the island along the beach, due to the difficulty of access on the south end. Along the 7 miles 

of undeveloped beach, the tracks of nesting, threatened loggerhead sea turtles can sometimes be 

observed from May through June. A variety of shorebirds also feed and loaf here throughout the 

year. Egret and heron rookeries, along with resident and migratory songbirds, can be observed from 

the inland forest roads and trails. 

Objective 3.4.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Wildlife Observation and Photography: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand wildlife observation and photography 

opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Identify wildlife viewing areas and make information available on the refuge website and 

publications 

 Work with partners to provide photography workshops and photography competitions. 

 Develop wildlife checklist. 

Objective 3.4.b: Harris Neck NWR – Wildlife Observation and Photography: Over the 15-year 

life of this CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand walking, driving, and boating access for 

wildlife observation and photography. 

Strategies: 

 Establish trailhead kiosks (one panel) at start of each trail that provides information about the 

trail. 

 Build a two-tiered observation platform (first tier ADA accessible) for viewing of managed 

impoundments. 

 Install spotting scopes on observation deck at ADA accessible walkway at Woody Pond. 

 Identify wildlife viewing areas and make information available on the refuge website and 

publications 

 Work with partners to provide photography workshops and photography competitions.

Objective 3.4.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Wildlife Observation and Photography: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand walking and bicycling access for wildlife 

observation and photography. 

Strategies: 

 Create opportunities for wildlife observation around some of the ephemeral ponds. 

 Cut some of the vegetation to provide access and/or viewing windows along trails. 

 Plan for the development of a concessionaire operated transport system to increase wildlife 

observation/photography opportunities. 

 Plan for the development of Visitor/Welcome Center and observation tower at Last End Point 

to increase wildlife observation opportunities, environmental education, interpretation, and 

photography. 

 Plan for wildlife photography classes. 
168 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Identify wildlife viewing areas and make information available on the refuge website and 

publications. 

 Work with partners to provide photography workshops and photography competitions. 

Objective 3.4.d: Savannah NWR - Wildlife Observation and Photography: Within 5 years of 

completion of this CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand walking, driving and boating access 

for wildlife observation and photography. 

Strategies: 

 Promote the Cistern Trail as a neotropical migratory songbird observation and photo 

opportunity. 

 Consider developing spur kayak trails onto the refuge from the Savannah River between 

Beck’s Ferry and Mill Stone Landing. Partner with counties to develop kiosks with kayak trail 

information at Beck’s Ferry and Mill Stone Landings. 

 Explore options for a permanent photo blind. 

 Construct two-tiered observation tower on wildlife drive with lower tier ADA accessible. 

 Establish a user fee for wildlife drive with staffed fee booth during peak use; honor system rest 

of year. Hire seasonal fee collectors. 

 Expand existing trail system. 

 Identify wildlife viewing areas and make information available on the refuge website and 

publications. 

 Work with partners to provide photography workshops and photography competitions. 

Objective 3.4.e: Wassaw NWR – Wildlife Observation and Photography: Within 5 years of 

completion of this CCP, maintain, and where possible, expand wildlife observation and photography 

opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Identify prime wildlife viewing areas and make information available on the refuge website and 

in all publications. 

 Work with partners to provide photography workshops and photography competitions on the 

refuge or at a partner’s facility. 

 Create a species checklist.

Fishing 

Discussion: Fishing (including crabbing and cast netting) is an appropriate use of wildlife resources 

on units of the Refuge System, when compatible. Fishing programs will be quality programs, 

conducted in a safe and cost-effective manner, and to the extent practicable, carried out in 

accordance with state regulations (See 605 FW 3, Fishing). 

Blackbeard Island NWR is composed of 2,000 acres of brackish creeks, tidal waters, and salt marsh 

and these areas are open to fishing year-round. Visitors also use nets and traps to shrimp and crab 

during open seasons. Freshwater fishing has not occurred since 2001 when the effects of prolonged 

drought rendered the ponds inaccessible by boat. At one time, artesian wells supplied the 

impoundments on the refuge with freshwater. Unfortunately, mainland industrial development, and its 

demand for freshwater from the aquifer, has depleted the wells, leaving rain as the sole source of 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 169

freshwater for the impoundments. Flag Pond is now mostly filled with cattails, willows, and other 

nuisance vegetation and no longer supports fishing. 

Harris Neck NWR allows sport fishing, including saltwater fishing, pier crabbing and cast netting in 

designated areas of the refuge based on the following: 

 Anglers may fish in estuarine waters year-round from sunrise to sunset. 

 Bank fishing in the Barbour River, adjacent to the boat-tramp, is permitted from sunrise to sunset. 

 Anglers may use Barbour River boat ramp year-round from 4 a.m. to midnight daily. A separate 

dock is maintained by the refuge for the Barbour River Watermen’s Association (BRWA). This 

dock is reserved for permitted members of the BRWA only (through a special use permit); the 

public is not allowed access to it. 

 Two wooden fishing piers on the Harris Neck Creek have been provided near the refuge entrance 

for public use. Fishing, crabbing, and/or cast-netting are permitted from sunrise to sunset. 

 A short, cemented boat-ramp is located on Harris Neck Creek near the two wooden fishing piers. 

This ramp can accommodate small boats, canoes, and kayaks. 

 Fishing is prohibited in all the freshwater ponds (Bluebill, Woody, Snipe, Teal, Greenhead, and 

Goose Ponds). 

Freshwater fishing is not permitted on Pinckney Island NWR. There is currently a high volume of 

saltwater fishing that takes place within waters adjacent to the refuge from anglers entering the area 

from the C.C. Haigh, Jr., Landing, a county managed boat launch facility located within the refuge 

boundary. The refuge has a trail guide that identifies the boat launch area and specifies that 

saltwater fishing and shell fishing are permitted by boat only. A fishing plan for Pinckney Island NWR 

is not required since state regulations govern fishing in tidal waters. 

Fishing opportunities on Savannah NWR are not heavily promoted as a major public use. The refuge 

offers freshwater fishing opportunities in designated areas. There are four county owned and 

maintained boat launch facilities immediately outside the refuge boundaries, which provide access to 

fishing the navigable waterways within the refuge. The refuge has a combined hunting and fishing 

regulations brochure specifically for Savannah NWR, which provides general fishing regulation 

information. An up-to-date fishing plan for Savannah NWR does not exist. 

At Wassaw NWR, all brackish creeks, tidal waters, and salt marsh areas within the refuge are open to 

fishing year-round. Wassaw NWR is bordered on the east by the Atlantic Ocean where surf fishing is 

permitted year-round as well. Visitors also use nets and traps to shrimp and crab during open seasons. 

There are no freshwater fishing opportunities on Wassaw NWR. Mainland boat ramps available to 

visitors include: Coffee Bluff, Delegal, Skidaway Narrows, Isle of Hope, Bull River, and Fort McAllister. 

Objective 3.5.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Fishing: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, 

and where possible, expand current fishing opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Add species list and state website for saltwater regulations to refuge brochure. 

 Partner with Friends and other organizations to conduct a Youth Fishing Clinic for the 

Complex to promote recreational fishing. 
170 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 3.5.b: Harris Neck NWR – Fishing: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand current saltwater fishing opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Redesign and reconstruct fishing piers at Harris Neck Creek. 

 Explore the design and construction of a fishing pier on the Barbour River. 

 Partner with Friends and other organizations to conduct a Youth Fishing Clinic for the 

Complex to promote recreational fishing.

Objective 3.5.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Fishing: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand current saltwater fishing opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Collaborate with SCDNR to modify its fishing publications and website to include information 

specific to shell fishing within refuge waters. 

 Partner with Friends and other organizations to conduct a Youth Fishing Clinic for the 

Complex to promote recreational fishing. 

Objective 3.5.d: Savannah NWR – Fishing: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and where 

possible, expand current fishing opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Install kiosk at the Clydesdale Creek fishing site to provide refuge fishing information. 

 Consider starting a youth fishing clinic/event to promote recreational fishing. 

 Partner with counties to install refuge fishing information kiosks at main boat launches 

(Abercorn, Mill Stone, Beck’s Ferry, and Houlihan Landing.) Include kayak trail info at Beck’s 

Ferry and Mill Stone. 

 Partner with Friends and other organizations to conduct a Youth Fishing Clinic for the 

Complex to promote recreational fishing. 

Objective 3.5.e: Wassaw NWR – Fishing: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and where 

possible, expand current saltwater fishing opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Add species list and state website for saltwater regulations to refuge brochure. 

 Partner with Friends and other organizations to conduct a Youth Fishing Clinic for the 

Complex to promote recreational fishing.

Hunting 

Discussion: Public hunting is used as a tool to help manage the game species populations to 

accomplish refuge wildlife and habitat management objectives. These carefully managed hunts 

attempt to maintain populations at a level deemed compatible for the natural environment, while 

providing recreational opportunities for a segment of the visiting population. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 171

On Blackbeard Island NWR, two 3-day archery hunts for deer and feral hogs are conducted each 

year. An easy to understand hunt brochure that includes regulations and other pertinent information 

is available at the Complex contact stations, the refuge website, and by mail. These hunts are not 

accessible to hunters in wheelchairs due to the rugged conditions of the island. However, a 

wheelchair accessible hunt is offered at nearby Savannah NWR. 

Harris Neck NWR allows hunting of white-tailed deer and feral hogs on designated areas of the 

refuge in accordance with state hunting regulations. The refuge administers two types of big game 

hunts, a 3-day bow hunt and a 1-day gun hunt, which has a quota. An easy to understand hunt 

brochure that includes regulations and other pertinent information is available at the refuge complex 

contact stations, the refuge website, and by mail. 

Pinckney Island NWR allows gun hunting of white-tailed deer only within designated areas of the 

refuge in accordance with state hunting regulations. The refuge offers a 1-day quota gun hunt for 

deer in November and when necessary for management purposes, an additional 1-day hunt may be 

held in December. An easy to understand hunt brochure that includes regulations and other pertinent 

information is available at the Complex contact stations, the refuge website, and by mail. 

Savannah NWR offers seven different hunts annually. The species hunted are deer, feral hog, squirrel, 

turkey, and waterfowl. Each hunt is allowed in designated areas of the refuge in accordance with state 

hunting regulations. An easy to understand hunt brochure that includes regulations and other pertinent 

information is available at the Complex contact stations, the refuge website, and by mail. 

At Wassaw NWR, one 3-day primitive weapons hunt and one 3-day gun hunt for deer and feral hogs 

are conducted each year. An easy to understand hunt brochure that includes regulations and other 

pertinent information is available at the Complex contact stations, the refuge website, and by mail. 

These hunts are not accessible to hunters in wheelchairs due to the rugged conditions of the island. 

However, a wheelchair accessible hunt is offered at nearby Savannah NWR. 

Objective 3.6.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Hunting: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, 

and where possible, expand current hunting opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Review and update hunt plan annually. 

 Evaluate the option of allowing the use of crossbows in hunts on the refuge. 

Objective 3.6.b: Harris Neck NWR – Hunting: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand current hunting opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Review and update hunt plan annually. 

 Investigate ways to streamline quota hunt process by providing online notification and 

distribute permits at check-in the morning of the hunt. Offer standby opportunity. 

 Explore the possibility of having a youth deer hunt. 

 Evaluate the option of allowing the use of crossbows during refuge hunts.
172 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 3.6.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Hunting: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand current hunting opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Review and update hunt plan annually. 

 Explore the possibility of having a youth deer hunt. 

 Investigate ways to streamline quota hunt process by providing online notification and 

distributing permits at check-in the morning of the hunt. Offer stand-by opportunity. 

 Evaluate the option of allowing the use of crossbows during refuge hunts. 

Objective 3.6.d: Savannah NWR – Hunting: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and 

where possible, expand current hunting opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Review and update hunt plan annually. 

 Include the Solomon Tract in the hunt program as youth small game hunt area. 

 Utilize the visitor center as site for youth hunter education course. 

 Evaluate the option of allowing the use of crossbows during refuge hunts 

Objective 3.6.e: Wassaw NWR – Hunting: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, maintain, and where 

possible, expand current hunting opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Review and update hunt plan annually. 

 Evaluate the option of allowing the use of crossbows during refuge hunts.

Volunteer Program and Friends Group 

Discussion: Volunteer Program 

The Complex has a diverse and active volunteer corps; however, there is not a dedicated volunteer 

coordinator on staff. Potential volunteers complete an application packet and are interviewed by the 

staff to ensure that individuals selected match refuge program needs. Most volunteers find out about 

the program from other volunteers, the volunteer page on the website, and on the Internet site: 

volunteer.gov. Orientation and training is provided by designated staff at specific sites and may vary 

according to the assignments. Each refuge spends part of its annual volunteer budget on volunteer 

travel and training. The rest of the budget goes towards volunteer uniforms and recognition items. 

The Complex holds an annual Volunteer Recognition Day, with a cook-out and awards ceremony. 

On Blackbeard Island NWR, volunteers assist staff in preparing for the island archery hunts, 

repairing restrooms, shop, dock, dikes, and trails. Three interns are recruited each year for 12 

weeks to conduct the sea turtle project. In Fiscal Year 2008, 13 volunteers contributed a total of 

2,984 hours of service to the refuge. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 173

Two trailer pads at Harris Neck NWR allow the refuge to host resident volunteers, who stay for at least 

one month and may work at Blackbeard Island in addition to Harris Neck. The volunteer program at 

Harris Neck NWR revolves around the visitor services and natural resource management programs. In 

Fiscal Year 2008, 27 volunteers contributed a total of 3,463 hours of service to the refuge. 

The volunteer program at Pinckney Island NWR is centered on visitor services and natural resource 

management. In Fiscal Year 2008, 47 volunteers contributed a total of 1,380 hours of service to the refuge. 

The volunteer program at Savannah NWR is centered on visitor services and natural resource 

management. In Fiscal Year 2008, 10 volunteers contributed a total of 621 hours of service to the refuge. 

On Wassaw NWR, volunteers assist staff in preparing for and administering the island hunts, 

conducting bird surveys, clearing trails, general maintenance, and conducting environmental 

education programs and interpretive tours. In Fiscal Year 2008, there were 10 volunteers on Wassaw 

NWR who donated a total of 1,037 hours. 

Friends Group 

The Friends of the Savannah Coastal Wildlife Refuges, Inc. (FOSCWR) is the official friends group for 

the Complex. Newly formed in 2008, the group will provide support through advocacy, fundraising, 

and providing volunteers to assist with refuge programs and projects for all refuges within the 

Complex. The group will operate a small sales outlet located within the Savannah NWR Visitor 

Center, which will be its primary means of fundraising. 

Although not official friends groups, the Ogeechee, Hilton Head, and Coastal Georgia Audubon 

Societies have served as refuge support groups for many years, and will likely continue relations with 

the Complex alongside the FOSCWR. 

Partnerships 

Clean Coast, a non-profit Savannah-based conservation organization, renews a special use permit 

annually to sponsor beach clean-ups on Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs. 

The University of Georgia’s Marine Education Center and Aquarium (UGA-MECA) is an excellent 

environmental education partner. Most of the field trips are to Wassaw NWR, but several are 

conducted each year to Blackbeard Island NWR as well. 

Refuge staff attend meetings of the Georgia Coastal Education Group, a consortium of mostly state and 

federal agencies that works together to promote environmental education opportunities in coastal Georgia. 

Objective 3.7.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Volunteer Program and Friends Group: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, expand volunteer program to enhance all aspects of refuge management. 

Strategies: 

 Establish a Complex volunteer coordinator position to work with staff to develop and manage 

the volunteer program. 

 Develop a refuge orientation and training program with handbook and provide to all 

volunteers. 

 Continue to support the newly organized FOSCWR. 
174 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 3.7.b: Harris Neck NWR – Volunteer Program and Friends Group: Over the 15-year 

life of this CCP, expand volunteer program to enhance all aspects of refuge management. 

Strategies: 

 Establish a Complex volunteer coordinator position to work with staff to develop and manage 

the volunteer program. 

 Develop a refuge orientation and training program with handbook and provide to all 

volunteers. 

 Continue to support the newly organized FOSCWR. 

 Train a group of volunteers to function as roving interpreters along the wildlife drive during 

high use times. 

 Establish a volunteer corps to serve as visitor aides at visitor contact station/office and any 

new facilities.

Objective 3.7.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Volunteer Program and Friends Group: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, maintain and expand an active volunteer program and friends group to enhance 

all aspects of refuge management. 

Strategies: 

 Establish a Complex volunteer coordinator position to work with staff to develop and manage 

the volunteer program. 

 Develop a refuge orientation and training program with handbook and provide to all 

volunteers. 

 Develop recreational vehicle pads in conjunction with a welcome/visitor center at Last End 

Point to accommodate resident volunteers. 

 Continue to support the newly organized FOSCWR. 

Objective 3.7.d: Savannah NWR – Volunteer Program and Friends Group: Over the 15-year life 

of this CCP, maintain and expand an active volunteer program and friends group to enhance all 

aspects of refuge management. 

Strategies: 

 Establish a Complex volunteer coordinator position to work with staff to develop and manage 

the volunteer program. 

 Train a group of volunteers to function as roving interpreters along the wildlife drive during 

high use times. 

 Establish a volunteer corps to serve as visitor aides at the visitor center. 

 Develop a refuge orientation and training program with handbook and provide to all 

volunteers. 

 Continue to support the newly organized FOSCWR. 

 Support friends group with management of the visitor center sales outlet, providing their 

volunteers with an orientation to the Complex. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 175

Objective 3.7.e: Wassaw NWR – Volunteer Program and Friends Group: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, maintain and expand an active volunteer program and friends group to enhance all aspects 

of refuge management. 

Strategies: 

 Establish a Complex volunteer coordinator position to work with staff to develop and manage 

the volunteer program. 

 Develop a refuge orientation and training program with handbook and provide to all 

volunteers. 

 Continue to support the newly organized FOSCWR.

Outreach 

Discussion: None of the Complex refuges currently have approved outreach plans. These plans 

need to be developed and updated annually.

Media outreach has occurred in the form of press releases, radio and television interviews, and 

phone contacts. Complex staff has maintained good working relationships with most local media 

sources, and a number of articles is printed each year covering various refuge topics. Special events 

and interpretive programs have also been subjects of press releases and newspaper stories. 

Complex staff and volunteers are invited to attend/participate in a number of outreach events (i.e., 

special events, festivals, and workshops) each year. All requests are considered with actual 

participation based on staff schedules and availability, as well as budget considerations for the cost 

associated with participation; however staff has been featured speakers for various organizations. 

Over the years, the Complex has typically participated in at least two or three major outreach events 

each year including the Southeastern Wildlife Exposition in Charleston, South Carolina; Georgia’s 

Colonial Coast Birding and Nature Festival in Jekyll Island, Georgia; Coast Fest in Brunswick, 

Georgia; and an annual Earth Day celebration held in Savannah, Georgia. Budget and time 

considerations have restricted staff participation in some of these events over the past couple of 

years. In the future, we hope to be able to have at least a minimal presence at all of these major 

outreach events. Most, if not all, off-site outreach activities support the entire Complex, not one 

specific refuge. 

Objective 3.8.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Outreach: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase 

public outreach to emphasize resource management practices and promote the six priority public 

uses of the Refuge System. 

Strategies: 

 Seek opportunities to participate in special events. 

 Develop a portable exhibit for the Complex. 

 Explore new partnerships that would expand outreach opportunities, particularly those that 

would promote Wilderness awareness. 

 Annually review and modify media/outreach plan. 
176 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 3.8.b: Harris Neck NWR – Outreach: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase public 

outreach to emphasize resource management practices and promote the six priority public uses of 

the Refuge System. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at appropriate off-site locations. 

 Evaluate opportunities to participate in special events. 

 Continue working with partners to provide National Wildlife Refuge Week events and explore 

new partnerships that would expand outreach opportunities. 

 Annually review and modify media/outreach plan. 

 Look for opportunities to host congressional and media field days. 

 Develop a portable exhibit for the Complex.

Objective 3.8.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Outreach: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase 

public outreach to emphasize resource management practices and promote the six priority public 

uses of the Refuge System. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at appropriate off-site locations. 

 Evaluate opportunities to participate in special events. 

 Continue working with partners to provide National Wildlife Refuge Week events and explore 

new partnerships that would expand outreach opportunities. 

 Annually review and modify media/outreach plan. 

 Develop a portable exhibit for the Complex. 

Objective 3.8.d: Savannah NWR – Outreach: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase public 

outreach to emphasize resource management practices and promote public use opportunities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at appropriate off-site locations. 

 Evaluate opportunities to participate in special events. 

 Continue working with partners to provide National Wildlife Refuge Week events and explore 

new partnerships that would expand outreach opportunities. 

 Annually review and modify media/outreach plan. 

 Host a congressional and media field day. 

 Develop a portable exhibit for the Complex. 

Objective 3.8.e: Tybee NWR – Outreach/Education: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, employ 

outreach actions, including productions of educational exhibits and materials, to ensure compliance 

with refuge regulations. 

Strategy: 

 Develop partnership with Fort Pulaski National Monument for installation of wayside exhibits 

at the Fort identifying the refuge. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 177

Objective 3.8.f: Wassaw NWR – Outreach: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase public 

outreach to emphasize resource management practices and promote the six priority public uses of 

the Refuge System. 

Strategies: 

 Evaluate opportunities to participate in special events. 

 Explore new partnerships that would expand outreach opportunities. 

 Develop a portable exhibit for the Complex.

 Annually review and modify media/outreach plan.

Welcome and Orient Visitors 

Discussion: Each refuge in the Complex has various ways to welcome and orient visitors, 

including facilities, signs, brochures, and other publications. Two refuges currently have facilities 

where the public can directly communicate with either staff or volunteers to receive information: Harris 

Neck NWR has a Visitor Contact Station located within the refuge office building, and Savannah 

NWR has a Visitor Center with Complex headquarters staff offices located within. Both facilities 

utilize trained volunteers to provide visitors with information. Although signs and publications are 

updated and replaced as needed, there are currently no approved sign plans for any of the refuges in 

the Complex. Each refuge needs to develop and/or update a sign plan, maintain a stock of updated 

publications, and add infrastructure upgrades, as needed, to better accommodate visitors. 

Objective 3.9.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Welcome and Orient Visitors: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, improve programs to welcome and orient visitors through directional and entrance signs, 

design and upkeep of facilities, and the provision of information regarding programs and facilities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a sign plan by 2013. 

 Expand refuge website to include informational videos and a virtual tour of the refuge. 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at Interstate and community welcome/visitor 

centers. 

 Develop map/trail guide. 

 Regularly update and post information on the website about any refuge closures. 

 Explore option for public boat transportation provided by concessionaire. 

 Work with local marinas and the boating community to provide information about the refuge. 

 Develop more prominent information about the Wilderness Area in the current refuge brochure, 

web site, and visitor contact areas. Make “Leave No Trace” materials available to visitors. 

Objective 3.9.b: Harris Neck NWR – Welcome and Orient Visitors: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, improve program to welcome and orient visitors through directional and entrance signs, design 

and upkeep of facilities, and the provision of information regarding programs and facilities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a sign plan by 2013. 

 Expand refuge website to include informational videos and a virtual tour of the refuge. 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at Interstate and community welcome/visitor 

centers. 
178 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Redesign the map and trail guide. 

 Develop Harris Neck NWR general brochure. 

 Install an electric gate at entrance road to Barbour River Landing. 

 Evaluate participating in the entrance fee program.

 Place a welcome and orient kiosk at the Barbour River parking area. 

 Design and construct a visitor center/environmental education center and retain the existing 

visitor contact station as an administrative building. 

 Regularly update and post information on the website about any refuge closures.

Objective 3.9.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Welcome and Orient Visitors: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, improve programs to welcome and orient visitors through directional and entrance signs, 

design and upkeep of facilities, and the provision of information regarding programs and facilities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a sign plan by 2013. 

 Evaluate participating in the entrance fee program. 

 Place a welcome and orient kiosk outside the electric gate for after-hours information. 

 Provide ADA accessible parking spots and trail near the kiosk. 

 Plan for development of welcome/visitor center at Last End Point and concessionaire 

operated transport system. 

 Regularly update and post information on the website about any refuge closures. 

 For all main trails, develop standard trail head kiosk with information about the trails. 

 Make the trail from parking lot to Ibis Pond ADA accessible. 

 Work with Department of Transportation to create safer acceleration/ deceleration lanes at the 

Highway 278 entrance and an underpass linking Last End Point to the entrance. 

 Expand refuge website to include informational videos and a virtual tour of the refuge. 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at Interstate and community welcome/visitor 

centers. 

 Coordinate with Deed of Donation. 

Objective 3.9.d: Savannah NWR – Welcome and Orient Visitors: Over the 15-year life of the 

CCP, improve program to welcome and orient visitors through directional and entrance signs, design 

and upkeep of facilities, and the provision of information regarding programs and facilities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a sign plan by 2013. 

 Expand refuge website to include informational videos and a virtual tour. 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at Interstate and community welcome/visitor 

centers. 

 Partner with South Carolina Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration to 

improve safety at the wildlife drive entrance/exit on South Carolina Highway 170 and establish 

safe parking for access to the hiking trails north of South Carolina Highway 170. 

 Establish a user fee for wildlife drive with staffed fee booth during peak use; honor system rest of 

year. 

 Regularly update and post information on the website about any refuge closures. 

 Develop refuge map/trail guide. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 179

Objective 3.9.e: Wassaw NWR – Welcome and Orient Visitors: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

improve programs to welcome and orient visitors through directional and entrance signs, design and 

upkeep of facilities, and the provision of information regarding programs and facilities. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a sign plan by 2013. 

 Expand refuge website to include informational videos and a virtual tour of the refuge. 

 Develop a refuge-specific rack card to distribute at Interstate and community welcome/visitor 

centers. 

 Develop map/trail guide. 

 Work with local marinas and the boating community to provide information about the refuge. 

 Regularly update and post information on the website about any refuge closures. 

 Explore option for public boat transportation provided by concessionaire.

RESOURCE PROTECTION 

Goal 4. Identify, conserve, and protect natural and cultural resources through partnerships, land 

protection programs, and law enforcement. Ensure a safe and secure environment for the visiting 

and Service personnel. 

Discussion: Protecting the natural and cultural resources of all of the refuges within the Complex and 

ensuring the safety of all refuge visitors are fundamental responsibilities of the Refuge System. Because 

of the extensive distance between some refuges and remote location of the barrier island refuges, it is 

difficult to share resources. Providing adequate law enforcement is essential and necessary to protect 

refuge resources including wildlife, habitat, and cultural resources. To ensure this mandated requirement 

is met, additional staff will be required. 

Archaeological and Historical Site Protection 

Discussion: The Service values and protects its archaeological and historical resources as defined in 

the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), the Native American Grave Protection and 

Repatriation Act of 1990, and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA). The 

Complex has cultural sites relating to human settlement that date back as far as 4,000 years ago. 

Several archaeological investigations have been performed and have produced artifacts and 

evidence that range from 500 A.D. to post Civil War. Most of these resources are not featured as 

public use areas due to the likelihood of theft and other adverse affects. It is unlikely that these areas 

will be open to the public. However, with the increased demand for public recreation and the 

economic value of artifacts, it may be necessary to increase law enforcement efforts in these areas. 

Objective 4.1.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Archaeological and Historical Site Protection: Over 

the 15-year life of this CCP, protect all archaeological sites on the refuge from illegal take or damage 

in compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and all other applicable 

federal and state laws. 
180 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Strategies: 

 Continue, and where possible, increase law enforcement patrols on all known sites to inspect 

for disturbances and illegal digging and or looting. 

 Conduct archaeological survey. 

 Develop and implement a Cultural Resources Plan by 2016. 

Objective 4.1.b: Harris Neck NWR – Archaeological and Historical Site Protection: Over the 

15-year life of this CCP, protect all archaeological sites on the refuge from illegal take or damage in 

compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and all other applicable 

federal and state laws. 

Strategies: 

 Continue, and where possible, increase law enforcement patrols on all known sites to inspect 

for disturbances and illegal digging and or looting. 

 Conduct archaeological survey. 

 Develop and implement a Cultural Resources Plan by 2016. 

Objective 4.1.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Archaeological and Historical Site Protection: Over 

the 15-year life of this CCP, protect all archaeological sites on the refuge from illegal take or damage 

in compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and all other applicable 

federal and state laws. 

Strategies: 

 Continue, and where possible, increase law enforcement patrols on all known sites to inspect 

for disturbances and illegal digging and or looting. 

 Conduct archaeological survey. 

 Develop and implement a Cultural Resources Plan by 2016. 

Objective 4.1.d: Savannah NWR – Archaeological and Historical Site Protection: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, protect all archaeological sites on the refuge from illegal take or damage in 

compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and all other applicable 

federal and state laws. 

Strategies: 

 Continue, and where possible, increase law enforcement patrols on all known sites to inspect 

for disturbances and illegal digging and or looting. 

 Conduct archaeological survey. 

 Develop and implement a Cultural Resources Plan by 2016. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 181

Objective 4.1.e: Tybee NWR – Archaeological and Historical Site Protection: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, protect all archaeological sites on the refuge from illegal take or damage in 

compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and all other applicable 

federal and state laws. 

Strategies: 

 Continue, and where possible, increase law enforcement patrols on all known sites to inspect 

for disturbances and illegal digging and or looting. 

 Conduct archaeological survey. 

 Develop and implement a Cultural Resources Plan by 2016. 

Objective 4.1.f: Wassaw NWR – Archaeological and Historical Site Protection: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, protect all archaeological sites on the refuge from illegal take or damage in 

compliance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and all other applicable 

federal and state laws. 

Strategies: 

 Continue, and where possible, increase law enforcement patrols on all known sites to inspect 

for disturbances and illegal digging and or looting. 

 Conduct archaeological survey. 

 Develop and implement a Cultural Resources Plan by 2016. 

Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary 

Discussion: Because of frequent damage and vandalism, maintaining the current refuge boundaries 

through sign replacement is a continuous need. This need is also perpetuated by funding constraints and 

active land acquisition within some refuge acquisition boundaries. The refuge would like to initiate an 

annual monitoring program to evaluate the need for boundary and directional signs on the refuge.

Objective 4.2.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary: Over the 15-

year life of this CCP, maintain refuge boundary and identify unmarked areas. 

Strategies: 

 Maintain existing refuge boundary signs at a rate of 10 percent per year. 

 Maintain existing Wilderness Area boundary signs. 

Objective 4.2.b: Harris Neck NWR – Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, maintain refuge boundary and identify unmarked areas 

Strategy: 

 Maintain existing refuge boundary signs at a rate of 10 percent per year. 
182 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 4.2.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary: Over the 15-year 

life of this CCP, maintain refuge boundary and identify unmarked areas. 

 

Strategy: 

 Maintain existing refuge boundary signs at a rate of 10 percent per year. 

Objective 4.2.d: Savannah NWR – Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary: Over the 15-year life of 

this CCP, maintain refuge boundary and identify unmarked areas. 

Strategy: 

 Maintain existing refuge boundary signs at a rate of 10 percent per year. 

Objective 4.2.e: Tybee NWR – Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, maintain refuge boundary and identify unmarked areas. 

Strategy: 

 Maintain existing refuge boundary signs at a rate of 100 percent per year.

Objective 4.2.f: Wassaw NWR – Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary: Over the 15-year life of this 

CCP, maintain refuge boundary and identify unmarked areas. 

Strategy: 

 Maintain existing refuge boundary signs at a rate of 10 percent per year. 

Law Enforcement 

Discussion: Because of the urban location of some of the Complex refuges, law enforcement is essential 

and necessary to protect refuge resources including wildlife, habitat, and cultural resources. The safety 

and protection of refuge visitors are also priorities. 

With two full-time law enforcement officers and one collateral duty officer for the entire Complex and 

the distance between the refuges, it is extremely challenging to ensure visitor safety and resource 

integrity. In addition to the protection of wildlife and cultural resources, the law enforcement 

personnel must also deal with illegal drugs, vandalism, illegal dumping, and the safety of visitors. 

Additional law enforcement presence is essential to meeting this increasing demand. 

Objective 4.3.a: Blackbeard Island NWR – Law Enforcement: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

provide visitor safety, protect resources, and ensure public compliance with refuge regulations. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a Law Enforcement Plan by 2015. 

 Develop and work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies 

to supplement resource protection. 

 Provide educational and outreach programs in local communities as part of preventive law 

enforcement effort to encourage voluntary compliance. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 183

Objective 4.3.b: Harris Neck NWR – Law Enforcement: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, provide 

visitor safety, protect resources, and ensure public compliance with refuge regulations. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a Law Enforcement Plan by 2015. 

 Develop and work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies 

to supplement resource protection. 

 Provide educational and outreach programs in local communities as part of preventive law 

enforcement effort to encourage voluntary compliance. 

Objective 4.3.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Law Enforcement: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

provide visitor safety, protect resources, and ensure public compliance with refuge regulations. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a Law Enforcement Plan by 2015. 

 Develop and work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies 

to supplement resource protection. 

 Provide educational and outreach programs in local communities as part of preventive law 

enforcement effort to encourage voluntary compliance. 

Objective 4.3.d: Savannah NWR – Law Enforcement: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, provide 

visitor safety, protect resources, and ensure public compliance with refuge regulations. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a Law Enforcement Plan by 2015. 

 Develop and work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies 

to supplement resource protection. 

 Provide educational and outreach programs in local communities as part of preventive law 

enforcement effort to encourage voluntary compliance. 

Objective 4.3.e: Tybee NWR – Law Enforcement: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, provide visitor 

safety, protect resources, and ensure public compliance with refuge regulations. 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a Law Enforcement Plan by 2015. 

 Develop and work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies 

to supplement resource protection. 

 Provide educational and outreach programs in local communities as part of preventive law 

enforcement effort to encourage voluntary compliance.

Objective 4.3.f: Wassaw NWR – Law Enforcement: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, provide 

visitor safety, protect resources, and ensure public compliance with refuge regulations. 
184 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Strategies: 

 Develop and implement a Law Enforcement Plan by 2015. 

 Develop and work cooperatively with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies 

to supplement resource protection. 

 Provide educational and outreach programs in local communities as part of preventive law 

enforcement effort to encourage voluntary compliance. 

Land Acquisition 

Discussion: Not all of the lands within the approved acquisition boundary for Savannah NWR have 

been obtained by the Service. If funds and willing sellers become available, the Complex will attempt 

to acquire these lands in accordance with current Service policy. A major expansion plan should be 

evaluated for Harris Neck NWR. These efforts would enhance management opportunities for wildlife 

and the public. 

Objective 4.4.a: Harris Neck NWR – Land Acquisition: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase 

focus on acquiring lands that provide resource and public use values from willing sellers by any viable 

means. 

Strategies: 

 Investigate expanding existing acquisition boundary. 

 Work with local land trusts, non-governmental organizations, and other federal and state 

agencies to identify willing sellers to acquire and/or protect additional lands, especially upland 

buffers.

 Explore opportunities to place easements on lands near the refuge that will compliment refuge 

objectives.

 Develop and annually update priority list for land acquisitions.

Objective 4.4.b: Savannah NWR – Land Acquisition: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, increase 

focus on acquiring lands that provide resource and public use values from willing sellers by any viable 

means. 

Strategies: 

 Investigate expanding existing acquisition boundary. 

 Annually update priority list for land acquisitions. 

 Work with local land trusts, non-governmental organizations, and other federal and state 

agencies to identify willing sellers to acquire and/or protect additional refuge lands, especially 

upland buffers. 

 Explore opportunities to place easements on lands near the refuge that will compliment refuge 

objectives. 

 Continue larger landscape conservation planning efforts (partnerships) to help guide 

acquisitions, easements, and habitat linkages. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 185

Private Lands Program 

Discussion: The Refuge System could never acquire enough land to meet the habitat needs of all 

resident and migratory wildlife; over 90 percent of Georgia is held in private ownership (USFWS Partners 

for Fish and Wildlife Strategic Plan 2007). Resident and migratory species, including threatened and 

endangered species, are dependent on lands in private ownership, in addition to public lands. While the 

refuges do have some landowners that actively manage all or a portion of their lands for wildlife, many 

others rely on their land to produce an income. Because government-based financial resources are 

scarce, efforts to restore habitat will be prioritized for areas of greatest need. 

Objective 4.5.a: Harris Neck NWR – Private Lands Program: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

expand opportunities to work with private landowners near the refuge to promote refuge goals and 

objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Annually coordinate with the Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (PFW) in the 

Ecological Services Field Office to identify opportunities to enter into Cooperative Wildlife 

Management Agreements with private landowners adjacent to or near the refuge in the PFW 

Georgia Coastal focus area. 

 Explore opportunities to improve habitat management on neighboring lands through farm bill 

programs, forest stewardship program, etc. 

 Work with district conservationists, Cooperative Extension Service, GADNR Technical 

Guidance Biologists, Service’s Partners Biologist, and others to prioritize lands surrounding 

the refuge suitable for restoration or enhancement for wildlife.

Objective 4.5.b: Savannah NWR – Private Lands Program: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, 

expand opportunities to work with private landowners near the refuge to promote refuge goals and 

objectives. 

Strategies: 

 Annually coordinate with the Service’s PFW Program in the Ecological Services Field Office to 

identify opportunities to enter into Cooperative Wildlife Management Agreements with private 

landowners near the refuge in the PFW focus areas. 

 Explore opportunities to improve habitat management on neighboring lands through farm bill 

programs, forest stewardship program, etc. 

 Work with district conservationists, Cooperative Extension Service, DNR Technical Guidance 

Biologists, Service’s Partners Biologist, and others to prioritize lands surrounding the refuge 

suitable for restoration or enhancement for wildlife. 

Partnerships 

Discussion: Opportunities to work in partnership with private landowners, federal and state agencies, 

and non-governmental organizations are increasingly beneficial. Working with partners to link habitat 

restoration and management projects can increase ecosystem management of lands located inside 

and outside refuge boundaries. Although a large portion of lands inside current acquisition 

boundaries have been acquired, partnerships are needed to meet habitat objectives, reduce offrefuge impacts, and protect unique habitats. 
186 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Objective 4.6.a: Partnerships: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, continue to maintain current 

relationships with partners and develop coordination and cooperation through new partnerships. 

REFUGE ADMINISTRATION 

Goal 5. Provide sufficient funding, staffing, facilities, and infrastructure to fulfill the Complex’s 

purposes, goals, and objectives.

Discussion: The administrative functions associated with the Complex include a wide range of activities 

that are critical to the mission of the Refuge System and the purpose(s) of each refuge. These functions 

include staffing, training, budgeting, planning, facility and infrastructure management, community 

relations, partnering, and equipment maintenance. To carry out these functions, each refuge must have 

the appropriate level of staffing and resources available. 

Maintain Capitalized Equipment, Facilities, and Infrastructure for the Complex 

Discussion: The Complex has a good base of facilities and equipment to support management 

operations for the 56,000 acres that span the seven refuges. Funding is received as part of the 

Complex funding allocation. In fiscal year 2008, the budget for the Complex totaled $3,500,000. 

Complex facilities and equipment to support management operations on the seven refuges include: 

Visitor Center/Office at Savannah NWR; Visitor Contact Station/Office at Harris Neck NWR; and 

maintenance shop facilities and associated storage buildings and outbuildings located on Savannah, 

Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs. There is a public boat ramp 

and parking lot at Harris Neck NWR along with a commercial dock under lease to local watermen. At 

Pinckney Island NWR there is a public boat ramp and associated parking area managed under 

agreement with Beaufort County, South Carolina. 

Objective 5.1.a: Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex – Maintain Capitalized Equipment, 

Facilities, and Infrastructure: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, acquire and maintain equipment, 

facilities, and infrastructure used as a part of Complex management. 

Strategies: 

 Maintain more than $5,000,000 worth of capitalized equipment, facilities, and infrastructure 

used in all aspects of refuge management such as habitat, wildlife, public use, and protection. 

 Develop an equipment maintenance schedule for heavy equipment and water craft. 

 Ensure replacement work orders are in Service Asset Maintenance Management System 

(SAMMS) for all existing heavy equipment needs. 

 Ensure deficiencies of all facilities and infrastructure are identified in SAMMS.

Objective 5.1.b: Blackbeard Island NWR – Maintain Capitalized Equipment, Facilities, and 

Infrastructure: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, acquire and maintain equipment, facilities, and 

infrastructure used as a part of Complex management. 

Strategy: 

 Develop environmental education shelter near headquarters. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 187

Objective 5.1.c: Pinckney Island NWR – Maintain Capitalized Equipment, Facilities, and 

Infrastructure: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, acquire and maintain equipment, facilities, and 

infrastructure used as a part of Complex management. 

Strategy: 

 Plan for development of welcome/visitor center at Last End Point and concessionaire 

operated transport system. 

Objective 5.1.d: Wassaw NWR – Maintain Capitalized Equipment, Facilities, and 

Infrastructure: Over the 15-year life of this CCP, acquire and maintain equipment, facilities, and 

infrastructure used as a part of Complex management. 

Strategy: 

 Develop environmental education shelter near headquarters. 

Staffing Needs 

Discussion: The Complex currently has a combined staff of 30 full-time employees. Five of the 

seven Complex refuges do not have permanently assigned staff; however, management and law 

enforcement are conducted on all refuges in the Complex. Additional staff would be required to 

accomplish the goals of this CCP. Personnel priorities would include employing an environmental 

education coordinator, law enforcement officers/park rangers, a volunteer coordinator, biological 

technicians, maintenance workers, refuge managers, assistant refuge managers, and a GIS 

specialist. Increased budgets and staffing levels would better enable the Complex to meet the 

obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

 

Objective 5.2.a: Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of the 

date of this CCP, increase Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better 

meet the obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Strategies: 

 Hire an additional law enforcement officer for the Complex. 

 Hire a volunteer coordinator for the Complex. 

 Hire an environmental education coordinator for the Complex. 

 Hire a facility manager for the Complex. 

 Hire a biological technician for the Complex. 

 Hire a GIS specialist for the Complex. 

 Hire a forester for the Complex. 

 Hire a forestry technician for the Complex. 

Objective 5.2.b: Blackbeard Island NWR – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of the date of this 

CCP, increase Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better meet the 

obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use.
188 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Strategies: 

 Hire a refuge manager for Blackbeard Island NWR. 

 Hire a maintenance worker for Blackbeard Island NWR. 

 Hire two biological technicians to support Blackbeard Island NWR. 

 Hire a wildlife biologist to support Harris Neck and Blackbeard Island NWRs. 

 Hire an administrative assistant to perform the administrative duties for Blackbeard Island, 

Harris Neck, and Wolf Island NWRs. 

Objective 5.2.c: Harris Neck NWR – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of CCP completion, increase 

Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better meet the obligations of wildlife 

stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Strategies: 

 Hire assistant refuge manager for Harris Neck NWR. 

 Hire a park ranger for Harris Neck NWR. 

 Hire a wildlife biologist to support Harris Neck and Blackbeard Island NWRs. 

 Hire a biological technician to support Harris Neck NWR. 

 Hire a maintenance worker for Harris Neck NWR. 

 Hire a boat mechanic for Harris Neck NWR. 

 Hire an administrative assistant to perform the administrative duties for Blackbeard Island, 

Harris Neck, and Wolf Island NWRs. 

Objective 5.2.d: Pinckney Island NWR – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of the date of this CCP, 

increase Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better meet the obligations 

of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Strategies: 

 Hire a refuge manager for Pinckney Island NWR. 

 Hire two park rangers for Pinckney Island NWR. 

 Hire two maintenance workers for Pinckney Island NWR. 

 Hire a biological technician for Pinckney Island NWR. 

Objective 5.2.e: Savannah NWR – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of the date of this CCP, 

increase Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better meet the obligations 

of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Strategies: 

 Hire a refuge operations specialist (assistant refuge manager) for Savannah NWR. 

 Hire a biological technician for Savannah NWR. 

 Hire two maintenance workers for Savannah NWR. 

 Hire a park ranger for Savannah NWR. 

Objective 5.2.f: Tybee NWR – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of CCP completion, increase 

Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better meet the obligations of wildlife 

stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 189

Strategy: 

 Hire a biological technician for Tybee NWR.

Objective 5.2.g: Wassaw NWR – Staffing Needs: Within 10 years of the date of this CCP, 

increase Complex budget and bring staffing levels up to RONS request to better meet the obligations 

of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Strategies: 

 Hire refuge manager for Wassaw NWR. 

 Hire two maintenance workers for Wassaw NWR. 

 Hire a biological technician for Wassaw NWR. 
190 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 191

V. Plan Implementation 

INTRODUCTION 

Refuge lands are managed as defined under the Improvement Act. Congress has distinguished a 

clear legislative mission of wildlife conservation for all national wildlife refuges. National wildlife 

refuges, unlike other public lands, are dedicated to the conservation of the Nation’s fish and wildlife 

resources and wildlife-dependent recreational uses. Priority projects emphasize the protection and 

enhancement of fish and wildlife species first and foremost, but considerable emphasis is placed on 

balancing the needs and demands for wildlife-dependent recreation and environmental education. 

To accomplish the purpose, vision, goals, and objectives contained in this CCP for the Complex, this 

section identifies projects, funding and personnel needs, volunteers, partnership opportunities, step-down 

management plans, a monitoring and adaptive management plan, and plan review and revision. 

PROPOSED PROJECTS 

Listed below are the proposed project summaries and their associated costs for fish and wildlife 

population management, habitat management, resource protection, visitor services, and refuge 

administration over the next 15 years. This proposed project list reflects the priority needs identified 

by the public, planning team, and refuge staff based upon available information. These projects were 

generated for the purpose of achieving the refuge’s objectives and strategies. The primary linkages 

of these projects to those planning elements are identified in each summary. 

Project 1: Wildlife inventorying and monitoring program 

Inventorying and monitoring of plant and animal populations are critical to ensuring the biological 

integrity of national wildlife refuges. Information collected will serve as the basis for developing 

habitat management plans and will influence all management activities. A scientifically based 

inventorying and monitoring program will enable the Complex to make informed management 

decisions and valuable long-term contributions to national and regional objectives for waterfowl, 

shorebirds, wading birds, nongame birds, threatened and endangered species, and other resident 

wildlife. Standardized census and survey techniques will be employed and all data compiled into 

databases, including GIS for spatial analysis. All data will be shared with appropriate state and 

federal partners in an effort to further strategic habitat conservation and adaptive management. 

(Linkages: Goal 1, Objectives 1.1.a-f; 1.2.a-e; 1.3.a-e; 1.4.a-k; 1.5.a-e; 1.6.a-f: Goal 2, Objectives 

2.2.a; 2.3.a-e; 2.4.a; 2.5.a; 2.6.a-b; 2.7.a; 2.8.a-f; 2.9.a-c; 2.10.a-d; 2.11.a-e; 2.12.a-f; 2.13.a-f; 2.14.ae: Goal 5, Objectives 5.2 a-g)

Project 2: Climate change and sea level rise 

Global climate change poses risks to human health and to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. This 

project would provide funding to work with research partners to conduct research and develop 

models and monitoring protocols to evaluate the potential effects of climate change and sea level rise 

on wildlife populations and habitats. Results and recommendations would be used to help the South 

Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative with management decisions to minimize or mitigate 

potential impacts. 

(Linkages: Goal 1, Objectives 1.2.a-e; 1.4.a-c, h-j; 1.6.a-f: Goal 2, Objectives 2.3.a-e; 2.6.a-b; 2.10.ad; 2.12.a-f; 2.14.a-e; 2.16.a-f: Goal 5, Objectives 5.2 a-g) 
192 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Project 3: Mapping (GIS) 

The use of geographic information systems (GIS) has become widespread as a valuable tool in 

developing and implementing habitat management plans. To better organize, understand, and make 

inferences regarding habitat management, a comprehensive GIS database is needed. Once 

established the geographic layers will incorporate all refuge programs. This will help ensure 

compatibility and productivity. This project will develop a data management, storage, and retrieval 

system; obtain spatial information from appropriate sources; develop geographical layers for refuge 

management programs; and facilitate spatial analysis and creation of maps. 

(Linkages: Goals 1 and 2, all objectives; Goal 3, Objectives 3.1a-e, 3.2a-e, 3.4a-e, 3.5a-e, 3.6a-e, 

and 3.9a-e; Goal 4, Objectives 4.1a-f, and 4.2a-f, 4.4a and b, 4.5a and b; Goal 5, Objective 5.2a) 

Project 4: Impoundment management 

Managed freshwater impoundments are one of the most important managed habitats within the 

Complex. Impoundments (often referred to as pools) are managed for a diverse array of wildlife and 

fish throughout the year. The freshwater plant communities within the units are extremely diverse 

and compositionally complex. This diversity makes impounded areas ideal habitat for a myriad of 

wildlife species. Most of the pools are located at the Savannah NWR and are the principle means of 

meeting one of the refuge’s primary objectives of providing habitat and sanctuary for migrating and 

wintering waterfowl. Additional managed units are found on Harris Neck NWR. Historically, 

Blackbeard Island NWR had approximately 800 acres under some type of water level management. 

However, because of increases in residential and industrial water demands, the management 

capability of these wetlands has been lost. This project would allow management, through various 

techniques, to: plant successional stages, regulate undesirable and noxious plants, and maintain 

water control structures. 

(Linkages: Goal 1, Objectives1.1.f; 1.2.c; 1.4.d,g; 1.6.c-d: Goal 2, Objectives 2.1.a-f; 2.3.a-d; 2.7.a; 

2.9.b; 2.10.b-c; 2.11.b-d; 2.12.d: Goal 5, Objectives 5.2 a-g) 

Project 5: Refuge marshes and wetlands 

The Complex is composed of a number of different types of wetlands outside the managed 

impoundments. Wetland types include tidal and non-tidal freshwater wetlands, both emergent and 

forested, and estuarine wetlands associated with the barrier islands. All these different types are 

valuable habitat for a diversity of species. Tidal freshwater wetlands are one of the rarest types of 

wetlands in the world and the most productive. The Savannah NWR once contained over 6,000 

acres of tidal freshwater wetlands but through continued expansion of the Savannah harbor, the 

amount has been reduced to less than 3,000 acres. Bottomland hardwoods make up a large portion 

of the wetlands on the Savannah NWR. These areas provide valuable nesting, migrating, and 

wintering habitat for a number of high-priority species such as the swallow-tailed kite. Other 

freshwater emergent, scrub/shrub, and forested wetlands are located within the Complex and provide 

valuable habitat for not only migratory birds, but other species as well. This especially holds true for 

those freshwater wetlands on the barrier islands. Estuarine wetlands are very important as nursery 

habitat for juvenile fish, crabs, and shrimp that take refuge among the vegetation for protection from 

predators. Intertidal pools and panes provide excellent foraging opportunities for birds. The diversity 

and abundance of aquatic fish and invertebrates in the estuary are very important for shorebirds and 

fish eating waterbirds. This project would provide a community assessment for plants, invertebrates, 

fisheries, reptiles, and amphibians on refuge marsh lands. 

(Linkages: Goal 1, Objectives 1.1.a-f; 1.2.a-e; 1.3.a-e; 1.4.d and g; 1.5.a-e; 1.6.a-f; Goal 2, 

Objectives 2.3.a-e; 2.7a; 2.8.a-e and f; 2.9.a-c; 2.10.a-c; 2.11.b-d: Goal 5, Objectives 5.2 a-g) 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 193

Project 6: Dune, beach, and sand bar habitat on Blackbeard Island NWR and Wassaw NWR 

Dunes, beaches, and sand bars are critical for migratory birds as nesting, feeding, loafing, and 

roosting habitat. Even more critical for shorebirds are the invertebrate prey populations these 

habitats support. Sea turtles nest on barrier island beaches and feed in offshore waters.

Protection of these important habitats will require a concerted effort involving state, federal, and local 

governments, as well as local residents, educational groups, and civic organizations. This project 

provides funding to map dune lines annually, monitor beach dynamics (erosion and accretion), 

develop and implement management actions to enhance beach habitat, monitor invasive species, 

and work with partners to educate the public using beaches on the importance of these habitats.

(Linkages: Goal 1, Objective 1.2.a and e; 1.4.a- b and i-j; 1.6.a and f: Goal 2, Objectives 2.6.a-b; 

2.10.a-b; 2.12.a and f; Goal 5, Objectives 5.2 b and g) 

Project 7: Control and removal of nuisance/exotic/invasive plants and animals 

The Complex has several documented native and nonnative invasive and exotic plant species. 

These invasive species impact the refuges’ ability to carry out desired wildlife and habitat 

management objectives and at times also reduce the range of visitor service activities. Many invasive 

plant species are difficult to control without applying chemical treatments. The moist-soil conditions 

conducive to providing quality habitat for migratory waterfowl management frequently encourages 

germination of those invasive species. 

Intrusion of invasive plants can displace native plant and animal species and change habitat 

productivity through changes such as vegetative community, insect community, and structural 

environment. Nuisance animal species can also be a problem for the refuges within the Complex, as 

they are known to cause significant negative impacts on native populations through direct predation, 

disturbance, or destruction of site-specific plant communities (e.g., seasonal wetlands) and soil 

conditions. The spread of feral hogs to almost all habitats in the southeast constitutes a significant 

threat to wildlife habitat including that of refuges of the Complex. This exotic threat to habitat is now 

common throughout the southeastern United States, continues to increase in range and intensity, and 

should be countered aggressively to keep population numbers severely reduced. 

(Linkages: Goal 1, Objectives 1.5.a-e; 1.6.a-f; Goal 2, Objectives 2.3.a-d; 2.12.a-f; Goal 5, 

Objectives 5.2 a-g) 

Project 8: Forest management 

Forest stand quality can be improved or maintained through the use of appropriate silvicultural 

treatments. Many breeding forest birds and migratory species are dependent upon dense understory 

and ground vegetation for nesting and foraging. Thus, desired future conditions in much of the 

existing forest stands would emphasize increasing structural diversity by providing a more open 

overstory canopy to allow sunlight to reach the ground in support of increased ground and understory 

cover. This project would provide funding to develop a forest management plan, timber prescriptions, 

and an updated timber cruise. 

(Linkages: Goal 2, Objectives 2.15.a-e; Goal 5, Objectives 5.2 a-g) 

Project 9: Maintain and expand environmental education and interpretation, wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, outreach, hunting, and fishing opportunities 

The Complex hosts around 500,000 visitors per year at the five refuges that are open to public use 

(Blackbeard Island, Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Savannah, and Wassaw NWRs). Wildlifedependent recreation opportunities are offered at each of these refuges, although some opportunities 
194 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

are limited due to resource constraints. A few of the refuges within the Complex lie in close proximity 

to heavily populated, urban areas. It is important to consider this when planning for public use to 

ensure quality in all recreational programs. Balancing visitor use with our mission to protect wildlife 

and habitat should be central to all decisions regarding expanding recreation opportunities. 

This project includes developing wildlife checklists, photography workshops, additional photo blinds 

and observation towers, as well as expanding the trail system for more wildlife observation and 

photography opportunities. It includes developing portable exhibits for special events, refuge videos, 

trail guide/maps, additional interpretive exhibits, environmental education shelters and classrooms, 

and refuge-specific educational and interpretive programs. The project also includes developing a 

youth fishing clinic and repairing and expanding fishing facilities, as well as developing additional 

youth hunts and youth hunter education programs. Four additional park rangers (one stationed at 

Harris Neck/Blackbeard Island NWRs, one stationed at Savannah NWR, and two stationed at 

Pinckney Island NWR) and one environmental education specialist would be employed to assist in 

implementing this project. 

(Linkages: Goal 3, Objectives 3.1a-e, 3.2a-e, 3.3a-e, 3.4a-e, 3.5a-e, 3.6a-e, 3.7a-e, and 3.8a-f; Goal 

5, Objectives 5.2a-g) 

Project 10: Improve programs to welcome and orient visitors 

The refuges within the Complex employ various ways to welcome and orient visitors, including signs, 

facilities, brochures, and other publications. This project includes the development of a sign plan; 

maps/trail guides and/or general brochures for each refuge; rack-cards for distribution at off-site 

locations; welcome/orient kiosks in high-use areas that don’t currently have them; and the 

development of visitor centers/contact stations at both Harris Neck and Pinckney Island NWRs. 

Refuge web sites would also be enhanced to include current information updates and more dynamic 

content. Visitor safety is a major concern, and this project would attempt to address a few major 

issues, mainly regarding visitors safely entering and exiting the refuges. The project also includes 

determining the feasibility of establishing entrance fees at Harris Neck, Savannah, and Pinckney 

Island NWRs. Four additional park rangers (one stationed at Harris Neck/Blackbeard Island NWRs, 

one stationed at Savannah NWR, and two stationed at Pinckney Island NWR) would be employed to 

assist in implementing this project. (Linkages: Goal 3, Objectives 3.1a-e, 3.2a-e, 3.4a-e, 3.7a-e, 

3.8a-f, and 3.9a-e; Goal 4, Objectives 4.2a-f and 4.3a-f; Goal 5, Objectives 5.2a-g) 

Project 11: Expand volunteer program and strengthen Friends group partnership 

The Complex has a diverse and active cadre of volunteers who work primarily on Savannah, 

Pinckney Island, and Harris Neck NWRs. A newly formed Friends group supports all seven of the 

refuges in the Complex through advocacy, outreach, fundraising, and volunteer services. This project 

includes developing and providing better training materials and opportunities for refuge volunteers. 

With refuge staff support, more and varied opportunities for volunteers will be created. The project 

also provides continuing support for the Friends group, including cooperatively managing a sales 

outlet within the Savannah NWR Visitor Center. A volunteer coordinator for the Complex would be 

employed to assist in implementing this project. (Linkages: Goal 1, Objectives 1.1a-f, 1.2a-e, 1.3a-e, 

1.4a-d, g, I, and j, and 1.5a-e; Goal 2, Objectives 2.2a, 2.3a-d, 2.6a-b, 2.8a-d and f, 2.11a-e, and 

2.12a-f; Goal 3, Objectives 3.1a-e, 3.2a-e, 3.3a-e, 3.4a-e, 3.5a-e, 3.6a-e, 3.7a-e, 3.8a-f, and 3.9a-e; 

Goal 4, Objectives 4.2a-f and 4.4a-b; Goal 5, Objectives 5.1a-d and 5.2a-g) 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan 195

Project 12: Visitor safety and resource protection 

With three law enforcement officers for the entire Complex and the distance between the refuges, it 

makes it extremely challenging to ensure visitor safety and facility integrity. In addition to the protection of 

wildlife and cultural resources, the law enforcement personnel must also deal with illegal drugs, 

vandalism, poaching, illegal dumping, and the safety of visitors. This project would provide for additional 

law enforcement and the development of educational outreach programs to local communities. 

(Linkages: Goal 4, Objectives 4.1a-f, 4.2a-f, and 4.3a-f; Goal 5, Objectives 5.2a-g) 

Project 13: Administrative support

The Complex currently has a combined staff of 30 full-time members. Five of the Complex refuges 

do not have permanently assigned staff; however, management and law enforcement are conducted 

on all refuges in the Complex. This project would provide for additional staff to accomplish the goals 

of this CCP. Personnel priorities would include employing an environmental education coordinator, 

law enforcement officers/ park rangers, a volunteer coordinator, biological technicians, maintenance 

workers, refuge managers, refuge assistant managers, and a geographic information systems 

specialist. These increases in budget and staffing levels would better enable the Complex to meet its 

obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

(Linkages: Goals 1-5, all objectives) 

Project 14: Facility support 

The Compelx has basic facilities and equipment to support management operations for the 56,000 

acres that comprise the seven refuges. This project will identify new infrastructure and equipment 

needed to efficiently operate the Complex. The project will also provide annual costs for utilities, fuel, 

and other annual operating expenses. 

(Linkages: Goals 1-5, all objectives) 

FUNDING AND PERSONNEL 

Implementation of this CCP would require increased funding and personnel support from a variety of 

internal and external sources. The majority of new projects are identified in the Refuge Operation 

and Needs System (RONS), while maintenance needs for existing facilities and projects are identified 

through the Service Asset and Maintenance Management System (SAMMS). This CCP outlines 

proposed projects that are substantially above current budget allocations. This CCP would not 

constitute a commitment (from Congress) for staffing increases, operational and maintenance 

increases, or funding for future land acquisition, but provides direction for future management and 

represents wildlife resource needs based on sound biological science and input from the public. 
Project Leader

GS-14

Refuge Manager

GS-13

Refuge Manager

Blackbeard

GS-07/09

Maintenance

Worker

WG-08

Bio. Tech.

GS-05/07

Refuge Manager

(Harris Neck)

GS-11/12

Refuge Biologist

GS-05/07/09

Maintenance

WorkerWG-09

Asst. Refuge 

Manager

GS-11

Admin. Support

Assistant

GS-05/07

Refuge Biologist

GS-07/09

Bio. Tech.

GS-05/07

Bio. Tech.

GS-05/07

Boat Mechanic

WG-10

Maintenance

WorkerWG-08

Refuge Manager

(Wassaw)

GS-12

Maintenance

WorkerWG-06

Maintenance

WorkerWG-06

Bio. Tech.

GS-07

Supervisory

Refuge Ranger

GS-12

Refuge Ranger

GS-05/07/09

Refuge Ranger

GS-07/09

Environmental

Ed. Specialist

GS-07/09

Volunteer 

Coordinator

GS-07/09

Refuge Ranger

GS-07/09

Refuge Ranger

GS-07

Refuge Ranger

GS-07

Refuge Ranger

GS-05/07/09

Administrative

Officer

GS-09/11

Office Assistant

GS-06

Park Ranger (LE)

GS-09

Park Ranger (LE)

GS-09

Park Ranger (LE)

GS-07/09

Facility Manager

GS-11/12

Refuge Biologist

GS-12/13

Refuge Biologist

GS-07/09/11

Bio. Tech

GS-05/07

GIS Specialist

GS-09/11

Fire Management

Officer

GS-12

Wildland Urban

Interface

GS-05/07/09/11

Prescribed Fire 

SpecialistGS-09/11

Admin. Support

Assistant

GS-06

Equipment 

Operator

WG-09

Equipment 

Operator

WG-08

Forestry Tech.

GS-05/07

Forestry Tech

GS-04/05

Forestry Tech

GS-04/05

Forester 

GS-11/12

Refuge Manager

(Savannah)

GS-11/12

Equipment

Operator

WG-10

Heavy Equip. 

Mechanic

WG-10

Heavy Equip. 

Mechanic

WG-10

Maintenance 

WorkerWG-07

Electrician

WG-10

Asst. Refuge 

Manager

GS-11

Bio. Tech.

GS-07

Bio. Tech.

GS-05/07

Maintenance 

WorkerWG-08

Refuge Manager

(Pinckney)

GS-09

Maintenance 

WorkerWG-08

Maintenance 

WorkerWG-06

Bio. Tech.

GS-05/07

ure 32. Proposed organization structure for the management of the Complex -- current and proposed positions 

 Current Positions  Proposed Positions 
 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 197

Table 13. Summary of projects for the Complex 

PROJECT 

NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FIRST YEAR COST 

RECURRING 

ANNUAL 

COST 

STAFF 

(FTE’S) 

1 INVENTORYING AND 

MONITORING 1,500,000 48,677 4 

2 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA 

LEVEL RISE 175,000 75,000 3 

3 MAPPING (GIS) 167,439 127,439 1 

4 IMPOUNDMENT MANAGEMENT 375,000 170,000 3 

5 MARSHES AND WETLANDS 347,000 175,000 1 

6 BEACH AND SAND BAR 

HABITAT 125,000 45,000 1 

7 NUISANCE/EXOTIC/INVASIVE 

PLANTS AND ANIMALS 573,000 172,000 3 

8 FOREST MANAGEMENT 75,000 25,000 2 

9 EXPAND WILDLIFEDEPENDENT RECREATION 890,000 55,000 2 

10 WELCOME AND OREINT 

VISITORS 3,500,000 85,000 2 

11 VOLUNTEER PROGRAM AND 

FRIENDS GROUP 75,000 25,000 1 

12 VISITOR SAFETY AND 

RESOURCE PROTECTION 150,000 22,000 2 

13 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT 225,000 200,000 3 

14 FACILITITY SUPPORT 750,000 500,000 5 
198 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

PARTNERSHIP/VOLUNTEERS OPPORTUNITIES 

A key element of this CCP is to establish partnerships with local volunteers, landowners, private 

organizations, and state and federal natural resource agencies. Partnerships are critical for refuges 

to fulfill their purposes; achieve their goals, objectives, and strategies; leverage funds; minimize costs; 

and bridge relationships. The Complex has historically partnered with many other agencies and 

organizations to enhance management of the refuges. It is anticipated that these partnerships will 

continue and opportunities to develop additional partnerships will be pursued. 

The Complex has cooperated with the following federal agencies: U.S. Geological Survey, USDA 

Forest Service, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, National Weather Service, National Park Service, Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Federal Aviation Administration, and the Federal Highway Administration. 

The Complex has cooperated with the following state agencies: Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources; South Carolina Department of Natural Resources; South Carolina Department of 

Transportation; Georgia Department of Transportation; Georgia Forestry Commission; South Carolina 

Forestry Commission; Georgia Department of Economic Development; South Carolina Department of 

Parks, Recreation, and Tourism; and the Georgia Ports Authority. 

The Complex has cooperated with the following local governments and agencies: Hardeeville, SC; 

Hilton Head, SC; Bluffton, SC; Port Wentworth, GA; Savannah, GA; Law enforcement for Effingham, 

Chatham, and McIntosh Counties, GA; and Jasper and Beaufort Counties, SC; GA and SC Highway 

Patrols; and Chambers of Commerce for Savannah, Port Wentworth, and Darien, GA; and 

Hardeeville and Hilton Head Island, SC. There are partnerships and local mutual aid agreements in 

place with the following fire departments: Ridgeland, Bluffton, Hardeeville, Levy, Port Wentworth, and 

McIntosh County Substation #5 (Harris Neck). 

The Complex has cooperated with the following universities: University of Georgia, University of 

South Carolina – Beaufort, University of Florida, University of New Orleans, Georgia Southern 

University, University of Tennessee, Mississippi State University, Armstrong-Atlantic State University, 

and the Savannah College of Art and Design. 

The Complex has cooperated with the following non-governmental organizations/agencies: 

Ogeechee Audubon Society, Hilton Head Island Audubon Society, Coastal Georgia Audubon 

Society, The Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club (Savannah, GA and Hilton Head Island, SC 

Chapters), Georgia Wildlife Federation, South Carolina Wildlife Federation, Georgia 

Conservancy, Coastal Conservation Association of Georgia, South Low Country Task Force 

(ACJV), South Carolina Prescribed Fire Council, Low Country Wildland Urban Interface Council, 

The Sanctuary on Sapelo, Trust for Public Lands, Wassaw Island LLC, Caretta Research Project, 

Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, National Wildlife Refuge Association, National Fish and 

Wildlife Foundation, Little St. Simons Island, Ducks Unlimited, Wild Turkey Federation, Bass Pro 

Shops, The Southern Company, R.B. Baker Construction, Yancey Caterpillar, Wilderness 

Southeast, Clean Coast, Coastal Discovery Museum of Hilton Head Island, Water-Dog Outfitters, 

Hilton Head Island’s Disney Resort, and Swamp Girls Kayak Tours. 
 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 199

Friends of the Savannah Coastal Wildlife Refuges, Inc., serves as the Friends group for the Complex. 

Established in 2008, the group supports all refuges within the Complex through advocacy, 

fundraising, and volunteer assistance on and off the refuges. 

STEP-DOWN MANAGEMENT PLANS 

A CCP is a strategic plan that guides the direction of the refuge. A step-down management plan 

provides specific guidance on activities, such as habitat, fire, and visitor services. Step-down plans 

(Table 14) are also developed in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, which 

requires the identification and evaluation of alternatives and public review and involvement prior to 

their implementation. 

Table 14. National wildlife refuge step-down management plans related to the goals and 

objectives of this CCP 

Step-down Plan Completion Date

Habitat Management Plan 2015 

Inventorying and Monitoring Plan 2016 

Forest Management Plan 2016 

Visitor Services Plan 2016 

Sign Plan 2013 

Integrated Pest Management Plan (Nuisance Animal Control, Exotic 

Plant Control) 2016 

Fire Management Plan (update) 2015 

Fuels Monitoring Plan 2015 

Law Enforcement Plan 2015 

Cultural Resources Management Plan 2016 

Safety/Contingency Plan (update) 2015 

Refuge Disease Contingency/Response Plan 2016 

Wilderness Stewardship Plan 2016 

MONITORING AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT 

Adaptive management is a flexible approach to long-term management of biotic resources that is directed 

over time by the results of ongoing monitoring activities and other information. More specifically, adaptive 

management is a process by which projects are implemented within a framework of scientifically driven 

experiments to test the predictions and assumptions outlined within a plan. 
200 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

To apply adaptive management, specific surveying, inventorying, and monitoring protocols will be 

adopted. The habitat management strategies will be systematically evaluated to determine 

management effects on wildlife populations. This information will be used to refine approaches and 

determine how effectively the objectives are being accomplished. Evaluations will include ecosystem 

team and other appropriate partner participation. If monitoring and evaluation indicate undesirable 

effects for target and non-target species and/or communities, then alterations to the management 

projects will be made. Subsequently, this CCP will be revised. Specific monitoring and evaluating 

activities will be described in the step-down management plans. 

PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION 

This CCP will be reviewed annually as annual work plans and budgets are developed. It will also be 

reviewed to determine the need for revision. A revision will occur if and when conditions change or 

significant information becomes available, such as a change in ecological conditions or a major 

refuge expansion. This CCP will be augmented by detailed step-down management plans to address 

the completion of specific strategies in support of refuge goals and objectives. Revisions to this CCP 

and the step-down management plans will be subject to public review and NEPA compliance. 
 

Appendices 201

APPENDICES 

Appendix A. Glossary 

Adaptive Management: Refers to a process in which policy decisions are implemented within a 

framework of scientifically driven experiments to test predictions and 

assumptions inherent in a management plan. Analysis of results helps 

managers determine whether current management should continue as 

is or whether it should be modified to achieve desired conditions. 

Alluvial: Sediment transported and deposited in a delta or riverbed by flowing 

water. 

Alternative: 1. A reasonable way to fix the identified problem or satisfy the stated 

need (40 CFR 1500.2). 2. Alternatives are different sets of objectives 

and strategies or means of achieving refuge purposes and goals, 

helping fulfill the Refuge System mission, and resolving issues 

(Service Manual 602 FW 1.6B). 

Anadromous: Migratory fishes that spend most of their lives in the sea and migrate to 

fresh water to breed. 

Aquifer An underground bed or layer of earth, gravel, or porous stone that 

yields water. 

Barrier Island A long, relatively narrow island running parallel to the mainland, built up 

by the action of waves and current and serving to protect the coast 

from erosion by surf and tidal surges. 

Biological Diversity: The variety of life and its processes, including the variety of living 

organisms, the genetic differences among them, and the communities 

and ecosystems in which they occur (Service Manual 052 FW 1. 12B). 

The System’s focus is on indigenous species, biotic communities, and 

ecological processes. Also referred to as biodiversity. 

Brackish Marsh Salt marsh where a significant freshwater influx dilutes the seawater to 

brackish levels of salinity. 

Carrying Capacity: The maximum population of a species able to be supported by a habitat 

or area. 

Categorical Exclusion: A category of actions that does not individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human environment and have been found to 

have no such effect in procedures adopted by a federal agency 

pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1508.4). 

CFR: Code of Federal Regulations. 
202 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Compatible Use: A proposed or existing wildlife-dependent recreational use or any other 

use of a national wildlife refuge that, based on sound professional 

judgment, will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment 

of the National Wildlife Refuge System mission or the purpose(s) of the 

national wildlife refuge [50 CFR 25.12 (a)]. A compatibility 

determination supports the selection of compatible uses and identifies 

stipulations or limits necessary to ensure compatibility. 

Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan:

A document that describes the desired future conditions of a refuge or 

planning unit and provides long-range guidance and management 

direction to achieve the purposes of the refuge; helps fulfill the mission 

of the Refuge System; maintains and, where appropriate, restores the 

ecological integrity of each refuge and the Refuge System; helps 

achieve the goals of the National Wilderness Preservation System; and 

meets other mandates (Service Manual 602 FW 1.6 E). 

Concern: See Issue 

Cover Type: The present vegetation of an area. 

Cultural Resource 

Inventory: 

A professionally conducted study designed to locate and evaluate 

evidence of cultural resources present within a defined geographic 

area. Inventories may involve various levels, including background 

literature search, comprehensive field examination to identify all 

exposed physical manifestations of cultural resources, or sample 

inventory to project site distribution and density over a larger area. 

Evaluation of identified cultural resources to determine eligibility for the 

National Register follows the criteria found in 36 CFR 60.4 (Service 

Manual 614 FW 1.7). 

Cultural Resource 

Overview: 

A comprehensive document prepared for a field office that discusses, 

among other things, its prehistory and cultural history, the nature and extent 

of known cultural resources, previous research, management objectives, 

resource management conflicts or issues, and a general statement on how 

program objectives should be met and conflicts resolved. An overview 

should reference or incorporate information from a field office’s background 

or literature search described in Section VIII of the Cultural Resource 

Management Handbook (Service Manual 614 FW 1.7). 

Cultural Resources: The remains of sites, structures, or objects used by people in the past. 

Demographics The physical characteristics of a population such as age, sex, marital 

status, family size, education, geographic location, and occupation. 

Designated Wilderness 

Area:

An area designated by the U.S. Congress to be managed as part of the 

National Wilderness Preservation System (Draft Service 

Manual 610 FW 1.5). 

Disking Pulling an offset disk over a site to control vegetation, correct soil 

compaction, or till the soil before seeding or planting. 
 

Appendices 203

Disturbance: Significant alteration of habitat structure or composition. May be 

natural (e.g., fire) or human-caused events (e.g., aircraft overflight). 

Dredging An excavation activity or operation usually carried out at least 

partly underwater, in shallow seas on fresh water areas with the 

purpose of gathering up bottom sediments and disposing of them at 

a different location. 

Ecosystem: A dynamic and interrelating complex of plant and animal communities 

and their associated non-living environment. 

Ecosystem 

Management: 

Management of natural resources using system-wide concepts to 

ensure that all plants and animals in ecosystems are maintained at 

viable levels in native habitats and basic ecosystem processes are 

perpetuated indefinitely. 

Endangered Species 

(Federal): 

A plant or animal species listed under the Endangered Species Act that is 

in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. 

Endangered Species 

(State): 

A plant or animal species in danger of becoming extinct or extirpated in 

the state within the near future if factors contributing to its decline 

continue. Populations of these species are at critically low levels or 

their habitats have been degraded or depleted to a significant degree. 

Environmental 

Assessment (EA): 

A concise public document, prepared in compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act, that briefly discusses the purpose and need 

for an action, alternatives to such action, and provides sufficient 

evidence and analysis of impacts to determine whether to prepare an 

environmental impact statement or finding of no significant impact 

(40 CFR 1508.9). 

Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS): 

A detailed written statement required by section 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act, analyzing the environmental impacts 

of a proposed action, adverse effects of the project that cannot be 

avoided, alternative courses of action, short-term uses of the 

environment versus the maintenance and enhancement of long-term 

productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitment of 

resources (40 CFR 1508.11). 

Estuary: A partially enclosed embayment where fresh water and sea water 

intermix and where tidal action is an important physical regulator and 

energy subsidy (Odom et. al 2005). 

Finding of No 

Significant Impact 

(FONSI): 

A document prepared in compliance with the National Environmental 

Policy Act, supported by an environmental assessment, that briefly 

presents why a federal action will have no significant effect on the 

human environment and for which an environmental impact statement, 

therefore, will not be prepared (40 CFR 1508.13). 
204 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Goal: Descriptive, open-ended, and often broad statement of desired future 

conditions that conveys a purpose but does not define measurable units 

(Service Manual 620 FW 1.6J). 

Groundwater Water that exists beneath the earth's surface in underground streams 

and aquifers. 

Habitat: Suite of existing environmental conditions required by an organism for 

survival and reproduction. The place where an organism typically lives.

Habitat Restoration: Management emphasis designed to move ecosystems to desired 

conditions and processes, and/or to healthy ecosystems. 

Habitat Type: See Vegetation Type. 

Hydrology The scientific study of the properties, distribution, and effects of water 

on the earth's surface, in the soil and underlying rocks, and in the 

atmosphere. 

Improvement Act: The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. 

Informed Consent: The grudging willingness of opponents to “go along” with a course of 

action that they actually oppose (Bleiker). 

Invasive Species A species that is non-native (or alien) to the ecosystem under 

consideration, and whose interdiction causes or is likely to cause 

economic harm, environmental harm or harm to human health. These 

species are normally introduced by direct or inadvertent human actions.

Issue: Any unsettled matter that requires a management decision [e.g., an 

initiative, opportunity, resource management problem, threat to the 

resources of the unit, conflict in uses, public concern, or other presence 

of an undesirable resource condition (Service Manual 602 FW 1.6K)]. 

Management 

Alternative: 

See Alternative 

Management Concern: See Issue 

Management 

Opportunity: 

See Issue 

Migration: The seasonal movement from one area to another and back. 

Mission Statement: Succinct statement of the unit’s purpose and reason for being. 

Monitoring: The process of collecting information to track changes of selected 

parameters over time. 
 

Appendices 205

National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA):

Requires all agencies, including the Service, to examine the 

environmental impacts of their actions, incorporate environmental 

information, and use public participation in the planning and 

implementation of all actions. Federal agencies must integrate NEPA 

with other planning requirements, and prepare appropriate NEPA 

documents to facilitate better environmental decision-making 

(40 CFR 1500). 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 

1997 (Public Law 105-

57): 

Under the Refuge Improvement Act, the Fish and Wildlife Service is 

required to develop 15-year comprehensive conservation plans for all 

national wildlife refuges outside Alaska. The Act also describes the six 

public uses given priority status within the Refuge System (i.e., hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation). 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System 

Mission:

The mission is to administer a national network of lands and waters for 

the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of 

the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the 

United States for the benefit of present and future generations 

of Americans. 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System: 

Various categories of areas administered by the Secretary of the 

Interior for the conservation of fish and wildlife, including species 

threatened with extinction; all lands, waters, and interests therein 

administered by the Secretary as wildlife refuges; areas for the 

protection and conservation of fish and wildlife that are threatened with 

extinction; wildlife ranges; game ranges; wildlife management areas; or 

waterfowl production areas. 

National Wildlife 

Refuge: 

A designated area of land, water, or an interest in land or water within 

the Refuge System. 

Native Species: Species that normally live and thrive in a particular ecosystem. 

Noxious Weed: A plant species designated by federal or state law as generally 

possessing one or more of the following characteristics: aggressive or 

difficult to manage; parasitic; a carrier or host of serious insect or 

disease; or non-native, new, or not common to the United States. 

According to the Federal Noxious Weed Act (P.L. 93-639), a noxious 

weed is one that causes disease or had adverse effects on man or his 

environment and therefore is detrimental to the agriculture and 

commerce of the United States and to the public health. 

Objective: A concise statement of what we want to achieve, how much we want to 

achieve, when and where we want to achieve it, and who is responsible 

for the work. Objectives derive from goals and provide the basis for 

determining strategies, monitoring refuge accomplishments, and 

evaluating the success of strategies. Making objectives attainable, 

time-specific, and measurable (Service Manual 602 FW 1.6N). 
206 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Plant Association: A classification of plant communities based on the similarity in 

dominants of all layers of vascular species in a climax community. 

Plant Community: An assemblage of plant species unique in its composition; occurs in 

particular locations under particular influences; a reflection or 

integration of the environmental influences on the site such as soils, 

temperature, elevation, solar radiation, slope, aspect, and rainfall; 

denotes a general kind of climax plant community. 

Preferred Alternative: This is the alternative determined (by the decision-maker) to best 

achieve the refuge purpose, vision, and goals; contributes to the 

Refuge System mission, addresses the significant issues; and is 

consistent with principles of sound fish and wildlife management. 

Prescribed Fire: The application of fire to wildland fuels to achieve identified land use 

objectives (Service Manual 621 FW 1.7). May occur from natural 

ignition or intentional ignition. 

Priority Species: Fish and wildlife species that require protective measures and/or 

management guidelines to ensure their perpetuation. Priority species 

include the following: (1) State-listed and candidate species; (2) 

species or groups of animals susceptible to significant population 

declines within a specific area or statewide by virtue of their inclination 

to aggregate (e.g., seabird colonies); and (3) species of recreation, 

commercial, and/or tribal importance. 

Public Involvement 

Plan: 

Broad long-term guidance for involving the public in the comprehensive 

conservation planning process. 

Public Involvement: A process that offers impacted and interested individuals and 

organizations an opportunity to become informed about and to express 

their opinions on Service actions and policies. In the process, these 

views are studied thoroughly and thoughtful consideration of public 

views is given in shaping decisions for refuge management. 

Public: Individuals, organizations, and groups; officials of federal, state, and 

local government agencies; Indian tribes; and foreign nations. It may 

include anyone outside the core planning team. It includes those who 

may or may not have indicated an interest in service issues and those 

who do or do not realize that Service decisions may affect them. 

Purposes of the 

Refuge: 

“The purposes specified in or derived from the law, proclamation, 

executive order, agreement, public land order, donation document, or 

administrative memorandum establishing, authorizing, or expanding a 

refuge, refuge unit, or refuge sub-unit.” For refuges that encompass 

congressionally designated wilderness, the purposes of the Wilderness 

Act are additional purposes of the refuge 

(Service Manual 602 FW 106 S). 
 

Appendices 207

Recommended 

Wilderness: 

Areas studied and found suitable for wilderness designation by both the 

Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Secretary of the 

Department of the Interior, and recommended for designation by the 

President to Congress. These areas await only legislative action by 

Congress in order to become part of the Wilderness System. Such 

areas are also referred to as “pending in Congress” (Draft Service 

Manual 610 FW 1.5). 

Record of Decision 

(ROD): 

A concise public record of decision prepared by the federal agency, 

pursuant to NEPA, that contains a statement of the decision, 

identification of all alternatives considered, identification of the 

environmentally preferable alternative, a statement as to whether all 

practical means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the 

alternative selected have been adopted (and if not, why they were not), 

and a summary of monitoring and enforcement where applicable for any 

mitigation (40 CFR 1505.2). 

Refuge Goal: See Goal 

Refuge Purposes: See Purposes of the Refuge 

Sea Level Rise A rise in the surface of the sea due to increased water volume of the 

ocean and/or sinking of the land. 

Scrub/shrub Habitat Areas dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet tall, including 

true shrubs, young trees, and trees or shrubs that may be stunted 

because of environmental conditions; these areas are sometimes 

referred to as early successional communities. 

Socioeconomic Involving social as well as economic factors. 

Songbirds: 

(Also Passerines) 

A category of birds that is medium to small, perching landbirds. Most 

are territorial singers and migratory. 

Step-down 

Management Plan: 

A plan that provides specific guidance on management subjects (e.g., 

habitat, public use, fire, and safety) or groups of related subjects. It 

describes strategies and implementation schedules for meeting CCP 

goals and objectives (Service Manual 602 FW 1.6 U). 

Strategy: A specific action, tool, technique, or combination of actions, tools, and 

techniques used to meet unit objectives 

(Service Manual 602 FW 1.6 U). 

Study Area: The area reviewed in detail for wildlife, habitat, and public use potential. 

For purposes of this CCP, the study area includes the lands within the 

currently approved refuge boundary and potential refuge expansion areas.
208 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Threatened Species 

(Federal): 

Species listed under the Endangered Species Act that are likely to 

become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of their range. 

Threatened Species 

(State): 

A plant or animal species likely to become endangered in the state 

within the near future if factors contributing to population decline or 

habitat degradation or loss continue. 

Tiering: The coverage of general matters in broader environmental impact 

statements with subsequent narrower statements of environmental 

analysis, incorporating by reference, the general discussions and 

concentrating on specific issues (40 CFR 1508.28). 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Mission: 

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others 

to conserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats for 

the continuing benefit of the American people. 

Unit Objective: See Objective 

Vegetation Type, 

Habitat Type, Forest 

Cover Type: 

A land classification system based upon the concept of distinct plant 

associations. 

Vision Statement: A concise statement of what the planning unit should be, or what we 

hope to do, based primarily upon the Refuge System mission and 

specific refuge purposes, and other mandates. We will tie the vision 

statement for the refuge to the mission of the Refuge System; the 

purpose(s) of the refuge; the maintenance or restoration of the 

ecological integrity of each refuge and the Refuge System; and other 

mandates (Service Manual 602 FW 1.6 Z). 

Watershed 

Wetland 

The total land area from which water drains into a single stream, lake, 

or ocean. 

Lands where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining 

the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal 

communities living in the soil and on its surface. 
 

Appendices 209

Wilderness Study 

Areas: 

Lands and waters identified through inventory as meeting the definition 

of wilderness and undergoing evaluation for recommendation for 

inclusion in the Wilderness System. A study area must meet the 

following criteria: 

 Generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of 

nature, with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable; 

 Has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and 

unconfined type of recreation; and 

 Has at least 5,000 contiguous roadless acres or is sufficient in size 

as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired 

condition (Draft Service Manual 610 FW 1.5). 

Wilderness: See Designated Wilderness 

Wildfire: A free-burning fire requiring a suppression response; all fire other than 

prescribed fire that occurs on wildlands (Service Manual 621 FW 1.7). 

Wildland Fire: Every wildland fire is either a wildfire or a prescribed fire (Service 

Manual 621 FW 1.3 
210 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

AQI Air Quality Index 

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act 

ACJV Atlantic Coast Joint Venture 

ARK Audubon Refuge Keeper 

BCR Bird Conservation Region 

BCC Birds of Conservation Concern 

BRT Biological Review Team 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CWA Clean Water Act 

CCP Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CRC Coastal Georgia Regional Developement Commission 

CWCS Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy 

cfs cubic feet per second 

DOI Department of the Interior 

DU Ducks Unlimited 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EE environmental education 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

EPD Environmental Protection Division 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

FR Federal Register 

FTE full-time equivalent 

FY Fiscal Year 

GADNR Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

GAFC Georgia Forestry Commission 

GCM Global Climate Models 

GPA Georgia Port Authority 

GIS Global Information System 

IBA Important Bird Area 

LCWF Land and Water Conservation Fund 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

NWR National Wildlife Refuge 

NWRS National Wildlife Refuge System 

NRI Nationwide Rivers Inventory 

NWSG Native Warm Season Grasses 

NABCI North American Bird Conservation Initiative 

NAWCP North American Waterbird Conservation Plan 

NAWMP North American Waterbird Management Plan 

OAS Ogeechee Audubon Society 

PIF Partners-In-Flight 

PFT Permanent Full Time 
 

Appendices 211

PUNA Public Use Natural Area 

RAPP Refuge Annual Performance Planning 

RM Refuge Manual 

RNA Research Natural Area 

ROD Record of Decision 

RONS Refuge Operating Needs System 

RRP Refuge Roads Program 

RHPO Regional Historic Preservation Officer 

SCRC Savannah Coastal Refuge Complex 

SLAMM Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model 

SLR Sea Level Rise 

SAMBI South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative 

SCDHEC South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 

SCDNR South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 

SCFC South Carolina Forestry Commission 

SE ARMI Southeast Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative 

SARP Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership 

SRES Special Report on Emissions Scenarios 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer 

SWG State Wildlife Grants Program (Georgia) 

OCRM The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management 

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (also Service) 

USSCP U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan 

TFT Temporary Full Time 

TNC The Nature Conservancy 

T&E Threatened and Endangered 

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers 

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization 

USC United States Code 

USDA United States Department of Agriculture 

USGS United States Geological Survey 

USSCP U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan 

WRD Wildlife Resources Division 
212 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 213

Appendix B. References and Literature Citations 

Atlantic Coast Joint Venture. “The Atlantic Coast Joint Venture Vision.” 

http://www.acjv.org/index.htm (Accessed 2008) 

Audubon. "Birds and Science, Georgia Important Birds Areas."

http://iba.audubon.org/iba/stateIndex.do?state=US-GA (Accessed 2008)

Audubon. "Birds & Science, South Carolina Important Birds Areas." 

http://iba.audubon.org/iba/stateIndex.do?state=US-SC (Accessed 2008) 

Badr, A., A. Wachob, and J. Gellici. January 2004. South Carolina Water Plan, 2nd Edition, 

SC Department of Natural Resources. Land, Water, and Conservation Division, 

Hydrology Section. http://dnr.sc.gov/water/hydro/hydindex.htm and 

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/water/hydro/water_plan.htm (Accessed 2009) 

Bailey, R.G. 1978. “Descriptions of the Ecoregions of the United States.” 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Misc. Publ. #1391, Washington, D.C. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/colorimagemap/ecoreg1_divisions.html and 

http://www.fs.fed.us/colorimagemap/ecoreg1_provinces.html 

Carter, H. S. 1970. Georgia Tropical Cyclones and Their Effect on the State. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, ESSA Technical Memorandum. EDSTM 14, 33 pp. 

Caudill, James and Andrew Laughland. 2003. Banking on Nature 2002. 

Division of Economics, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 118p. 

Chattam County Finance Staff (Linda Cramer, Finance Director). 2005. Chattam County, Georgia 

Annual Budget – Fiscal Year 2005/2006. http://www.chathamcounty.org/FY2005Budget/016-

intro-backgroundinfo.pdf. Accessed November 2009. 

Church, J.A., J. M. Gregory, and others. “Changes in Sea Level.” Chapter 11 in Climate Change 

2001: The Scientific Basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 639-693. 

Edited by J. T. Houghton and others. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 

Craft, C., M. Joye, S. Pennings, D. Park, and J. Ehman. 2008. Data Report on SLAMM Model 

Results for Ten National Wildlife Refuges in South Carolina and Georgia, extracted from 

“Effects of Sea Level Rise and Climate Variabiltiy on Ecosystems Services of Tidal Marshes, 

South Atlantic Coast,” a U.S. EPA Science to Achieve Resoults (STAR) Program 

(EPA Agreement # RD 83222001-0). 

Deed of Donation from John S. Dunhill and Thomas F. Jones, Jr., to United States of America, 

December 3, 1975 (filed January 20, 1976), Beaufort County, SC, Deed book 233, page 2015. 

Deutsch, C.J., J.P. Reid, R.K. Bonde, D.E. Easton, H.I. Kochman, and T.J. O’Shea. 2003. Seasonal 

movements, migratory behavior, and site fidelity of West Indian manatees along the Atlantic 

Coast of the United States. Wildlife Monographs 151: 1-77. Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute. 
214 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Dupree, A. Hunter. 1957. Science in the Federal Government: A History of Policies and Activities to 

1940. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 460 pp. 

Easement Exchange Agreement between the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

State of South Carolina, July 28, 1981, Beaufort County, SC. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). “Regional Economic Conditions.” 

http://www4.fdic.gov/RECON/ (Accessed 2008) 

Gabrielson, Ira N. 1943. Wildlife Conservation. The Macmillan Company, 

New York, New York. 250 pp. 

Georgia Department of Community Affairs, Office of Planning and Quality Growth. October 2005. 

“Regional Profile of Georgia’s Coastal Counties.” Prepared for Coastal Comprehensive 

Plan Advisory Committee. 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources , Environmental Protection Division, Air Protection Branch, 

Ambient Monitoring Program . "2006 Ambient Air Surveillance Report, 2005-2006 Risk 

Assessment Discussion." http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp/report.php 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. “Altamaha River 

Basin Management Plan, 2003.” http://www.gaepd.org/Documents/altamaha.html

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. “Ogeechee River 

Basin Management Plan, 2001.” http://www.gaepd.org/Documents/ogeechee.html

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. “Savannah River 

Basin Management Plan, 2001.” http://www.gaepd.org/Documents/savannah.html

Georgia Department of Natural Resources . 2005. "A Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy 

for Georgia.” http://www1.gadnr.org/cwcs/Documents/strategy.html 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources. “Guidelines for Eating Fish From Georgia Waters, 

2007 Update.” 

http://www.gaepd.org/Files_PDF/gaenviron/fish_advisory/GADNR_FishConsumptionGuideline

s_Y2007.pdf

Georgia Department of Natural Resources. "Statewide Plans." 

http://www.gadnr.org/statewidePlans.aspx (Accessed 2008) 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GADNR). 2005. “Georgia Comprehensive 

Wildlife Conservation Strategy." Wildlife Resources Division, August 2005, 

http://www1.gadnr.org/cwcs/Documents/strategy.html (Accessed 2009). 

Georgia Port Authority (GPA). 2009. “By the Numbers: Redefining the Pace of Trade. 

November 2009. GPA Marketing. http://www.gaport.com/LinkClick.aspx

Georgia State Climate Office, University of Georgia. "Historical Climate Data and Summaries - 

Climatology of the Georgia Coastal Plain." http://climate.engr.uga.edu/historic.html 

(Accessed 2008) 
 

Appendices 215

Griffith, G., J. Omernick, and J. Comstock. 2002 “Ecoregions of South Carolina- Regional 

Descriptions”. July 31, 2002. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. 

Hunter, C., J. Collazo, B. Noffsinger, B. Winn, D. Allen, B. Harrington, M. Epstein, and J. Saliva. 

October 2005. Southeastern Coastal Plains – Caribbean Regional Shorebird Plan 

Version 1.0. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

http://www.acjv.org/documents/shorebird_plan_se_car.pdf 

Krabill, W., W. Abdalati, E. Frederick, S. Manizade, C. Martin, J. Sonntag, R. Swift, R. Thomas, 

W. Wright, and J. Yungel. “Greenland Ice Sheet: High-elevation Balance and Peripheral 

Thinning.” Science. July 21, 2000: pp. 428-430. 

Laycock, George. 1965. The Sign of the Flying Goose: A Guide to the National Wildlife Refuges. 

The Natural History Press, Garden City, New York. 299 pp. 

Lenz Design & Communication, Inc. Sherpa Guides. "Blackbeard Island National Wildlife 

Refuge." Decatur, Georgia. 

http://www.sherpaguides.com/georgia/wildlife_viewing/colonial_coast/63.html 

(Accessed 2008) 

Lenz Design & Communication, Inc. Sherpa Guides. "Savannah National Wildlife Refuge." 

Decatur, Georgia 

http://www.sherpaguides.com/georgia/wildlife_viewing/colonial_coast/57.html

http://www.sherpaguides.com/georgia/coast/northern_coast/savannah_nwr.html 

(Accessed 2008) 

Lenz Design & Communication, Inc. Sherpa Guides. "Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge." Decatur, 

Georgia. http://www.sherpaguides.com/georgia/wildlife_viewing/colonial_coast/58.html 

http://www.sherpaguides.com/georgia/coast/northern_coast/wassaw_island.html (Accessed 2008) 

Loveland, T.R. and A. Williams. 2008. “Land Cover Change in the Eastern United States” 

USGS, Center for Earth Observations and Science, Sioux Falls, SD. 57198, 22-Aug-2008, 

http://landcovertrends.usgs.gov/east/regionalSummary.html (Accessed December 9, 2009) 

Matthews, S., R. O'Connor, L. Iverson, and A. Prasad. 2004. Atlas of Climate Change Effects 

 in 150 Bird Species of the Eastern United States. Newton Square, PA: USDA Forest 

Service General Technical Report NE-GTR-318. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/ne/newtown_square/publications/technical_

reports/pdfs/2004/gtr318/ne_gtr318.pdf 

Meehl, G.A., T. F. Stocker, W. D. Collins, P. Friedlingstein, A. T. Gaye, J. M. Gregory, A. Kitoh, R. Knutti, 

J. M. Murphy, A. Noda, SCB Raper, I. G. Watterson, A. J. Weaver, and Z. C. Zhao. 2007. 

“Global Climate Projections.” Climate Change 2007: the Physical Science Basis. Contribution of 

Working Group 1 to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change, 747-845. Edited by S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, 

K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. L. Miller. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 

Mitchell, R. J., and S. L. Duncan. 2009. Range of variability in southern coastal plain forests: its 

historical, contemporary, and future role in sustaining biodiversity. Ecology and Society 

14(1): 17. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art17/ 
216 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The Office of Ocean and Coastal 

Resource Management (OCRM). http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/ (Accessed 2008) 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1999. “Turning to the Sea: America’s 

Ocean Future.” Washington, DC. 

North American Bird Conservation Initiative. "Integrated Bird Conservation in the United States," 

http://www.nabci-us.org/; and "NABCI-Bird Conservation, Region 27,” Southeastern Coastal 

Plain," http://www.nabci-us.org/bcr27.html

Odum, E.U. et. al. 2005. Fundamentals of Ecology, pg. 421. 

Partners in Flight, Southern Piedmont and South Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

http://www.partnersinflight.org/ and http://www.blm.gov/wildlife/pifplans.htm (Accessed 2008) 

Pew Oceans Commission. 2003. “America’s Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change, A 

Report to the Nation.” Arlington, VA. 

Porcher, R., and Sarah Fick. 2005. The Story of Sea Island Cotton. Charleston, South Carolina: 

Wyrick & Company. 

Priest, S., and J.S. Clarke. 2003. “Stream-Aquifer Relations in the Coastal Area of Georgia and 

Adjacent Parts of Florida and South Carolina.” U.S. Geological Survey. 

http://ga.water.usgs.gov/pubs/other/gwrc2003/pdf/Priest-GWRC2003.pdf

Sassaman, K. 2006. People of the Shoals: Stallings Culture of the Savannah River Valley. 

Saunders, R. 2000. The Guale Indians of the Lower Atlantic Coast: Change and Continuity. In: 

Indians of the Greater Southeast during the Historic Period, edited by Bonnie G. McEwan. 

Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. 

Savannah Area Chamber of Commerce. November 2007. “Savannah 2008 Forecast and 2007 

Economic Trends." Savannah, GA. 

http://www.savannahchamber.com/images/pdf/1200495996.pdf 

Schulte, S., S. Brown, and the American Oystercatcher Working Group. 2006. “American 

Oystercatcher Conservation Plan for the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States,” 

Version 1.0, April 2006. 

www.ncsu.edu/project/grsmgis/AMOY/AMOYConservationPlan06_05_06.doc 

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. (DHEC). 2006. Bureau of Air 

Quality (BAQ), “South Carolina Air Program 1990-2005”, 

http://www.scdhec.com/administration/library/CR-003800.pdf. (Accessed 2009). 

http://www.scdhec.com/environment/bag/ambientairmonitoring.aspx. (Accessed 2009). 

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. "South Carolina Fish Consumption 

Advisories – 2007." http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/fish/downloads.htm 

(Accessed 2008)
 

Appendices 217

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. October 1997. "208 Water Quality 

Management Plan Update for Non-Designated Area of South Carolina and Section 208 Water 

Quality Management Plan Catawba Regional Plan." 

http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/docs/208plan.pdf 

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. October 2003. “Watershed Water 

Quality Assessment – Salkehatchie River Basin.” Columbia, SC. 

http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/shed/text/salk03.pdf and 

http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/shed/sav_main.htm

South Carolina Department of Natural Resources . 2006. "The 2005 Comprehensive Wildlife 

Conservation Strategy." Columbia, SC. http://www.dnr.sc.gov/cwcs/ (Accessed 2008). 

South Carolina Department of Natural Resources , South Carolina State Climatology Office. 

"The Impact of Climate Change on South Carolina." Columbia, SC. 

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/climate/sco/Publications/climate_change_impacts.php 

(Accessed 2009) 

Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership. http://www.sarpaquatic.org/ (Accessed 2008) 

Southeast Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. Habitat Management Guidelines. 

http://www.separc.org/ (Accessed 2008) 

Sullivan, B. 2001. Early Days on the Georgia Tidewater: The Story of McIntosh County & Sapelo 

(6th Revised Edition). McIntosh Board of Commissioners. 

The Coastal Environmental Organization of Georgia. “Savannah Harbor Expansion Project.” 

Savannah, GA. http://home.att.net/~theceo/deepening.htm (Accessed 2008) 

The Earth Institute at Columbia University, Next Generation Earth. "Climate Change.” 

http://www.nextgenerationearth.org/contents/view/18 (Georgia) and 

http://www.nextgenerationearth.org/contents/view/48 (South Carolina) (Accessed 2009) 

The Earth Institute at Columbia University, Next Generation Earth. "Fast Climate Facts.” 

http://www.nextgenerationearth.org/facts (Accessed 2009) 

The National Wilderness Preservation System, Wilderness.net. "Wilderness Legislation: The 

Wilderness Act of 1964." http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=legisAct

(Accessed 2008) 

The Nature Conservancy. “Adopt an Acre.” (Accessed June 25, 2009) 

http://support.nature.org/site/PageServer?pagename=soforests_aaa 

The New Georgia Encyclopedia. “Geology of the Georgia Coast.” A project of the Georgia 

Humanities Council, in partnership with the University of Georgia Press, the University System 

of Georgia/GALILEO, and the Office of the Governor. 

 http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-2777 (Accessed 2008) 

The South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative. “The South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative 

Implementation Plan – An Integrated Approach to Conservation of All Birds Across All 

Habitats.” http://www.acjv.org/documents/sambi_plan.pdf (Accessed 2008) 
218 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Air Quality. 

April 2006. "South Carolina Air Program." Report CR-003800. Columbia, SC. 

http://www.scdhec.com/administration/library/CR-003800.pdf (Accessed 2008) 

The Southeast Regional Climate Center, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. 

“Historical Climate Summaries for Georgia.” 

http://www.sercc.com/climateinfo/historical/historical_ga.html (Accessed 2008) 

Thomas, Edward J. 1923. Memoirs of a Southerner 1840-1923. 

Electronic Edition, Davis Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Tomkins, I.R. 1965. “The Willits of Georgia and South Carolina.” The Wilson Bulletin, 

Vol. 77, No. 2 (June 1965), pp. 151-167. 

University of Georgia, “Geology of Georgia’s Coast.” 

http://www.uga.edu/aquarium/nature/geology.html (Accessed 2008) 

University of Georgia – Summit to the Sea. “Florida Aquifer System.” 

http://coastgis.marsci.uga.edu/summit/aquifers_fla.htm (Accessed 2008) 

University of Georgia – Summit to the Sea. “Surficial Aquifer System.” 

http://coastgis.marsci.uga.edu/summit/aquifers_surf.htm (Accessed 2008) 

University of Florida. 2003. “Plant Management in Florida Waters.” 

http://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/guide/aquifers.html (Accessed 2010) 

U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Economic Analysis, and Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/states/00000.html (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Water and 

Climate Center. "Climate Reports (Narratives and Tables) for Soil Survey Regions of the 

U.S." http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/cgibin/soil-nar-state.pl?state=ga (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2008. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, Soil Series Classification Database. USDA-NRCW, Lincoln, NE. 

http://soils.usda.gov/soils/technical/classification/scfile/index.html (Accessed 2009) 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Office of Science. 

1999. Carbon Sequestration Research and Development. 

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/sequestration/publications/1999_rdreport/ 

(Accessed 2009) 

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1974. "An Ecology Survey of the Coastal 

Region of Georgia," NPS Scientific Monograph No.3. 

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/science/3/index.htm 

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Center for Recreation and 

Conservation. “Nationwide Rivers Inventory.” 

http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/rtca/nri/index.html (Accessed 2008) 
 

Appendices 219

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Air Quality Index (AQI) - A Guide to Air Quality and Your 

Health," AirNow. http://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=static.aqi (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . "Air Quality Index Report." 

http://www.epa.gov/air/data/monaqi.html?st~GA~Georgia and 

http://www.epa.gov/air/data/monaqi.html?st~SC~South%20Carolina (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Climate Change.” http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ 

(Accessed 2009) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. September 1997. 

“Climate Change and Georgia.” Publication # EPA 230-F-97-008j. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/downloads/ga_impct.pdf 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy. September 1998. 

“Climate Change and South Carolina.” Publication # EPA 236-F-98-007w. 

http://nepis.epa.gov/EPA/html/DLwait.htm?url=/Adobe/PDF/40000PT6.PDF 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . December 2004. “National Coastal Condition Report II 

(Chapter 4).” Publication # EPA-620/R-03/002. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/nccr/2005/

and http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/nccr/2005/downloads.html 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. June 2007. “National Estuary Program Coastal Condition 

Report (Chapter 4).” Publication # EPA-842-B-06-001. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/nepccr/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

“National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." 

http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria/html (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2009a. “Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia.” Western 

Ecology Division. http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/alga_eco.htm (Accessed 2009) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2009b. “Ecoregions of North Carolina and South 

Carolina.” Western Ecology Division. 

http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/ncsc_eco.htm (Accessed 2009) 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “America’s National Wildlife Refuge System - Research Natural Areas 

within Fish and Wildlife Service Managed Lands." 

http://www.fws.gov/refuges/habitats/rnas.html (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “America’s National Wildlife Refuge System - Special Management 

Areas – Biosphere Reserves." 

http://www.fws.gov/refuges/habitats/specialAreas.html#biosphere

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Census Bureau. “2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, 

and Wildlife-Associated Recreation - Georgia and South Carolina.” 

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/fhw06-nat.pdf 
220 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Census Bureau. Revised March 2003. “2001 National 

Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation South Carolina.” 

http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/01fhw/fhw01-sc.pdf 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge - Refuge History." 

http://www.fws.gov/blackbeardisland/history.htm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Bird Habitat Conservation. "North American Waterfowl 

Management Plan." http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/NAWMP/index.shtm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Ecosystem Units.” http://www.fws.gov/offices/ecounits.html

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Georgia Ecological Services, Athens, Brunswick and Columbus - 

Altamaha Ecosystem.” http://www.fws.gov/athens/ecoteams/altamaha.html 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Georgia Ecological Services, Savannah-Santee-Pee Dee (SSPD) 

Ecosystem.” http://www.fws.gov/athens/ecoteams/peedee.html 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge - Refuge History." 

http://www.fws.gov/harrisneck/history.htm

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. “Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 

169).” http://www.fws.gov/policy/library/2006/06-7257.html (Accessed March 2010). 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. January 10, 2008. "Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge, Savannah 

Coastal Refuges, GA – Biological Review Report, June 11-14, 2007." 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. January 17, 2008. "Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge, 

Savannah Coastal Refuges, GA – Biological Review Report, August 27-31, 2007." 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. January 2008. "Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and 

Environmental Assessment, Wolf Island National Wildlife Refuge, 

McIntosh County, GA." Atlanta, GA. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. June 12, 2008. "Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge, 

Savannah Coastal Refuges, GA – Biological Review Report, August 27-31, 2007." 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service . 2007 "Partners for Fish and Wildlife Strategic Plan." 

http://ecos.fws.gov/partners/viewContent.do?viewPage=contactInfo4 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge - Refuge History." 

http://www.fws.gov/pinckneyisland/history.htm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Savannah National Wildlife Refuge. "Quick Facts." 

http://www.fws.gov/savannah/facts.htm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Savannah National Wildlife Refuge - Refuge History." 

http://www.fws.gov/savannah/history.htm 
 

Appendices 221

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Savannah NWR, Pinckney Island NWR and Tybee Island NWR 

Biological Reviews, March 7-10, 2008 (draft)." 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. September 2008. "Overflow National Wildlife Refuge, 

South Arkansas Refuge Complex, AR – Biological Review Report, September 2008." 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Division of Conservation Partnerships. 

"Strategic Habitat Conservation and Power of Partnerships-Strategic Plan for the Partners for 

Fish and Wildlife Program, 2007-2011." http://www.fws.gov/southeast/partners 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Planning Division. October 2007. 

"Comprehensive Conservation Plan Schedule.” 

http://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning/ScheduleByState.htm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region. "Revised Recovery Plan for the U.S. Breeding 

Population of the Wood Stork." Atlanta, GA, 41 p. 

http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/970127.pdf 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region. "Savannah Coastal Refuges." 

http://www.fws.gov/southeast/pubs/savgen.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Tybee National Wildlife Refuge - Refuge History." 

http://www.fws.gov/tybee/history.htm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. "U.S. Shorebird Conservation 

Plan and Council." http://www.fws.gov/shorebirdplan/USShorebird.htm 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge Annual Narrative, 

” CY’s 2005 and 2006. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge - Refuge History." 

http://www.fws.gov/wassaw/history.htm 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). (undated). “A Plan for a Comprehensive National Coastal Program.” 

U.S. Geological Survey Coastal and Marine Geology Program. 

http://marine.usgs.gov/coastal-plan/index.html (Accessed 2009) 

U.S. Geological Survey. "Land Cover Trends - Land Cover Change in the Eastern United States.” 

http://edc2.usgs.gov/LT/LCCEUS.php (Accessed 2008) 

U.S. Geological Survey, National Wildlife Health Center. “Wildlife Disease Information Node.” 

Accessed June 26, 2009. http://wildlifedisease.nbii.gov/significance.jsp 

U.S. Geological Survey. “Southeastern Coastal Plain Aquifer System.” 

Groundwater Atlas of the United States (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina). 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha730/ch_g/G-text7.html (Accessed 2008) 

Waterbird Conservation for the Americas. “North American Waterbird Conservation Plan.” 

http://www.waterbirdconservation.org/nawcp.html (Accessed 2008) 

Waterbird Conservation for the Americas. "Southeast United States Waterbird Conservation Plan." 

http://www.waterbirdconservation.org/southeast_us.html (Accessed 2008) 
222 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 223

Appendix C. Relevant Legal Mandates and Executive 

Orders 

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Administrative Procedures 

Act (1946) 

Outlines administrative procedures to be followed by federal agencies 

with respect to identification of information to be made public; 

publication of material in the Federal Register; maintenance of records; 

attendance and notification requirements for specific meetings and 

hearings; issuance of licenses; and review of agency actions. 

American Antiquities Act of 

1906 

Provides penalties for unauthorized collection, excavation, or 

destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments, or objects of 

antiquity on lands owned or controlled by the United States. The Act 

authorizes the President to designate as national monuments 

objects or areas of historic or scientific interest on lands owned or 

controlled by the Unites States. 

American Indian Religious 

Freedom Act of 1978 

Protects the inherent right of Native Americans to believe, express, 

and exercise their traditional religions, including access to important 

sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to 

worship through ceremonial and traditional rites. 

Americans With Disabilities 

Act of 1990 

Intended to prevent discrimination of and make American society 

more accessible to people with disabilities. The Act requires 

reasonable accommodations to be made in employment, public 

services, public accommodations, and telecommunications for 

persons with disabilities. 

Anadromous Fish 

Conservation Act of 1965, 

as amended 

Authorizes the Secretaries of Interior and Commerce to enter into 

cooperative agreements with states and other non-federal interests 

for conservation, development, and enhancement of anadromous 

fish and contribute up to 50 percent as the federal share of the cost 

of carrying out such agreements. Reclamation construction 

programs for water resource projects needed solely for such fish are 

also authorized. 

Archaeological Resources 

Protection Act of 1979, as 

amended. 

This Act strengthens and expands the protective provisions of the 

Antiquities Act of 1906 regarding archaeological resources. It also 

revised the permitting process for archaeological research. 

Architectural Barriers Act of 

1968 

Requires that buildings and facilities designed, constructed, or 

altered with federal funds, or leased by a federal agency, must 

comply with standards for physical accessibility. 

Bald and Golden Eagle 

Protection Act of 1940, as 

amended 

Prohibits the possession, sale or transport of any bald or golden 

eagle, alive or dead, or part, nest, or egg except as permitted by the 

Secretary of the Interior for scientific or exhibition purposes, or for 

the religious purposes of Indians. 
224 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Bankhead-Jones Farm 

Tenant Act of 1937 

Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a program of land 

conservation and utilization in order to correct maladjustments in 

land use and thus assist in such things as control of soil erosion, 

reforestation, conservation of natural resources and protection of 

fish and wildlife. Some early refuges and hatcheries were 

established under authority of this Act. 

Cave Resources Protection 

Act of 1988 

Established requirements for the management and protection of 

caves and their resources on federal lands, including allowing the 

land managing agencies to withhold the location of caves from the 

public, and requiring permits for any removal or collecting activities 

in caves on federal lands. 

Clean Air Act of 1970 

Regulates air emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources. This 

Act and its amendments charge federal land managers with direct 

responsibility to protect the “air quality and related values” of land under 

their control. These values include fish, wildlife, and their habitats. 

Clean Water Act of 1974, as 

amended 

This Act and its amendments have as its objective the restoration 

and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of 

the Nation’s waters. Section 401 of the Act requires that federally 

permitted activities comply with the Clean Water Act standards, state 

water quality laws, and any other appropriate state laws. Section 

404 charges the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with regulating 

discharge of dredge or fill materials into waters of the United States, 

including wetlands. 

Coastal Barrier Resources 

Act of 1982 (CBRA) 

Identifies undeveloped coastal barriers along the Atlantic and Gulf 

Coasts and included them in the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System (CBRS). The objectives of the act are to 

minimize loss of human life, reduce wasteful federal expenditures, 

and minimize the damage to natural resources by restricting most 

federal expenditures that encourage development within the CBRS. 

Coastal Barrier 

Improvement Act of 1990 

Reauthorized the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA), expanded 

the CBRS to include undeveloped coastal barriers along the Great 

Lakes and in the Caribbean, and established “Otherwise Protected 

Areas (OPAs).” The Service is responsible for maintaining official 

maps, consulting with federal agencies that propose spending 

federal funds within the CBRS and OPAs, and making 

recommendations to Congress about proposed boundary revisions. 

Coastal Wetlands Planning, 

Protection, and Restoration 

(1990) 

Authorizes the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service to participate 

in the development of a Louisiana coastal wetlands restoration 

program, participate in the development and oversight of a coastal 

wetlands conservation program, and lead in the implementation and 

administration of a national coastal wetlands grant program. 
 

Appendices 225

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Coastal Zone Management 

Act of 1972, as amended 

Established a voluntary national program within the Department of 

Commerce to encourage coastal states to develop and implement 

coastal zone management plans and requires that “any federal 

activity within or outside of the coastal zone that affects any land or 

water use or natural resource of the coastal zone” shall be 

“consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable 

policies” of a state’s coastal zone management plan. The law 

includes an Enhancement Grants Program for protecting, restoring, 

or enhancing existing coastal wetlands or creating new coastal 

wetlands. It also established the National Estuarine Research 

Reserve System, guidelines for estuarine research, and financial 

assistance for land acquisition. 

Emergency Wetlands 

Resources Act of 1986 

This Act authorized the purchase of wetlands from Land and Water 

Conservation Fund moneys, removing a prior prohibition on such 

acquisitions. The Act requires the Secretary to establish a National 

Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan, required the states to include 

wetlands in their Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans, and 

transfers to the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund amounts equal to 

import duties on arms and ammunition. It also established entrance 

fees at national wildlife refuges. 

Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended 

Provides for the conservation of threatened and endangered species 

of fish, wildlife, and plants by federal action and by encouraging the 

establishment of state programs. It provides for the determination 

and listing of threatened and endangered species and the 

designation of critical habitats. Section 7 requires refuge managers 

to perform internal consultation before initiating projects that affect or 

may affect endangered species. 

Environmental Education 

Act of 1990 

This Act established the Office of Environmental Education within 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop and administer 

a federal environmental education program in consultation with other 

federal natural resource management agencies, including the Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

Estuary Protection Act of 

1968 

Authorized the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with other 

federal agencies and the states, to study and inventory estuaries of 

the United States, including land and water of the Great Lakes, and 

to determine whether such areas should be acquired for protection. 

The Secretary is also required to encourage state and local 

governments to consider the importance of estuaries in their 

planning activities relative to federal natural resource grants. In 

approving any state grants for acquisition of estuaries, the Secretary 

was required to establish conditions to ensure the permanent 

protection of estuaries. 
226 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Estuaries and Clean Waters 

Act of 2000 

This law creates a federal interagency council that includes the 

Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Secretary of the Army 

for Civil Works, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency and the Administrator for the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The council is 

charged with developing a national estuary habitat restoration 

strategy and providing grants to entities to restore and protect 

estuary habitat to promote the strategy. 

Food Security Act of 1985, 

as amended (Farm Bill) 

The Act contains several provisions that contribute to wetland 

conservation. The Swampbuster provisions state that farmers who 

convert wetlands for the purpose of planting after enactment of the 

law are ineligible for most farmer program subsidies. It also 

established the Wetland Reserve Program to restore and protect 

wetlands through easements and restoration of the functions and 

values of wetlands on such easement areas. 

Farmland Protection Policy 

Act of 1981, as amended 

The purpose of this law is to minimize the extent to which federal 

programs contribute to the unnecessary conversion of farmland to 

nonagricultural uses. Federal programs include construction 

projects and the management of federal lands. 

Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (1972), as 

amended 

Governs the establishment of and procedures for committees that 

provide advice to the federal government. Advisory committees may 

be established only if they will serve a necessary, nonduplicative 

function. Committees must be strictly advisory unless otherwise 

specified and meetings must be open to the public. 

Federal Coal Leasing 

Amendment Act of 1976 

Provided that nothing in the Mining Act, the Mineral Leasing Act, or 

the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands authorized mining coal 

on refuges. 

Federal-Aid Highways Act 

of 1968 

Established requirements for approval of federal highways through 

national wildlife refuges and other designated areas to preserve the 

natural beauty of such areas. The Secretary of Transportation is 

directed to consult with the Secretary of the Interior and other federal 

agencies before approving any program or project requiring the use 

of land under their jurisdiction. 

Federal Noxious Weed Act 

of 1990, as amended 

The Secretary of Agriculture was given the authority to designate 

plants as noxious weeds and to cooperate with other federal, State 

and local agencies, farmers’ associations, and private individuals in 

measures to control, eradicate, prevent, or retard the spread of such 

weeds. The Act requires each Federal land-managing agency, 

including the Fish and Wildlife Service, to designate an office or 

person to coordinate a program to control such plants on the 

agency’s land and implement cooperative agreements with the 

states, including integrated management systems to control 

undesirable plants. 
 

Appendices 227

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Fish and Wildlife Act of 

1956 

Establishes a comprehensive national fish, shellfish, and wildlife 

resources policy with emphasis on the commercial fishing industry 

but also includes the inherent right of every citizen and resident to 

fish for pleasure, enjoyment, and betterment and to maintain and 

increase public opportunities for recreational use of fish and wildlife 

resources. Among other things, it authorizes the Secretary of the 

Interior to take such steps as may be required for the development, 

advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and 

wildlife resources including, but not limited to, research, 

development of existing facilities, and acquisition by purchase or 

exchange of land and water or interests therein. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Act of 1980, 

as amended 

Requires the Service to monitor non-gamebird species, identify 

species of management concern, and implement conservation 

measures to preclude the need for listing under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Coordination Act of 1958 

Promotes equal consideration and coordination of wildlife 

conservation with other water resource development programs by 

requiring consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

state fish and wildlife agencies where the “waters of a stream or 

other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or 

licensed to be impounded, diverted...or otherwise controlled or 

modified” by any agency under federal permit or license. 

Improvement Act of 1978 

This act was passed to improve the administration of fish and wildlife 

programs and amends several earlier laws, including the Refuge 

Recreation Act, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Act, and the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956. It authorizes the 

Secretary to accept gifts and bequests of real and personal property 

on behalf of the United States. It also authorizes the use of 

volunteers on Service projects and appropriations to carry out 

volunteer programs. 

Fishery (Magnuson) 

Conservation and 

Management Act of 1976 

Established Regional Fishery Management Councils comprised of 

federal and state officials, including the Fish and Wildlife Service. It 

provides for regulation of foreign fishing and vessel fishing permits. 

Freedom of Information Act, 

1966 

Requires all federal agencies to make available to the public for 

inspection and copying administrative staff manuals and staff 

instructions; official, published and unpublished policy statements; 

final orders deciding case adjudication; and other documents. 

Special exemptions have been reserved for nine categories of 

privileged material. The Act requires the party seeking the 

information to pay reasonable search and duplication costs. 

Geothermal Steam Act of 

1970, as amended 

Authorizes and governs the lease of geothermal steam and related 

resources on public lands. Section 15 c of the Act prohibits issuing 

geothermal leases on virtually all Service-administrative lands. 
228 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Lacey Act of 1900, as 

amended 

Originally designed to help states protect their native game animals and 

to safeguard U.S. crop production from harmful foreign species, this Act 

prohibits interstate and international transport and commerce of fish, 

wildlife or plants taken in violation of domestic or foreign laws. It 

regulates the introduction to America of foreign species. 

Land and Water 

Conservation Fund Act of 

1948 

This Act provides funding through receipts from the sale of surplus 

federal land, appropriations from oil and gas receipts from the outer 

continental shelf, and other sources for land acquisition under 

several authorities. Appropriations from the fund may be used for 

matching grants to states for outdoor recreation projects and for land 

acquisition by various federal agencies, including the Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

Marine Mammal Protection 

Act of 1972, as amended 

The 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act established a federal 

responsibility to conserve marine mammals with management 

vested in the Department of the Interior for sea otter, walrus, polar 

bear, dugong, and manatee. The Department of Commerce is 

responsible for cetaceans and pinnipeds, other than the walrus. With 

certain specified exceptions, the Act establishes a moratorium on 

the taking and importation of marine mammals, as well as products 

taken from them. 

Migratory Bird Conservation 

Act of 1929 

Established a Migratory Bird Conservation Commission to approve 

areas recommended by the Secretary of the Interior for acquisition 

with Migratory Bird Conservation Funds. The role of the commission 

was expanded by the North American Wetland Conservation Act to 

include approving wetlands acquisition, restoration, and 

enhancement proposals recommended by the North American 

Wetlands Conservation Council. 

Migratory Bird Hunting and 

Conservation Stamp Act of 

1934 

Also commonly referred to as the “Duck Stamp Act,” requires 

waterfowl hunters 16 years of age or older to possess a valid federal 

hunting stamp. Receipts from the sale of the stamp are deposited 

into the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund for the acquisition of 

migratory bird refuges. 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 

1918, as amended 

This Act implements various treaties and conventions between the 

United States and Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former Soviet 

Union for the protection of migratory birds. Except as allowed by 

special regulations, this Act makes it unlawful to pursue, hunt, kill, 

capture, possess, buy, sell, purchase, barter, export or import any 

migratory bird, part, nest, egg, or product. 

Mineral Leasing Act for 

Acquired Lands (1947), as 

amended 

Authorizes and governs mineral leasing on acquired public lands. 
 

Appendices 229

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Minerals Leasing Act of 

1920, as amended 

Authorizes and governs leasing of public lands for development of 

deposits of coal, oil, gas, and other hydrocarbons; sulphur; phosphate; 

potassium; and sodium. Section 185 of this title contains provisions 

relating to granting rights-of-way over federal lands for pipelines. 

Mining Act of 1872, as 

amended 

Authorizes and governs prospecting and mining for the so-called 

“hardrock” minerals (i.e., gold and silver) on public lands. 

National and Community 

Service Act of 1990 

Authorizes several programs to engage citizens of the U.S. in fulland/or part-time projects designed to combat illiteracy and poverty, 

provide job skills, enhance educational skills, and fulfill 

environmental needs. Among other things, this law establishes the 

American Conservation and Youth Service Corps to engage young 

adults in approved human and natural resource projects, which will 

benefit the public or are carried out on federal or Indian lands. 

National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 

Requires analysis, public comment, and reporting for environmental 

impacts of federal actions. It stipulates the factors to be considered 

in environmental impact statements, and requires that federal 

agencies employ an interdisciplinary approach in related decisionmaking and develop means to ensure that unqualified environmental 

values are given appropriate consideration, along with economic and 

technical considerations. 

National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966, 

as amended 

It establishes a National Register of Historic Places and a program of 

matching grants for preservation of significant historical features. Federal 

agencies are directed to take into account the effects of their actions on 

items or sites listed or eligible for listing in the National Register. 

National Trails System Act 

(1968), as amended 

Established the National Trails System to protect the recreational, 

scenic, and historic values of some important trails. National 

recreation trails may be established by the Secretaries of Interior or 

Agriculture on land wholly or partly within their jurisdiction, with the 

consent of the involved state(s), and other land managing agencies, 

if any. National scenic and national historic trails may only be 

designated by Congress. Several national trails cross units of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System. 

National Wildlife Refuge 

System Administration Act 

of 1966 

Prior to 1966, there was no single federal law that governed the 

administration of the various national wildlife refuges that had been 

established. This Act defines the National Wildlife Refuge System 

and authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to permit any use of a 

refuge provided such use is compatible with the major purposes(s) 

for which the refuge was established. 
230 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 

1997 

This Act amends the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Act of 1966. This Act defines the mission of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System, establishes the legitimacy and appropriateness of 

six priority wildlife-dependent public uses, establishes a formal 

process for determining compatible uses of Refuge System lands, 

identifies the Secretary of the Interior as responsible for managing 

and protecting the Refuge System, and requires the development of 

a comprehensive conservation plan for all refuges outside of Alaska. 

Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation 

Act of 1990 

Requires federal agencies and museums to inventory, determine 

ownership of, and repatriate certain cultural items and human 

remains under their control or possession. The Act also addresses 

the repatriation of cultural items inadvertently discovered by 

construction activities on lands managed by the agency. 

Neotropical Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act of 2000 

Establishes a matching grant program to fund projects that promote 

the conservation of neotropical migratory birds in the united States, 

Latin America, and the Caribbean. 

North American Wetlands 

Conservation Act of 1989 

Provides funding and administrative direction for implementation of 

the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the Tripartite 

Agreement on wetlands between Canada, the United States, and 

Mexico. The North American Wetlands Conservation Council was 

created to recommend projects to be funded under the Act to the 

Migratory Bird Conservation Commission. Available funds may be 

expended for up to 50 percent of the United States’ share cost of 

wetlands conservation projects in Canada, Mexico, or the United 

States (or 100 percent of the cost of projects on federal lands). 

Refuge Recreation Act of 

1962, as amended 

This Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to administer refuges, 

hatcheries, and other conservation areas for recreational use, when 

such uses do not interfere with the area’s primary purposes. It 

authorizes construction and maintenance of recreational facilities and 

the acquisition of land for incidental fish and wildlife-oriented 

recreational development or protection of natural resources. It also 

authorizes the charging of fees for public uses. 

Partnerships for Wildlife Act 

of 1992 

Establishes a Wildlife Conservation and Appreciation Fund to receive 

appropriated funds and donations from the National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation and other private sources to assist the state fish and game 

agencies in carrying out their responsibilities for conservation of nongame species. The funding formula is no more that 1/3 federal funds, 

at least 1/3 foundation funds, and at least 1/3 state funds. 

Refuge Revenue Sharing 

Act of 1935, as amended 

Provided for payments to counties in lieu of taxes from areas 

administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Counties are required 

to pass payments along to other units of local government within the 

county, which suffer losses in tax revenues due to the establishment 

of Service areas. 
 

Appendices 231

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 

Requires nondiscrimination in the employment practices of federal 

agencies of the executive branch and contractors. It also requires 

all federally assisted programs, services, and activities to be 

available to people with disabilities. 

Rivers and Harbors 

Appropriations Act of 1899, 

as amended 

Requires the authorization by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

prior to any work in, on, over, or under a navigable water of the 

United States. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act provides 

authority for the Service to review and comment on the effects on 

fish and wildlife activities proposed to be undertaken or permitted by 

the Corps of Engineers. Service concerns include contaminated 

sediments associated with dredge or fill projects in navigable waters. 

Sikes Act (1960), as 

amended 

Provides for the cooperation by the Departments of Interior and 

Defense with state agencies in planning, development, and 

maintenance of fish and wildlife resources and outdoor recreation 

facilities on military reservations throughout the United States. It 

requires the Secretary of each military department to use trained 

professionals to manage the wildlife and fishery resource under his 

jurisdiction, and requires that federal and state fish and wildlife 

agencies be given priority in management of fish and wildlife 

activities on military reservations. 

Transfer of Certain Real 

Property for Wildlife 

Conservation Purposes Act 

of 1948 

This Act provides that upon determination by the Administrator of the 

General Services Administration, real property no longer needed by 

a federal agency can be transferred, without reimbursement, to the 

Secretary of the Interior if the land has particular value for migratory 

birds, or to a state agency for other wildlife conservation purposes. 

Transportation Equity Act 

for the 21st Century (1998) 

Established the Refuge Roads Program, requires transportation 

planning that includes public involvement, and provides funding for 

approved public use roads and trails and associated parking lots, 

comfort stations, and bicycle/pedestrian facilities. 

Uniform Relocation and 

Assistance and Real 

Property Acquisition 

Policies Act (1970), as 

amended 

Provides for uniform and equitable treatment of persons who sell their 

homes, businesses, or farms to the Service. The Act requires that any 

purchase offer be no less than the fair market value of the property. 

Water Resources Planning 

Act of 1965 

Established Water Resources Council to be composed of Cabinet 

representatives including the Secretary of the Interior. The Council 

reviews river basin plans with respect to agricultural, urban, energy, 

industrial, recreational and fish and wildlife needs. The act also 

established a grant program to assist States in participating in the 

development of related comprehensive water and land use plans. 
232 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

STATUTE DESCRIPTION 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act 

of 1968, as amended 

This Act selects certain rivers of the nation possessing remarkable 

scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or 

other similar values; preserves them in a free-flowing condition; and 

protects their local environments. 

Wilderness Act of 1964, as 

amended 

This Act directs the Secretary of the Interior to review every roadless 

area of 5,000 acres or more and every roadless island regardless of 

size within the National Wildlife Refuge System and to recommend 

suitability of each such area. The Act permits certain activities within 

designated wilderness areas that do not alter natural processes. 

Wilderness values are preserved through a “minimum tool” 

management approach, which requires refuge managers to use the 

least intrusive methods, equipment, and facilities necessary for 

administering the areas. 

Youth Conservation Corps 

Act of 1970 

Established a permanent Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) program 

within the Departments of Interior and Agriculture. Within the 

Service, YCC participants perform many tasks on refuges, fish 

hatcheries, and research stations. 

EXECUTIVE ORDERS DESCRIPTIONS 

EO 11593, Protection and Enhancement 

of the Cultural Environment (1971) 

States that if the Service proposes any development 

activities that may affect the archaeological or historic 

sites, the Service will consult with Federal and State 

Historic Preservation Officers to comply with Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 

as amended. 

EO 11644, Use of Off-road Vehicles on 

Public Land (1972) 

Established policies and procedures to ensure that the 

use of off-road vehicles on public lands will be 

controlled and directed so as to protect the resources 

of those lands, to promote the safety of all users of 

those lands, and to minimize conflicts among the 

various uses of those lands. 
 

Appendices 233

EXECUTIVE ORDERS DESCRIPTIONS 

EO 11988, Floodplain Management 

(1977) 

The purpose of this Executive Order is to prevent 

federal agencies from contributing to the “adverse 

impacts associated with occupancy and modification 

of floodplains” and the “direct or indirect support of 

floodplain development.” In the course of fulfilling 

their respective authorities, federal agencies “shall 

take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize 

the impact of floods on human safety, health and 

welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and 

beneficial values served by floodplains.” 

EO 11989 (1977), Amends Section 2 of 

EO 11644 

Directs agencies to close areas negatively impacted 

by off-road vehicles. 

EO 11990, Protection of Wetlands (1977) Federal agencies are directed to provide leadership 

and take action to minimize the destruction, loss of 

degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and 

enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands. 

EO 12372, Intergovernmental Review of 

Federal Programs (1982) 

Seeks to foster intergovernmental partnerships by 

requiring federal agencies to use the state process to 

determine and address concerns of state and local 

elected officials with proposed federal assistance and 

development programs. 

EO 12898, Environmental Justice (1994) Requires federal agencies to identify and address 

disproportionately high and adverse effects of its 

programs, policies, and activities on minority and lowincome populations. 

EO 12906, Coordinating Geographical 

Data Acquisition and Access (1994), 

Amended by EO 13286 (2003). 

Amendment of EOs and other actions in 

connection with transfer of certain 

functions to Secretary of DHS. 

Recommended that the executive branch develop, in 

cooperation with state, local, and tribal governments, 

and the private sector, a coordinated National Spatial 

Data Infrastructure to support public and private 

sector applications of geospatial data. Of particular 

importance to comprehensive conservation planning 

is the National Vegetation Classification System 

(NVCS), which is the adopted standard for vegetation 

mapping. Using NVCS facilitates the compilation of 

regional and national summaries, which in turn, can 

provide an ecosystem context for individual refuges. 

EO 12962, Recreational Fisheries (1995) Federal agencies are directed to improve the quantity, 

function, sustainable productivity, and distribution of U.S. 

aquatic resources for increased recreational fishing 

opportunities in cooperation with states and tribes. 
234 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

EXECUTIVE ORDERS DESCRIPTIONS 

EO 13007, Native American Religious 

Practices (1996) 

Provides for access to, and ceremonial use of, Indian 

sacred sites on federal lands used by Indian religious 

practitioners and direction to avoid adversely affecting 

the physical integrity of such sites. 

EO 13061, Federal Support of 

Community Efforts Along American 

Heritage Rivers (1997) 

Established the American Heritage Rivers initiative for 

the purpose of natural resource and environmental 

protection, economic revitalization, and historic and 

cultural preservation. The Act directs Federal 

agencies to preserve, protect, and restore rivers and 

their associated resources important to our history, 

culture, and natural heritage. 

EO 13084, Consultation and 

Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments (2000) 

Provides a mechanism for establishing regular and 

meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal 

officials in the development of federal policies that 

have tribal implications. 

EO 13112, Invasive Species (1999) Federal agencies are directed to prevent the 

introduction of invasive species, detect and respond 

rapidly to and control populations of such species in a 

cost effective and environmentally sound manner, 

accurately monitor invasive species, provide for 

restoration of native species and habitat conditions, 

conduct research to prevent introductions and to 

control invasive species, and promote public 

education on invasive species and the means to 

address them. This EO replaces and rescinds EO 

11987, Exotic Organisms (1977). 

EO 13186, Responsibilities of Federal 

Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds. 

(2001) 

Instructs federal agencies to conserve migratory birds 

by several means, including the incorporation of 

strategies and recommendations found in Partners in 

Flight Bird Conservation plans, the North American 

Waterfowl Plan, the North American Waterbird 

Conservation Plan, and the United States Shorebird 

Conservation Plan, into agency management plans 

and guidance documents. 
 

Appendices 235

Appendix D. Public Involvement 

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC SCOPING COMMENTS 

Public input for the development of this CCP was obtained, in part, through three public scoping 

meetings held in the vicinity of the refuges. These meetings were held during June 2008 and were 

attended by approximately 42 people. The public meetings were held in an open house format with 

table top displays of each Complex refuge. The public was invited to talk with refuge staff, ask 

questions, and review maps and information on the refuges. A presentation on the CCP process was 

available for interested stakeholders, and both written and verbal comments were received. The 

dates and locations of these meetings are listed below: 

June 2, 2008 - Mighty Eighth Air Force Museum - Pooler, GA (13 members of the public attended) 

June 3, 2008 - Hilton Garden Inn, Bluffton, SC (12 members of the public attended) 

June 5, 2008 - Eulonia Senior Center, Eulonia, GA (17 members of the public attended) 

In addition to the public meetings, the Complex sent out written notices to local, state, and federal 

agencies to invite input in the comprehensive planning process. Several letters or comments were 

received in response to this intergovernmental scoping letter. 

 

The Complex issued news releases to: The Island Packet (Hilton Head Island, SC) - printed article, 

The Savannah Morning News (Savannah, GA) - printed article, The Darien News (Darien, GA) - 

printed article, The Spirit Newspapers (Garden City, GA) - printed article, Coastal Empire News 

(Savannah, GA), The Pooler News (Pooler, GA), Georgia Times-Union (Brunswick, GA), The 

Brunswick News (Brunswick, GA), and Bluffton Today (Bluffton, SC), and the meetings were 

announced on local radio stations and posted on the Complex’s CCP web page. 

The planning team expanded its list of issues and concerns to include those generated by the 

agencies, organizations, businesses, and citizens from the local communities. These issues and 

concerns formed the basis for the development and comparison of objectives in the three alternatives 

described in the EA. The following is a summary of comments from the three public meetings: 

Blackbeard Island NWR Public Comments

Regulations prohibiting tying a boat up to the dock overnight and requiring stream anchoring during 

the bow hunt are unsafe and should be changed. 

There is a need for a longer dock for recreational boat use and more access for the elderly, the 

handicapped, and women and children. Requesting funding to add a 200-foot addition to the dock 

should be a priority. 

Using screw in step while hunting should be allowed. They are safe. 

Access to refuge for non-boat owners 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 
236 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Harris Neck NWR Public Comments

Need to buy more land around Harris Neck NWR to buffer development. 

Concern that the creation of new wells to support a large development may impact the refuge’s ability 

to maintain water levels critical to wood stork nesting areas on Harris Neck NWR. 

With the planning of a major development on Harris Neck NWR, refuge visitation rates could increase 

at both Harris Neck and Black Beard Island NWRs and the Cabretta Inlet area; resulting in increase in 

vehicular traffic, boat docks, and water and air quality impacts. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Pinckney Island NWR Public Comments

Remote fields need to be cut shorter to provide natural food plots for deer and turkey. 

Remove invasive plant species to promote bird nesting and feeding areas. 

Increase interpretive opportunities by adding more signage and establishing various tours. 

Increase signage. 

Add drinking fountains and restrooms. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Savannah NWR Public Comments

Need better map of Savannah NWR. 

Locate an office/welcome center on the refuge. 

The new visitor center should have a meeting place (a pavilion) that could be used as a classroom. 

The refuge should focus on introducing children to refuges and protecting wildlife as great 

opportunities for developing good stewards of our environment. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Tybee NWR Public Comments

Tybee NWR is closed to the public and no public comments were received specifically related to this 

refuge. Please see Complex-wide Issues for more Complex comment details and issues. 

Wassaw NWR Public Comments

Refuge regulations regarding “no dogs” and beach access should be better enforced. 

Continue hunting on refuge. 
 

Appendices 237

Increase signage. 

Access to refuge for non-boat owners. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Complex-wide Public Issues

Habitat Conservation and Management: 

Satisfied with current habitat management programs (2). 

Sea level rise is an important issue that should be considered in the CCP. 

Saltwater intrusion and dredging of the Savannah River are seen as importing issues. 

The rapid development of lands around the refuge should be considered in the CCP. 

It would be beneficial to develop sediment management plans for the refuges that comprise 

part of the ocean shoreline. 

 

Keep people out if you want to protect flora and fauna. 

Coastal property development by large corporations should be promoted. They will comply 

with zoning and building standards and have a positive economic impact. 

 

Concern over maintenance of refuges such as controlled burns and pond dredging. 

 

Control of invasive species should increase. 

Restoration efforts for degraded or impacted refuge lands, such as former maritime forests 

and wetlands, should be conducted. Restoration of Complex lands and water should be 

based on analysis of the ecosystem, including source threats which may originate beyond the 

Complex boundary. In addition, efforts should be made to reduce beach erosion using 

alternative/natural methods. 

 

Use of coordinated fire management program for the Complex is encouraged. 

 

The biota should be inventoried periodically so that everyone knows what is being protected 

and conserved. 

 

The Service should control feral animals (cats and dogs) that destroy the natural biota being 

conserved. 

The Service should control exotic plants where possible. 

 
238 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Visitor and Education Services 

 Include hunting rights in CCP. 

 

All recreational activities that do not disturb wildlife should be allowed (i.e., hunting, fishing, 

picnicking). 

 

Please plan to maximize hunting opportunities on the refuges and also make the opportunities 

affordable to all. 

 

Open Complex completely to hunters. 

 

Refuges should be wildlife sanctuaries. Do not allow hunting. 

 

Trails need better signage. 

 

Using screw in step while hunting should be allowed. They are safe and do less damage to 

trees. 

 

The requirement for a $100,000 liability insurance policy for guides on refuges is 

unreasonable and excessively expensive. The dangers that visitors face at the refuges do not 

approach this amount. 

 

Need to continue to make changes to ensure refuges more accessible to public. 

 

Raise funds with overnight campouts (rustic for children and romantic for couples). Include 

interpretive tours with campout. 

 

Provide a mobile safari for Savannah’s elite as a fundraiser. 

 

Have a scheduled program for birding during specific migratory seasons. 

 

Consider equestrian trails at the refuges including equestrian trails on the beach. 

 

Need more outreach for awareness and public support. 

 

Need volunteer days to help maintain refuges. 

 

Develop allies such as CCL, Sierra Club, and nearby towns. 

 

Facilities and grounds associated with the refuges should be clean, orderly, and protected. 

The staff should be knowledgeable about the refuges in their charge. 

The refuges should have reasonable hours and access, except for those refuges where 

access must be limited to protect visitors and organisms. 

The Service should conduct safe hunts and provide safe places for fishing. 

The refuges should be kept safe for visitors. When conditions are not safe, visitors should be 

informed or kept out of the refuge. 
 

Appendices 239

Resource Protection

There is concern that pollution (i.e., litter, air) will be generated when new port is built. 

Refuge Administration

There is concern about staffing and personnel cutbacks. The Refuge System is understaffed 

and underfunded. 

Supports and advises fundraising in new inventive ways to raise funds. 

Enforce current regulations. 

Need larger budget. 

Public needs to be more informed about options pertaining to the expanded port near HHI. 

There is concern over port development at Savannah and Harris Neck NWRs. 

Because Savannah is a port city, government agencies need to work together to help resolve 

development (growth) issues. 

Keep the refuges as they are now. 

Need increase in refuge staff. 

Expand existing refuges or create new ones to offset development. 

Land acquisition and resource protection: TNC strongly recommends increasing land 

acquisition, conservation easement, and protection for Harris Neck NWR and in-holdings of 

the Savannah NWR of Fife Plantation and Dixie Plywood track at Abercorn Creek in 

Effingham County. 

Service staff should continue to work with partners to manage and improve habitats within the 

ecosystem as well as explore opportunities with partners to expand land and habitat 

protection efforts. 

Significant problems that may adversely affect the population and habitat of fish, wildlife, and 

plants within the Complex may originate from development practices in the surrounding areas. 

Direct destruction of habitat and higher visitation rates may impact the health of plants and 

animals under the protection of the refuge. TNC strongly recommends considering these 

impacts and working towards protecting the Complex and surrounding lands and waters. 

DRAFT CCP/EA COMMENTS AND SERVICE RESPONSES 

This section summarizes all comments that were received on the Draft CCP/EA for Savannah, Tybee, 

Pinckney Island, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuges. Public 

comments were accepted from September 15 to October 15, 2010. 
240 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

A total of 14 individuals, organizations, and government agencies responded on the Draft CCP/EA by 

mail, fax, or e-mail. Comments were received from six individuals, one county agency, and one 

federal agency. Four agencies within the State of Georgia sent form letters through the Georgia 

Office of Planning and Budget, Georgia State Clearinghouse, concurring with the Draft CCP/EA and 

providing no additional comments. These were the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 

Historic Preservation Division; Georgia Forestry Commission; Chatham-Savannah Metro Planning 

Commission; and the Coastal Regional Development Commission of Georgia. Comments were also 

received from the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. 

The following summarizes the comments received on the Draft CCP/EA and provides the Service’s 

response to each concern or comment. 

Blackbeard Island NWR Public Comments

Comment: South Atlantic Quarantine Station – there are important archaeological sites on both the 

south and north ends of the island. I believe these sites need to be investigated and documented to 

better understand 30 years of the island history. 

Service Response: Comment noted. These are addressed in Objective 4.1a. They will be 

addressed further in the Cultural Resources Management Plan. 

Comment: Spanish American War Gun Mount – in April of 1977 an application was filed with the 

Park Service – National Register of Historic Places. I do not know if the application was approved. 

However, I believe this site should be investigated and documented. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The Gun Mount was moved to Fort Pulaski and is no longer 

eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Harris Neck NWR Public Comments

Comment: Ecological Threats and Problems section on page 34: The wood stork rookery at Harris 

Neck is the state's largest, not "one of the largest." In addition, I recommend adding a fourth threat 

as follows: The McIntosh County Commissioners have recently recommended transferring the land 

occupied by the refuge to a group of former landowners for development as a residential and resort 

community. Such action, if taken, would have a very significant negative impact on refuge wildlife. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The sentence has been changed to reflect comment for wood 

stork rookery. The Service currently has no plans to return the land to the descendents of the former 

landowners.

Comment: Biological Resources for Harris Neck, page 57: In paragraph 1, artificial nesting 

structures are cited as support for the breeding wood stork colony. Although these structures are still 

in place, they are in general disrepair and are no longer used by the storks, which nest instead in 

cypress trees that were planted years ago by refuge staff. In addition, ponds are no longer 

maintained as foraging areas for wood storks. 
 

Appendices 241

Service Response: Comment noted. Nesting structures are being refurbished and although ponds 

are no longer stocked with fish, they are still used as foraging areas for wood storks.

Comment: Cultural Resources for Harris Neck, page 75: In paragraph 1, delete the reference to 

Harris Neck's "at times controversial history." Most refuges had controversies that arose in the past, 

whether it was use of slave labor at Savannah NWR before it became a refuge, undignified treatment 

of yellow fever victims on Blackbeard, etc. There is no reason to single out Harris Neck. 

In paragraph 2, are we sure that the pre-World War II community "thrived?" Is there documentation 

for this assertation? If not, it might be better to say the community "continued" until the advent of the 

war. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The following sentence was added to the document. “The 

Gullah-Geechee community of Harris Neck emerged from a small group of former slaves that had 

returned to Thomas’ Peru Plantation following the American Civil War. The community consisted of 

primarily commercial watermen, who harvested oysters, crabs, and fish from the nearby waters, and 

small-scale farmers.” 

“Thrived” was replaced with “continued” in the document. 

Comment: Waterfowl and Nongame Birds, page 111: Although it is true that waterfowl do not utilize 

the inland areas of Blackbeard and Wassaw, extremely large numbers of wintering waterfowl and 

shorebirds can be found in the surrounding salt marshes, oyster rakes, mud and sand flats, and 

offshore shoals. For example, rafts of more than 5,000 lesser scaup were seen last winter just off the 

Blackbeard beach. I believe that the relatively undisturbed nature of the waters and marshes 

surrounding the refuges attract these birds to the area. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Fish and Wildlife Population Management, page 118: In the discussion of Goal 1, 

mention is made of the specific habitat needs of each species. Would it be appropriate to add that 

each species also has specific threats to its survival and that, in some cases, management of those 

threats will benefit the species in significant ways? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Ecological threats are detailed in Chapter I of this CCP and 

will be further detailed in a Habitat Management Plan. Further discussions for endangered species 

will be addressed in a recovery plan. 

Comment: Waterfowl and Water-dependent Birds, page 119: In paragraph 2, add Harris Neck NWR 

to the list of refuges that hosts wading bird rookeries. The rookery there is by far the largest in the 

Complex. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Changes made in document. 

Comment: Shorebirds section, page 121: Why is there no objective for Harris Neck? Shorebirds 

use the impoundments there during seasonal drawdowns of the water levels. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Objective 1.2.b has been added to reflect comment. 
242 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Comment: Nongame Birds, page 123: Should loggerhead shrike be added to the list of high-priority 

species? 

The second paragraph states that the majority of refuges in the Complex conduct Christmas Bird 

Counts. But only three refuges (Savannah, Pinckney and Harris Neck) out of seven participate -- 

that's not a majority in my book. 

Service Response: Comments noted. Loggerhead shrike was added to the list in the document. 

Changes concerning the Christmas Bird Count were made in the document.

Comment: Threatened and Endangered Species, page 124: The third paragraph discusses the 

endangered wood stork. Please add that a major threat to this species is the proposed transfer of 

refuge lands into private ownership. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Visitor Services, page 162: To be consistent with the other summaries, the Harris Neck 

section should mention that visitor facilities include a wildlife drive, trails, fishing docks, and 

interpretive signs and kiosks. 

Service Response: Comment noted. These comments were added to the document. 

Comment: Objective 3.5, pages 172-173: I recommend that FWS partner with both the Friends group 

and other organizations (such as the Coastal Conservation Association) to offer Youth Fishing Clinics. 

Service Response: Comment noted. This recommendation was added to the document. 

Comment: Outreach, page 178: In addition to attending special events, refuge staff members have 

been featured speakers for organizations such as Audubon societies, the Sierra Club, Rotary, 

Kiwanis, etc. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 

Comment: Need to recheck boundary line of all Harris Neck maps - not sure if correct. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The refuge is working with the Regional Office, Realty 

Division, to verify the boundary. 

Comment: Page 135: Third paragraph: discussion on rice trunks on Harris Neck NWR... there are 

no rice trunks on Harris Neck NWR 

Service Response: Comment noted. There is one rice trunk at Harris Neck in Bluebill Pond. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 
 

Appendices 243

Pinckney Island NWR Public Comments

Comment: Installation of platforms, trails, and towers - The most intensively populated wildlife 

habitats on Pinckney Island, I believe, are quite visible from the 12 miles of maintained trails. Further 

intrusion would not be advantageous. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Any new wildlife observation facilities would be located on 

Last End Point. 

Comment: Objective 3.7.c. - A visitor center at Last End Point would involve considerable cost to 

make the main area of Pinckney Island accessible to such a center. An underpass for U.S. 278 or 

extensive destruction of currently off-limits habitat would be required. Last End Point is a highly used 

boat ramp and is hazardous to reach from either direction travelling U.S. 278. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Any development on Last End Point would be contingent on 

providing safe access. 

Comment: Objective 3.8.c - A portable exhibit for the Complex would in most cases answer the 

need for a visitor center as proposed in 3.7.c. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Portable exhibits are used for off-refuge programs. 

Comment: Objective 3.9.c. - Have never noticed any afterhours traffic approach the Pinckney Island 

gate. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Former refuge manager, John Davis, wrote an agreement with the landowners of 

Pinckney Island. This agreement should be found and referenced with regards to the public activities 

allowed on the refuge. Also, agreement was signed with the state that gives all marshes and 

interests of the marshes (they conveyed their rights not fee title) on the refuge to the FWS. This 

agreement needs to be referenced in this document. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Easement Exchange Agreement and Deed of Donation are 

referenced in the document. 

Comment: Page 82 Pinckney Island - Need to look at covenant in deed for restrictions of public use. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Savannah NWR Public Comments

Comment: Table 24. Comparison of alternatives by management issues for Savannah NWRHabitat Management, fishing, Alternative B - Please consider expanding the items in this section to 

also include “create fish habitat” to support the goal of expanding fishing opportunities. Adding such 

language would allow the Service to take advantage of low- to zero-cost opportunities to increase the 

quality of fish habitat within the refuge. Once installed/created, the new habitat would likely require 

little management or maintenance costs. 
244 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Tybee NWR Public Comments

Comment: Page 104: Tybee NWR: ...there are no Service personnel or staff assigned to the 

refuge...Need to state that law enforcement is present on the refuge!! Same for Wassaw NWR. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Law enforcement is present on all refuges in the Complex.

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 

Wassaw NWR Public Comments

Comment: Battery Henry Sims Morgan, officially named by the Georgia DNR Board on 9/27/06 

played an important role in Wassaw’s history. The remains will soon be claimed by the sea. Hans 

Neuhauser with the Georgia Land Trust Service should be consulted as he is truly an expert on this 

site. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The background section is a brief overview of the refuge’s 

history. More detailed historical accounts will be captured in the cultural resources overview and 

Cultural Resources Management Plan for each refuge. 

Comment: Parson family trust - the island was purchased by the Parson family in 1866. I believe 

the role this family played in the island’s history should be investigated and documented. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The background sections are brief overviews of the refuge’s 

history. More detailed historical accounts will be captured in the cultural resources overview and 

Cultural Resources Management Plan for each refuge. 

Comment: Anthony Odingsell - purchased Little Wassaw in 1834. I believe other than coastal 

Indians he may be the only permanent resident to live on the island. What is known about the 

Odingsell family should be investigated and documented. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The background sections are brief overviews of the refuge’s 

history. More detailed historical accounts will be captured in the cultural resources overview and 

Cultural Resource Management Plan for each refuge. 

Comment: Page 104: Tybee NWR: ...there are no Service personnel or staff assigned to the 

refuge...Need to state that law enforcement is present on the refuge!! Same for Wassaw NWR. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Law enforcement is present on all refuges in the Complex. 

See Complex-wide Public Issues for more details. 
 

Appendices 245

Complex-wide Public Issues

Habitat Conservation and Management

Comment: Page 137: Objective 2.3d: Should add a strategy to work with the COE. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The strategy to work closely with the COE for the long-term 

integrity of the freshwater diversion canal and ensure adequate freshwater availability was added to 

Objective 2.3d. 

Comment: Page 145: Habitat Managements-Other Fish, Wildlife... third paragraph: What is a 

floodplain forest? This should be removed if not applicable to Complex. 

Service Response: Comment noted. “Floodplain forest” was replaced with “bottomland hardwood” 

in the document. 

Comment: Page 159 first paragraph...should include St. Mary’s along with Hilton Head and Myrtle 

Beach. 

Service Response: Comment noted. St. Mary’s is not located in South Carolina.

Comment: Page 159 fourth paragraph: Need citation for Cape Romain Sea Level study. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The citation was added to the document.

Comment: “Dredging associated with the maintenance of harbors and inland waterways ... results 

in... shoreline erosion and sediment deposition (not to mention the direct loss of marshlands by the 

dredging activities per se). ...increases the silt load and turbidity... benthic can be buried by silt and 

fisheries impacted by the anoxia...” 

Shoreline erosion and deposition is a natural process driven by wind water and currents, whether 

they be longshore drift, tidal, etc. Dredging may alter the natural process, but the wording infers that, 

in the absence of dredging, there would be no sediment movement or shoreline erosion. All COE 

dredging operations are conducted in accordance with Section 404 of Clean Water Act requirements, 

including turbidity. Maintenance dredging activities do not result in the direct loss of marshlands. 

Although maintenance dredging does temporarily impact benthic communities, surveys have shown 

substantial populations within O&M sediments, indicating that the benthic population quickly reestablish themselves. Low dissolved oxygen levels are known to occur in Savannah Harbor and 

other southeast coastal rivers each summer. Although such hypoxia occurs each year, we are not 

aware that any periods of anoxia (without oxygen) have occurred. 

Service Response: Comment noted. In the document, wording was changed to: “Dredging 

associated with the expansion and maintenance of harbors and inland waterways....” 

Comment: “Dredging activities in the Savannah area have also raised concerns that the deeper 

dredging might crack or weaken the rocky barrier of the freshwater aquifer that keeps sea water out.” 

This statement is incorrect from a geological and hydrological perspective. We suggest omitting the 

paragraph. The natural “barrier” is a compacted silty-sand unit of sediments known as the Miocene 

confining unit. In the area from Savannah NWR to Tybee NWR, it varies in thickness from 50 to 150 

feet. The impacts of dredging on the Upper Floridan aquifer have been studied extensively and those 
246 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

studies have shown that deepening the harbor would have negligible impact in the rate of downward 

groundwater saltwater intrusion rates in the Savannah area. The present rate of such intrusion is 

driven by the amount of pumping/removal of groundwater, primarily within the city of Savannah. We 

suggest distinguishing groundwater saltwater intrusion terminology from surface saltwater 

encroachment throughout the report. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. “Rocky barrier” was changed to 

“compacted silty-sand.” 

Comment: “Dredging activities in the Savannah River delta have interrupted this natural southward 

transport of sand ... robbing the Georgia barrier islands of their sand supply. The result is that barrier 

islands in coastal Georgia are sand starved.” While there are evidence and technical reports that 

show maintenance of the Savannah Harbor affects the sand supply immediately south of the channel, 

there is no evidence that demonstrates that such removal affects ALL the barrier islands of Georgia. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: “Impacts of Savannah River dredging and harbor deepening activities (from a 42-foot to 

a 48-foot depth to accommodate mega ships) threaten aquatic habitats, especially those of the 

endangered shortnose sturgeon and the striped bass, due to lowered dissolved oxygen (DO) levels. 

In particular, DO concentrations are measurably lower in the Kings Island Turning Basin, which the 

sturgeon uses as a nursery and foraging habitat. Prior to 2005, striped bass fishing in the Savannah 

River system was closed for 16 years due to low recruitment of young fish caused by harbor 

modifications and higher salinities in traditional spawning areas of the river.” The most recent studies 

have not found sturgeon use the Kings Island Turning Basin for nursery or forage habitat. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. “In particular, DO concentrations 

are measurably lower in the Kings Island Turning Basin, which the sturgeon uses as a nursery and as 

foraging habitat” has been removed from the paragraph. 

Comment: “The surface streams and rivers are interconnected with the aquifer and form a single 

hydrologic entity that is stressed by natural hydrologic and climatic factors (viz. drought) and 

anthropogenic factors.” Suggest adding “surficial” in front of aquifer. In the coastal area the Upper 

Floridan aquifer is not responsive to drought because the recharge zone is located over a hundred 

miles away (at the fall line), and travel times are on the order of thousands of years. The Upper 

Floridan Aquifer is confined in the coastal area and is responsive to pumping as noted in the 

paragraph above. The surficial aquifer, however, is responsive to drought. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 

Visitor and Education Services

Comment: Team Development - The USFWS and the Savannah District should develop a working 

level team to discuss operational issues of common interest to Tybee NWR and the Savannah NWR. 

Common issues include dredging effects such as dissolved oxygen and turbidity, invasive species 

integrated management plan, annual bird monitoring, and prescribed fire. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The Complex would like to coordinate an annual meeting to 

discuss mutual issues related to Tybee and Savannah spoil areas. See Objective 4.6.a. 
 

Appendices 247

Comment: Pages 162 and 274 need to reference the Improvement Act (Goal 3 Discussion) and the 

public law. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 

Comment: Page 170, Objective 3.4c: Building a Visitor Center on Pinckney may not be possible 

with deed restrictions. Need to review the deed! 

Service Response: Comment noted. The deed specifically prohibits: “The construction of any 

facilities or the construction or paving of any vehicle parking areas, roads, paths or ways, other than 

exclusively for the observation of birds, fowl, and other wildlife by the public.” The Visitor Center 

would be used for wildlife observation and education. 

Comment: Page 172, first paragraph....A fishing plan for Pinckney Island is not required since state 

regulations govern fishing in tidal waters....this is wrong since the state has no rights on marshes 

within the Pinckney Island NWR boundary. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Page 181, Objective 3.9c - coordinate with deed restrictions for Pinckney Island. (As well 

as Objective 5.1c planning a welcome center). 

Service Response: Comment noted. A strategy was added to Objective 3.9.c to coordinate with the 

deed of donation. 

Resource Protection

Comment: Sea level rise is identified as possibly having a profound effect on the Complex due to habitat 

loss. If this potential effect would be profound, shouldn’t the Final CCP address ways to minimize the 

effects? Since the Service has stated that the tidal freshwater habitats are some of the most valued 

habitats within the Savannah NWR, the CCP should clearly identify the effects of sea level rise on the 

ability of the refuge to continue to provide those habitats and their inherent ecological values/services. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Sea Level rise will be further addressed in Habitat 

Management Plan.

Refuge Administration

Comment: Cost of Capitalized Facilities - The cost should be updated when the freshwater control 

system is repaired. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Page 82, Refuge administration and Management: Need to add Wolf Island with 

reference to the separate CCP!! 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. Reference to Wolf Island NWR 

was added to cover and introduction. 
248 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Comment: Page 191, Staffing needs: Four of the Complex refuges are unstaffed needs to be reworded 

to include that law enforcement is done on these refuges. There are over 100 miles of coast to enforce so 

need to request more law enforcement officers than the plan states (Figure 32 on page 201). 

Service Response: Comment noted. These refuges are managed by limited Complex staff and 

volunteers. The wording “unstaffed” has been addressed throughout the document. Five out of the 

seven refuges do not have permanently assigned staff; however, management and law enforcement 

are conducted on all refuges in the Complex. 

Comment: Quantify Refuge Boundary marking - should be 15 percent each year. The boundary 

should be checked at least twice a year (pages 257, 368, and throughout document) 

Service Response: Comment noted. Refer to “Maintain Marked Refuge Boundary” objective. Due 

to reductions of staff and budget over the years, 15 percent may not be achievable. 

Comments on Document 

Comment: “the plantation era on the Georgia coast was marked by a sophisticated level of land 

management.” I would disagree with the word “sophisticated” - does the use of slaves as an integral 

part of their land management deserve that word? 

Service Response: Comment noted. The word “sophisticated” is used to describe only the land 

management techniques. 

Comment: “Plantation owners were well-educated and included some of the most advanced 

agriculturalists in the nation, employing practices generally attributed to a much later age.” Again, 

there is another word that almost seems to praise the former slaveowners “advanced.” Although they 

may have used some newer method to increase production, it was the use of the free labor (slaves) 

that made plantations profitable. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The word “advanced” is used to describe the land 

management techniques (i.e., irrigation, drainage, liming). 

Comment: “the war for southern independence and the ensuing abolition of slavery marked the 

beginning of the end for the plantations and for prosperity and a way of life.” Do I sense certain 

nostalgia here? Only a few people (namely plantation owners) prospered, while the majority of the 

people (including slaves) were not doing very well. I would hardly call that “prosperity.” Also, “the 

end... a way of life” - it can be construed as regretting something lost? 

Service Response: Comment noted. The sentence was revised in the document to state, “The Civil 

War and the ensuing abolition of slavery signaled the end of the Plantation Era.”

Comment: “Survivors of the war returned to their devastated lands and attempted to restore the 

plantation system with paid labor, but the freed slaves and imported Irish and Chinese laborers 

proved to be undependable sources of labor and the plantations were soon abandoned.” It says that 

Irish, Chinese, and freed slaves were undependable sources of labor. This remark seems inaccurate 

and could be construed as racist. Are these ethnic groups somehow not good workers? Also, why 

would freed slaves want to work for their former masters? I think that the plantations failed (and were 

subsequently abandoned) because without free labor (slaves) they were no longer economically 

viable. I believe the statement needs to be rewritten or removed. 
 

Appendices 249

Service Response: Comment noted. Citation of historical record was added to the document.

Comment: “Thus, within a few years, the coastal area changed from one of the most prosperous 

regions in the nation to one of the poorest.” Again, most people did not prosper during slavery, 

certainly not the slaves! 

Service Response: Comment noted.

Comment: Although I certainly doubt that these sections were deliberately written with racial 

overtones, I hope you see that they are certainly not politically/economically correct and could be 

misconstrued.

Service Response: Comment noted. Citation of historical record was added to the document.

Comment: Section II Introduction - Paragraph 3 on page 9 lists transient birds that visit the area during 

migration. I find the species mentioned as examples to be peculiar, since most of them (magnolia and 

blackpoll warblers and pectoral, white-rumped and buff-breasted sandpipers) are uncommon even during 

migration. Much more common migrants include American redstarts, black-throated blue warblers, 

whimbrels, semipalmated sandpipers, and short-billed dowitchers, among others. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Recommended species were added to the document. 

Comment: An EIS should be prepared under NEPA, not an EA, which is a lazy wasteful way to truly 

investigate environmental concerns. 

Service Response: Comment noted. NEPA requires that decisions be made with public involvement in 

a transparent way and provides us three different venues through which we can make those decisions: 

categorical exclusion from further NEPA documentation with an Environmental Action Statement, 

Environmental Assessment, and Finding of No Significant Impact where impacts are determined to not be 

significant, or an Environmental Impact Statement and a Record of Decision to analyze significant 

impacts. We have fully complied with NEPA and considered a reasonable range of alternatives in 

accordance with Service policy [602 FW 3 (http://www.fws.gov/policy/602fw3.html) and 602 FW 3 Exhibit 

1], specifically citing 602 FW 3.4(b), which states: 

Each CCP will comply with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) through 

the concurrent preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) that will accompany or be integrated with the CCP. We have integrated NEPA compliance 

requirements directly into the CCP process. When preparing an EA, consider integrating it into the 

Draft CCP. When preparing an EIS with a CCP, integrate the documents. Following completion of 

the final CCP/NEPA document, the product of the planning process will be a stand-alone CCP, 

separate from the EA or EIS. 

Comment: The employees would choose B because they want to guarantee they have jobs and 

they are looking for increase in tax dollars to get more money. That is not what taxpayers want. The 

employees are making decisions based on their own self interest - Which is how skanky Federal 

bureaucracies work these days. It’s what they want that seems to be all they care about these days. 

We see this non-responsiveness to the public constantly at every level of government. The tax 

payers are fed up with it. 
250 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Service Response: Comment noted. The Service evaluated three management alternatives in the 

Environmental Assessment (EA). Based upon the analysis of the EA, Alternative B was determined 

to best serve the purpose, vision, and goals of the Complex and the mission of the Refuge System. 

Comment: The public thinks this agency is crap these days. You only respond to the big money of 

the NRA. You don’t care that your mission should be to protect wildlife. You grow it so it can be 

killed. That is all you do. It’s as if it’s a crop - grow it to kill it. Allow deranged pathological wildlife 

murdering gun wackos to run wild and kill all they want. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is found in 

the Background section of Chapter I of the document. 

Comment: Don’t tell the public you are managing for healthy wildlife. The fact is and research 

proves that hunted species are being hunted into extinction. The big animals are the trophy animals 

that these deranged pathological wildlife gun wacko hunters want, and that is what they kill. Those 

animals are the healthiest. What are left after hunting are animals that are weaker, less healthy, less 

large - so when you allow hunting you are in fact hurting the species. You have seen the research; 

stop publishing lies to the public in your proposals. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Hunting is one of the six priority public uses established in the 

National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. A compatibility determination for hunting 

was prepared and is included in this CCP in Appendix F. 

Comment: This agency allowed the gulf oil rig to kill marine wildlife by the score in letting them get by 

with an EA instead of the required EIS. That is the same kind of crap you are into with this proposal. 

Service Response: Comment noted. NEPA requires that decisions be made with public involvement in 

a transparent way and provides us three different venues through which we can make those decisions: 

categorical exclusion from further NEPA documentation with an Environmental Action Statement, 

Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact where impacts are determined to not be 

significant, or an Environmental Impact Statement and a Record of Decision to analyze significant 

impacts. We believe we have fully complied with NEPA and considered a reasonable range of 

alternatives in accordance to FWS CCP policy [602 FW 3 (http://www.fws.gov/policy/602fw3.html) and 

602 FW 3 Exhibit 1], specifically citing 602 FW 3.4(b), which states: 

Each CCP will comply with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) through 

the concurrent preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) that will accompany or be integrated with the CCP. We have integrated NEPA compliance 

requirements directly into the CCP process. When preparing an EA, consider integrating it into the 

draft CCP. When preparing an EIS with a CCP, integrate the documents. Following completion of 

the final CCP/NEPA document, the product of the planning process will be a stand-alone CCP, 

separate from the EA or EIS. 

Comment: You allow these wildlife murdering gun wacko hunters to use lead shot. Such lead shot 

deteriorates in air/water and soil and causes red blood cells and brain cells to die and hurts 

particularly our kids. Such lead shot also stays in the animal so that when the gun wacko takes his 

meat home to feed his kids, they get a shot of lead to eat too. How is that helping America? You are 

such crud in this agency feeding the public lies instead of being honest. 
 

Appendices 251

Service Response: Comment noted. Lead shot is not allowed on any of the refuges for waterfowl 

hunting.

Comment: I oppose all hunting and trapping. I believe the management outlined is hurting the sites 

owned by national taxpayers. Plans A and B are wildlife slaughter. I oppose crossbows coming in. 

Hunting is not compatible with any peaceful use by the 99% of the American population that does not 

hunt. It is not a compatible activity since these wildlife murderers slaughter people all of the time. 

Service Response: Comment noted: Hunting is one of the six priority public uses established in the 

National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. A compatibility determination for hunting 

was prepared and is included in this CCP in Appendix F. The Service evaluated three management 

alternatives in the Environmental Assessment (EA). Based upon the analysis of the EA, Alternative B 

was determined to best serve the purpose, vision, and goals of the Complex and the mission of the 

Refuge System. Recreational trapping is prohibited on the Complex. 

Comment: As a matter of public record, I would like the management team and employees of this 

site to identify whether they are or are not wildlife murdering hunters. Please give names and 

whether you are a hunter or not. Because whether you are or are not shows how this plan became 

biased. It is biased toward killing wildlife, when the intention of the site was to protect them. Plan C 

may be okay, but it is clear that wildlife murderers sneak in killing sometimes. I would not like such 

sneakiness to take place in a federal document. 

Service Response: Comment noted: Hunting is one of the six priority public uses established in 

the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. A compatibility determination for 

hunting was prepared and is included in this CCP in Appendix F. The Service evaluated three 

management alternatives in the Environmental Assessment (EA). Based upon the analysis of the 

EA, Alternative B was determined to best serve the purpose, vision, and goals of the Complex 

and the mission of the Refuge System. 

Comment: All references of Savannah Coastal Complex should include Wolf Island with a note 

that the Wolf Island CCP was completed separate from this CCP. This will be confusing to the 

public if Wolf Island is not mentioned. Maybe should put Wolf Island CCP in document appendix 

(also pages 283, 287, 405, and 521) 

Service Response: Comment noted. Comment addressed in document. 

Comment: Page 3 - Recognize that wildlife-dependent recreation activities... and provide refuge 

managers... 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 

Comment: Page 255. Disagree that fishing brochure should be bilingual. 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Page 346 - If boundary is not currently maintained, in Alternative A, continue...will you 

continue to not maintain the refuge boundary?? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Under Alternative A, the refuge will continue to manage 

refuge boundary. 
252 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Comment: Need funding and manpower to achieve Alternative B! 

Service Response: Comment noted. This is addressed in chapters 4 and 5 of the document.

Comment: Page 367- Do not support having a fee program. 

Service Response: Comment noted.

Comment: Page 462 - Refuge staff need to rethink Beach Use Appropriate Use Form (i) and (j). 

Service Response: Comment noted.

Comment: Page 473 - Need to ask solicitor’s office what purpose of refuge means...future use in 

navigation. 

Service Response: Comment noted.

Comment: Page 475 - Should state no dogs allowed on beach. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Compatibility determination was clarified to reflect comment. 

Comment: Page 486 - May want to reconsider rewording “closed to motorized boats.” 

Service Response: Comment noted. Compatibility determination clarified to reflect comment. 

Comment: Page 493 - Closed areas should be closed to all uses 

Service Response: Comment noted. Compatibility determination clarified to reflect comment.

Comment: Page 495 - Reword listed two types of chemical with only one being allowed on the 

refuge. Statement is confusing to the public. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Sentence clarified. 

Comment: Page 502 - How are you going to remove salvaged timber from some of these refuges? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Details of timber salvage removal will be addressed as 

needed. 

Comments Grammatical Errors Including Typos

Comment: Page 255 - Edit: Page 259 - Need a period at the end of Goal 1. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 287, first paragraph, first bullet, change....may have adverse impacts to will have 

adverse impacts. 

Service Response: Comment noted.
 

Appendices 253

Comment: Page 22, par. 4: "Coastal" is misspelled for Site 235. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 24, par. 1: In third to last sentence, delete "and" after "late 1700s and 1800s." 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 37, 2nd bullet point for Wassaw NWR: Has there really been a MAPS station 

operating for 70 years on Wassaw, or is this a typo? 

Service Response: Comment noted. This sentence was corrected to MAPS station operating for 10 

years on Wassaw.

Comment: Page 71, par. 2: The correct species name is "green heron," not "green-backed heron." 

Cattle egrets and common moorhens should be added to the list of wading birds that use the refuge. 

Mississippi kite is a summer visitor, not a year-round resident. Bald eagle is a year-round resident, 

not a seasonal visitor. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Changes made in document. 

Comment: Page 104, par. 4: Under the Wassaw NWR section, "permanent" is misspelled in the first 

sentence. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 108, par. 2: Capitalize "Kirtland's." 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 109, par. 4: In the Invasive and Nuisance Species section, the word "interdiction" 

is used incorrectly. Interdiction means "prohibition or exclusion." Perhaps the word "introduction" 

was intended? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 110, par. 4: In the Migratory and Resident Birds Section, replace the semi-colon in 

the first sentence with a full colon. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 113, par. 4: In the third sentence, place a comma between "loons" and "grebes." 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 125, par. 5: "Lakes" in "Great Lakes" should be capitalized. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.
254 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Comment: Page 144, par. 4: "Improved" is misspelled in the second bullet point. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 172, par. 2: The word "use" is missing from the end of the first sentence. In the 

third sentence, remove the apostrophe from the word "regulations." 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page. 185, Maintain Marker Boundary section: I believe the correct word in the first 

sentence is "continual" or "continuing," not "continuous." 

Service Response: Comment noted. 

Comment: Page 186, par. 3: Should "collateral duty office" be changed to "collateral duty officer?" 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 196, last Par.: In the first sentence, insert a space after the word "composed." 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Should Objective 4.2.e read "10 percent per year" rather than "100 percent?" 

Service Response: Comment noted. Objective 4.2.e is correct as written.

Comment: The thrust of the document seemed to be the comparison and analysis of the three 

Management Systems - Current, Proposed, and Minimal Intervention, shown in Tables 15-26. The 

three alternatives are defined in the text. Tables 19 and 25 include three other management 

alternatives - Targeted Increased Management, Comprehensive Increased Management and 

Comprehensive Biological Management that were not defined. Tables 21 - 26 seem to be a duplicate 

of Tables 15 - 20. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Tybee NWR required a different set of management 

alternatives than the other 5 refuges in the Complex. Tables 21 through 26 analyze the 

environmental effects of alternatives outlined in tables 15 through 20. 

Comment: The text describing Pinckney Island staffing needs and the organizational chart depicting 

the staffing needs on page 201 do not match up. 

Service Response: Comment noted. The organizational chart reflects positions shared throughout 

the Complex. Positions are listed under supervisor, not refuges.

Comment: All acronyms should be spelled out. Make sure all acronyms in document are listed in 

Appendix. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Appendix A has been updated to reflect acronyms used 

throughout the document. 
 

Appendices 255

Comment: Edit: page 11 Paragraph 4: This variety known as Sea Island cotton, was far superior to 

upland cotton and sold for two to five times the price of the latter. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Changes were made in document. 

Comment: Edit: Page 22 - Under Georgia designated waters, should read Savannah River, Coastal 

Site 235 not Costal Site 235 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 34 Bullet 2 of first paragraph: “astronomical proportions” is not a good statement for 

this document. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 

Comment: Page 40: bullet 2: Possible responses to sea level rise....CITATION?? Bullet 4: By 2100, 

temperatures in South Carolina....CITATION??? Bullet 6: At Charleston, sea level....CITATION??? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Citation added to document. 

Comment: Edit: Page 45, first paragraph - reclit should be relic 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 48, second paragraph: the Floridan aquifer...CITATION??? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Citation added to document.

Comment: Page 53, second paragraph: Blackbeard Island: These habitats provide for one of the 

highest breeding concentrations of painted buntings on the east coast...CITATION?? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 

Comment: Edit page 73, paragraph 3, first sentence: Northern subpopulation not Notheren. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document.

Comment: Page 118, first paragraph: These six refuges....should be 7 with Wolf Island (also page 205). 

Service Response: Comment noted. Comment addressed in document. 

Comment: Page 121, Shorebirds Discussion: CITATION??? 

Service Response: Comment noted. Citation added to document.

Comment: Page 415, Savannah NWR Bio Review Team Roster - Typographical errors: Steve 

Calver (not Carver), Corps (not Corp), Savannah, GA (not Charleston); Ed EuDaly has retired from 

the Charleston ES Office; John Robinette no longer works at the Savannah NWR. 

Service Response: Comment noted. Change made in document. 
256 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 257

Appendix E. Appropriate Use Determinations 

Savannah Coastal Refuge Complex Appropriate Use Determinations 

An appropriate use determination is the initial decision process a refuge manager follows when first 

considering whether or not to allow a proposed use on a refuge. The refuge manager must find that 

a use is appropriate before undertaking a compatibility review of the use. This process clarifies and 

expands on the compatibility determination process by describing when refuge managers should 

deny a proposed use without determining compatibility. If a proposed use is not appropriate, it will 

not be allowed and a compatibility determination will not be undertaken. 

Except for the uses noted below, the refuge manager must decide if a new or existing use is an 

appropriate refuge use. If an existing use is not appropriate, the refuge manager will eliminate or 

modify the use as expeditiously as practicable. If a new use is not appropriate, the refuge manager 

will deny the use without determining compatibility. Uses that have been administratively determined 

to be appropriate are: 

 Six wildlife-dependent recreational uses - As defined by the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997, the six wildlife-dependent recreational uses (hunting, fishing, 

wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation) are 

determined to be appropriate. However, the refuge manager must still determine if these uses 

are compatible. 

 Take of fish and wildlife under state regulations - States have regulations concerning take of 

wildlife that includes hunting, fishing, and trapping. The Service considers take of wildlife 

under such regulations appropriate. However, the refuge manager must determine if the 

activity is compatible before allowing it on a refuge. 

Statutory Authorities for this policy: 

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, 16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee. This law provides the 

authority for establishing policies and regulations governing refuge uses, including the authority to 

prohibit certain harmful activities. The Act does not authorize any particular use, but rather authorizes 

the Secretary of the Interior to allow uses only when they are compatible and “under such regulations 

as he may prescribe.” This law specifically identifies certain public uses that, when compatible, are 

legitimate and appropriate uses within the Refuge System. The law states “. . . it is the policy of the 

United States that . . .compatible wildlife-dependent recreation is a legitimate and appropriate general 

public use of the System . . .compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses are the priority general 

public uses of the System and shall receive priority consideration in refuge planning and 

management; and . . . when the Secretary determines that a proposed wildlife-dependent recreational 

use is a compatible use within a refuge, that activity should be facilitated . . . the Secretary shall . . . 

ensure that priority general public uses of the System receive enhanced consideration over other 

general public uses in planning and management within the System . . . .” The law also states “in 

administering the System, the Secretary is authorized to take the following actions: . . . issue 

regulations to carry out this Act.” This policy implements the standards set in the Act by providing 

enhanced consideration of priority general public uses and ensuring other public uses do not interfere 

with our ability to provide quality, wildlife-dependent recreational uses. 
258 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, 16 U.S.C. 460k. The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 

administer refuges, hatcheries, and other conservation areas for recreational use, when such uses do not 

interfere with the area’s primary purposes. It authorizes construction and maintenance of recreational 

facilities and the acquisition of land for incidental fish and wildlife oriented recreational development or 

protection of natural resources. It also authorizes the charging of fees for public uses. 

Other Statutes that Establish Refuges, including the Alaska National Interest Lands 

Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 410hh - 410hh-5, 460 mm - 460mm-4, 539-539e, 

and 3101 - 3233; 43 U.S.C. 1631 et seq.). 

Executive Orders. The Service must comply with Executive Order 11644 when allowing use of 

off-highway vehicles on refuges. This order requires the Service to designate areas as open or 

closed to off-highway vehicles in order to protect refuge resources, promote safety, and minimize 

conflict among the various refuge users; monitor the effects of these uses once they are allowed; 

and amend or rescind any area designation as necessary based on the information gathered. 

Furthermore, Executive Order 11989 requires the Service to close areas to off-highway vehicles 

when it is determined that the use causes or will cause considerable adverse effects on the soil, 

vegetation, wildlife, habitat, or cultural or historic resources. Statutes, such as ANILCA, take 

precedence over executive orders. 

Definitions: 

Appropriate Use

A proposed or existing use on a refuge that meets at least one of the following four conditions: 

1) The use is a wildlife-dependent recreational use as identified in the Improvement Act. 

2) The use contributes to fulfilling the refuge purpose(s), the Refuge System mission, or goals 

or objectives described in a refuge management plan approved after October 9, 1997, the 

date the Improvement Act was signed into law. 

3) The use involves the take of fish and wildlife under state regulations. 

4) The use has been found to be appropriate as specified in section 1.11. 

Native American. American Indians in the conterminous United States and Alaska Natives (including 

Aleuts, Eskimos, and Indians) who are members of federally recognized tribes. 

Priority General Public Use. A compatible wildlife-dependent recreational use of a refuge involving 

hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and 

interpretation. 

Quality. The criteria used to determine a quality recreational experience include: 

 Promotes safety of participants, other visitors, and facilities. 

 Promotes compliance with applicable laws and regulations and responsible behavior. 

 Minimizes or eliminates conflicts with fish and wildlife population or habitat goals or objectives 

in a plan approved after 1997. 

 Minimizes or eliminates conflicts with other compatible wildlife-dependent recreation. 

 Minimizes conflicts with neighboring landowners. 

 Promotes accessibility and availability to a broad spectrum of the American people. 

 Promotes resource stewardship and conservation. 
 

Appendices 259

 Promotes public understanding and increases public appreciation of America’s natural 

resources and the Service’s role in managing and protecting these resources. 

 Provides reliable/reasonable opportunities to experience wildlife. 

 Uses facilities that are accessible and blend into the natural setting. 

 Uses visitor satisfaction to help define and evaluate programs. 

Wildlife-Dependent Recreational Use. As defined by the Improvement Act, a use of a refuge 

involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and 

interpretation. 
260 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 261
262 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 263
264 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 265
266 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 267
268 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 269

Appendix F. Compatibility Determinations 

Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex Compatibility Determinations 

Uses: The following uses were found to be appropriate and evaluated to determine their 

compatibility with the mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of the refuge. 

1. Beach Use 

2. Bicycling 

3. Commercial Guiding for Wildlife-Wildland Observation 

4. Environmental Education and Interpretation 

5. Recreational Fishing 

6. Hiking 

7. Public Hunting 

8. Mosquito Control 

9. Scientific Research 

10. Timber Harvest 

11. Salvage Timber Harvest and Sale 

12. Utility Right-Of-Way 

13. Wildlife Observation and Photography 

Refuge Name: Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge. 

Date Established: February 5, 1924. 

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities: 

Executive Order 4512 -- (dated September 20, 1926) 

[16 U.S.C. 715d] 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act -- (February 18, 1929) 

[16 U.S.C. 667b] 

Real Property Transfer Act, PL 80-537 -- (May 19, 1948) 

[16 U.S.C. 742] 

Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 -- (August 8, 1956) 

 [16 U.S.C. 1131-1136] 

The Wilderness Act of 1964, PL 88-577 -- (September 3, 1964) 

[16 U.S.C. 460] 

Refuge Recreation Act, and amendments -- (September 28, 1962) and PL 93-205 (December 

Public Law 93-632, January 3, 1975 

Section 1 (Wilderness Act) 

Refuge Purpose: 

“for use as a bird refuge and as an experiment station for acclimatization of certain foreign game 

birds” (Executive Order 4512, September 20, 1926); and, “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any 

other management purpose for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act) 
270 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Refuge Name: Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge. 

Date Established: May 25, 1962. 

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:

[16 U.S.C. 715d] 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act -- (February 18, 1929) 

[16 U.S.C. 667b] 

Real Property Transfer Act, PL 80-537 -- (May 19, 1948) 

[16 U.S.C. 742] 

Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 -- (August 8, 1956) 

[16 U.S.C. 460k] 

Refuge Recreation Act, and amendments -- (September 28, 1962) and PL 93-205 

December 28, 1973) 

[16 U.S.C. 3901(b), 100 Stat. 3583] 

Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 

Refuge Purpose: 

“particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program” (16 U.S.C. 667b, 

An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes); “for use as 

an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act); and, for “the conservation of the wetlands of the Nation in order to 

maintain the public benefits they provide and to help fulfill international obligations contained in 

various treaties and conventions” (16 U.S.C. 3901(b), 100 Stat. 3583, Emergency Wetlands 

Resources Act of 1986).

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island National Wildlife Refuge. 

Date Established: December 4, 1975. 

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:

Deed of Donation, dated December 4, 1975 

[16 U.S.C. 715d] 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act -- (February 18, 1929) 

Refuge Purpose: 

established “as a wildlife refuge and as a nature and forest preserve for aesthetic and conservation 

purposes, without disturbing the habitat of the plant and animal populations except as such 

disturbance may be necessary to preserve the use of the real property for the purposes above 

mentioned” (Deed of Donation, December 4, 1975); and “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any 

other management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

Refuge Name: Savannah National Wildlife Refuge. 

Date Established: April 6, 1927. 
 

Appendices 271

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:

 Executive Order # 4626, dated April 6, 1927 

Executive Order # 5748, dated Nov 12, 1931 

Executive Order # 7391, dated June 16, 1936 

 [16 U.S.C. 715d] 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act -- (February 18, 1929) 

[16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)] 

Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 -- (August 8, 1956) 

 [16 U.S.C. 460k-1] 

Refuge Recreation Act, and amendments -- (September 28, 1962) 

[16 U.S.C. 460k-2] 

PL 93-205 -- (December 28, 1973) 

16 U.S.C. 3901(b), 100 Stat. 3583 

 (Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986) 

 

Refuge Purpose: 

“as a refuge and breeding ground for birds and wild animals subject to future use in navigation if 

necessary and to valid existing rights if any” (Executive Order 5748, April 6, 1927); for lands acquired 

under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other 

management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d); for lands acquired under the Refuge 

Recreation Act for “(1) Incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the 

protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species” 

(16 U.S.C. 460k); for “the conservation of the wetlands of the Nation in order to maintain the public 

benefits they provide and to help fulfill international obligations contained in various migratory bird 

treaties and conventions” (16 U.S.C. 3901(b), 100 Stat. 3583, Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 

1968); “for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and 

wildlife resources” (16 U.S.C. 742f(a)(4)); and, “for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of 

any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude” (16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1), Fish and 

Wildlife Act of 1956) 

Refuge Name: Tybee National Wildlife Refuge. 

Date Established: May 9, 1938. 

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:

Executive Order # 7882, dated May 9, 1938 

[16 U.S.C. 715d] 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act -- (February 18, 1929) 

Refuge Purpose: 

 “Effectuate further the purposes of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act." 

Refuge Name: Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge. 

Date Established: October 20, 1969. 
272 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:

Deed of Donation, dated October 20, 1969 

[16 U.S.C. 715d] 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act -- (February 18, 1929) 

Refuge Purpose: 

“for the purpose of creating a fish and wildlife refuge to be maintained as nearly as practicable in its 

natural state” (Deed of Donation, October 20, 1969); and, “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any 

other management purpose, for migratory birds” (16 U.S.C. 715d, Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: 

The mission of the Refuge System, as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, is: 

... to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, 

management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant 

resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and 

future generations of Americans.

Other Applicable Laws, Regulations, and Policies: 

Antiquities Act of 1906 (34 Stat. 225) 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (15 U.S.C. 703-711; 40 Stat. 755) 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 (16 U.S.C. 715r; 45 Stat. 1222) 

Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act of 1934 (16 U.S.C. 718-178h; 48 Stat. 451) 

Criminal Code Provisions of 1940 (18 U.S.C. 41) 

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d; 54 Stat. 250) 

Refuge Trespass Act of June 25, 1948 (18 U.S.C. 41; 62 Stat. 686) 

Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j; 70 Stat.1119) 

Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4; 76 Stat. 653) 

Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131; 78 Stat. 890) 

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470, et seq.; 80 Stat. 915) 

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd, 668ee; 80 Stat. 927) 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq; 83 Stat. 852) 

Use of Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands 

(Executive Order 11644, as amended by Executive Order 10989) 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq; 87 Stat. 884) 

Refuge Revenue Sharing Act of 1935, as amended in 1978 (16 U.S.C. 715s; 92 Stat. 1319) 

National Wildlife Refuge Regulations for the Most Recent Fiscal Year 

(50 CFR Subchapter C; 43 CFR 3101.3-3) 

Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (S.B. 740) 

North American Wetlands Conservation Act of 1990 

Food Security Act (Farm Bill) of 1990 as amended (HR 2100) 

The Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution Article IV 3, Clause 2 

The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57, USC668dd) 

Executive Order 12996, Management and General Public Use of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System. March 25, 1996 
 

Appendices 273

Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 25-33 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 

Public Review and Comment: 

A notice of availability of the Draft CCP/EA for the Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex was 

published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2010 (75 FR 56133), announcing a 30-day public 

review and comment period. Other methods used to solicit public review and comment included 

posted notices at Complex headquarters and area locations; copies of the Draft CCP/EA were 

distributed to adjacent landowners, the public, and local, state, and federal agencies; copies were 

made available at public meetings; and news releases were sent to area newspapers and to local 

radio stations. A copy of the Draft CCP/EA was posted on the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Internet 

site. Appendix D summarizes the public comments. 

Compatibility determinations for each description listed were considered separately. Although for 

brevity, the preceding sections from “Uses” through “Public Review and Comment” and the 

succeeding section, “Approval of Compatibility Determinations” are only written once within the 

comprehensive conservation plan, they are part of each descriptive use and become part of that 

compatibility determination if considered outside of the comprehensive conservation plan. 

Use: Beach Use 

Refuge Name: Wassaw and Blackbeard Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham and McIntosh Counties, Georgia 

Description of Use: 

Beach uses, such as sunbathing, shell collecting, swimming, surf fishing, seining, picnicking, and 

nature watching, are existing uses on Wassaw and Blackbeard Island NWRs. With the exceptions of 

fishing, seining, and shell collecting, most beach use is nonconsumptive. Vehicular access is nonexistent on these refuges. Visitors must travel to the refuges via boat. On Blackbeard Island NWR, 

some visitors walk across the sand flats between Sapelo and Blackbeard Islands during low tide. 

Public use on these two refuges is limited to day use activities; however, beaches are open seven 

days a week, year-round. Primary use occurs during the summer months. 

On both island refuges, there are 7 miles of beach. The majority of visitors to these refuges remain 

on the beaches to enjoy Atlantic breezes, abundant sunshine, and pristine, uncrowded beaches. No 

open fires or camping are permitted. Additionally, no pets are allowed on the beach. Many other 

beaches along the Georgia coastline are available to public access. However, refuge beaches are 

unique in that they are undeveloped and attract a relatively low density of people compared to 

beaches near populated areas. 
274 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Availability of Resources: 

As this use supports wildlife observation, fishing and photography, no additional resources above 

those needed to facilitate these priority public uses are needed to manage this use. Additionally, 

there is no special equipment, facilities, or improvements needed to support this use, and no 

associated maintenance or monitoring costs. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Short-term impacts: Mechanized forms of recreation can have the greatest impact on wildlife, 

causing habitat destruction, disturbance, and disruption of animal behavior, noise pollution, and even 

direct mortality (Boyle and Samson 1983, Boyle and Samson 1985). Hiking and camping can be 

responsible for these same impacts, as well as for the displacement of animals, the accumulation of 

litter and trash dumps and increased air and water pollution (Boyle and Samson 1985). Since the 

public is not permitted to camp on the refuge, the primary disturbance factor may be the size of 

groups participating in various beach activities. 

Of particular concern at Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs is disturbance to beach nesting birds 

such as gulls, terns, and other shorebirds. Large numbers of shorebirds congregate for the purposes 

of breeding, feeding, loafing, nesting, and wintering during various seasons throughout the year. 

Beach use may disturb these activities. Additionally, dune vegetation may be trampled. Other 

impacts involve violation of refuge regulations (e.g., harassing wildlife; removing animals, plants, or 

live shells; littering; and vandalism). 

There are no anticipated long-term or cumulative impacts. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

Law enforcement patrol of the beach would continue to minimize impacts. Existing regulations which 

limit public use to day use only would be maintained; this restriction alone provides the greatest 

protection to nesting sea turtles. Beach use at the dune level will be regulated as needed by closure 

of specific areas (e.g., loggerhead turtle nesting areas and/or shorebird nesting areas). Beach use 

from the high water to the low water marks would be regulated through enforcement of Title 50 CFR. 

 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 
 

Appendices 275

Justification: 

Due to the remoteness of these island refuges and their accessibility by boat only, public use is 

limited. In 2004, Blackbeard Island NWR hosted 11,000 visitors, while Wassaw NWR hosted 23,000 

visitors. Of these visitors, approximately 30 to 50 percent came ashore. 

Since beach access is not limited to designated areas, a precise count of visitors engaged in beach 

uses is not attainable. However, on Wassaw NWR, most use is concentrated within 1 mile of the 

north end and 1 mile of the south end of the refuge’s 7-mile stretch of beach. On Blackbeard Island 

NWR, most use is concentrated on the south end of the 7-mile beach, near Cabretta Inlet, and 

regular surveys of this area indicate that refuge visitors are using the beach for a variety of 

consumptive and nonconsumptive recreational pursuits. Since beach use is concentrated in specific 

areas, crowd control is facilitated. 

No visitor facilities are available for beach users; therefore, beach activities are generally of a short 

duration. No facilities such as picnic tables and shelters are planned. Beach use requires minimal 

management, mainly law enforcement support, which would be provided regardless of recreational 

activities permitted on the refuge. The majority of beach users engage mainly in wildlife-oriented 

activities such as photography, nature watching, wildlife observation, shell collecting, and hiking. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021

Literature Cited

Boyle, S. A. and F. B. Samson. 1983. Nonconsumptive outdoor recreation: An annotated 

bibliography of human-wildlife interactions. Special Scientific Re.-Wildl. No. 252, 

USDI, Washington, D.C. 113 pp. 

Boyle, S. A. and F. B. Samson. 1985. Effects of nonconsumptive outdoor recreation of wildlife: 

A review. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 13(2):110-116. 

Use: Bicycling 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina. 

Description of Use: 

Bicycling is an existing use on Pinckney Island, Savannah, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard 

Island NWRs. Vehicular access is non-existent or limited on these refuges and bicycling and hiking 

are the primary means by which wildlife-dependent activities such as wildlife observation and 

photography are conducted. Public use on all refuges is limited to day use activities. 
276 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

On Pinckney Island NWR, foot and bicycle traffic are permitted on all refuge roads and trails, other 

than roadways within the manager’s residence, which are closed to public access. Motorized 

vehicles are restricted to the refuge entrance road and the paved parking area. 

On Savannah NWR, foot and bicycle travel is permitted on all refuge roads and dikes other than the 

maintenance shop entrance road, north of U.S. 17 between impoundments #6 and #7. Access to all 

impoundments (#31-39), via the dike network north of U.S. 17, is closed to the general public from 

November 1 through March 14, to reduce disturbance to wintering waterfowl. The Laurel Hill Wildlife 

Drive, a 1-way, unpaved 4.5-mile-long drive through the refuge’s impoundment system south of U.S. 

17, is open to vehicular, foot, and bicycle traffic. The 1-mile Tupelo Swamp Trail is open to foot traffic 

only. The Cistern Walk is also restricted to foot travel. 

On Wassaw NWR, bicycling is permitted along the 40 miles of primitive roads and 7 miles of beach. 

Only foot travel is permitted on Pine Island, one of the units of the refuge. Other islands within this 

refuge are closed to public entry. Additionally, 180 acres of a private inholding are closed to public 

entry except along the Main Road and the Avenue, roads that intersect the property. 

On Harris Neck NWR, all refuge roads and trails are open to foot and bicycle travel unless the area is 

posted as closed. 

On Blackbeard Island NWR, all roads, trails, and levees are open to foot and bicycle travel. There is 

no vehicular access on this offshore island. Additionally, bicycling is permitted along 7 miles of 

beach. Only a small percentage of the refuge’s visitors venture off the beach into the trail system and 

very few bicycle as roadways are composed of deep sand. 

Availability of Resources: 

As this use supports wildlife observation and photography, no additional resources above those 

needed to facilitate these priority public uses are needed to manage this use. Additionally, there is no 

special equipment, facilities, or improvements needed to support this use, and no associated 

maintenance or monitoring costs. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Short-term impacts: Mechanized forms of recreation can have the greatest impact on wildlife, 

causing habitat destruction, disturbance, and disruption of animal behavior, noise pollution, and even 

direct mortality (Boyle and Samson 1983, Boyle and Samson 1985). Since motorized vehicles are 

not permitted on three of the refuges, the primary disturbance factor may be the size of groups 

participating in various activities, such as bicycling. 

Of particular concern at Blackbeard Island NWR and Wassaw NWR is disturbance to beach nesting 

birds such as gulls, terns, and other shorebirds. Large numbers of shorebirds congregate for the 

purposes of breeding, feeding, loafing, nesting, and wintering during various seasons throughout the 

year. Bicycling may disturb these activities. Additionally, bicycling may destroy vegetation. Other 

impacts involve violation of refuge regulations (e.g., harassing wildlife, removing animals and plants, 

littering, and vandalism). 

On other refuges, disturbance will primarily occur along the wildlife drives and trails and the dikes that 

intersect these drives. 

There are no anticipated long-term or cumulative impacts. 
 

Appendices 277

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

Pinckney Island NWR: The refuge's road and trail system will be open during daylight hours to foot 

and bicycle travel. No motorized vehicles will be permitted beyond the public parking area. Access 

to trails adjacent to freshwater ponds will be prohibited during periods of high concentrations of 

nesting wading birds. Law enforcement patrol will minimize impacts from violations. Outlying islands 

within the refuge (Big Harry, Little Harry, Corn, and Buzzard Islands) will remain closed to the public. 

Savannah NWR: Refuge roads and trails will be open during daylight hours only. Only foot and 

bicycle travel will be permitted on refuge dikes. The Tupelo Swamp and Cistern trails will be open for 

foot traffic only. Access to dikes north of U. S. 17 will be closed to public access from November 1 

through March 14, to prevent disturbance to wintering waterfowl. Law enforcement patrol will 

continue in an effort to minimize impacts from violations. 

Wassaw NWR: Law enforcement patrol of the beach and roadways will continue in order to 

minimize impacts. Current regulations which limit public use to day-use only will be maintained. 

In addition, roads and trails leading to freshwater ponds that support wading bird rookeries or 

roosts will be closed when these sites are active. Beach use at the dune level will be regulated 

as needed by closure of specific areas (e.g., loggerhead turtle nesting areas and or shorebird 

nesting areas). Beach use from the high water to the low water marks would be regulated 

through enforcement of Title 50 CFR. 

Harris Neck NWR: The public access route of the refuge will remain open during daylight hours. 

During the wood stork and wading bird nesting season, rookery sites will be closed to the public. 

Other sensitive areas, such as the wood duck banding site at Bluebill Pond, will be closed seasonally 

to prevent disturbance. 

Blackbeard Island NWR: Law enforcement patrol of the beach and roadways will continue to 

minimize impacts. Current regulations of day use only will be maintained. In addition, Flag Pond and 

adjacent levees will be closed March 1 to August 31, to protect sensitive stork and wading bird 

rookeries from disturbance. Other rookery sites will be seasonally closed, as well. Beach use at the 

dune level will be restricted during sea turtle nesting season (May 1 through October 30). 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

 X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 
278 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Justification: 

On the five refuges within the Complex where this activity will be permitted, bicyclers account for a 

relatively small percentage of visitors (Pinckney Island NWR, 3 percent; Savannah NWR, 20 percent; 

Wassaw NWR, 1 percent, Harris Neck NWR, 12 percent; and Blackbeard Island NWR, 1 percent). 

Bicycling is a low impact and a low cost activity to manage. No special roads or trails are developed 

or maintained specifically for this activity. The refuges’ existing road and dike systems, maintained 

for management purposes, is ideally suited for this activity. Additionally, two of the refuges are island 

refuges accessible by boat only. Bicycling supports wildlife observation and photography, two of the 

six priority public uses as identified in the Improvement Act. It facilitates the public’s ability to 

experience and appreciate wildlife on the refuges. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021

Literature Cited

Boyle, S. A. and F. B. Samson. 1983. Nonconsumptive outdoor recreation: An annotated 

bibliography of human-wildlife interactions. Special Scientific Re.-Wildl. No. 252, 

USDI, Washington, D.C. 113 pp. 

Boyle, S. A. and F. B. Samson. 1985. Effects of nonconsumptive outdoor recreation of wildlife: 

A review. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 13(2):110-116. 

Use: Commercial Guiding for Wildlife/Wildlands Observation 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and 

Wolf Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

The refuges will authorize commercially guided wildlife and wildlands observation and regulate such 

use through the implementation of a commercial wildlife guide management program, including 

issuance of special use permits with conditions. Commercial means that clients pay a fee for the 

program and the intent of the permittee is to generate profit. Guiding also includes outfitting 

operations which may not provide an accompanying guide. Guiding does not include “no fee” or “notfor-profit” guided tours conducted by non-profit groups, schools and colleges, or other agencies. This 

use is covered under the general wildlife observation compatibility determination. 

This activity provides recreational and often educational opportunities for the paying public who desire a 

successful, quality experience, but who may lack the necessary equipment, skills, or knowledge to 

observe wildlife or otherwise experience the expansive river, marsh, and upland environment of the 

refuges. Commercial guiding for wildlife or other observation is an existing activity on the refuges. 
 

Appendices 279

Guiding operations will generally be allowed throughout the approximately 56,949 acres of the 

Complex throughout the year, subject to seasonal closures in impoundments, administrative “No 

Hunting” zones, and in the vicinity of sensitive bird areas such as wood stork rookeries. Tours tend to 

travel to and through backwater areas including smaller side channels of the river, marshes, and 

shallow ponds. These areas are preferred by many wildlife species, and thus present better 

opportunities for wildlife observation. Also, the quiet, secluded, and scenic bottomland forest of the 

backwaters and the freshwater and saltwater marshes is a setting preferred by many clients. 

Guided wildlife observation typically involves transport of clients by power boats from public or private 

boat landings to selected sites or routes. Often guides and clients use the same site or route or one 

of several locations selected by the guide. Some guided programs may walk to sites/routes from 

parking lots or road sides. Guided wildlife viewing operations have typically used existing refuge or 

other public observation sites, though some seasonal observation or photography blinds may be 

requested by guides as demand increases. In addition to the observation activities, guides and 

clients may use refuge shoreline areas for breaks, lunch, or other activities during the outing, and in 

accordance with refuge regulations. 

The total number of wildlife observation guides and clients using the refuges is not known. 

A first step in establishing a commercial guiding program will be to identify existing guides and 

outfitting businesses. It is anticipated that a significant number of the public is willing to pay for the 

expertise and local knowledge provided by commercial businesses and guides. The refuges provide 

excellent populations of watchable wildlife in a wild and scenic setting, and the expanse of backwater 

areas and bottomland forests along the Savannah River, combined with the tidal marshes of 

Wassaw, Pinckney Island, Blackbeard Island, and Wolf Island NWRs, provides a unique opportunity. 

It is expected that demand for guided wildlife/wildland observation will continue to increase, and with 

it, the number of interested commercial operators. 

Administration of commercially guided wildlife/wildland activities will be conducted in accordance with 

commercial guide use stipulations (attached) developed to ensure consistency throughout the 

refuges; provide a safe, quality experience; protect resources; and to ensure compliance with 

pertinent Refuge System regulations and policies. The guide use stipulations will address all aspects 

of the guided programs including the number of permits to be issued, guide qualifications, permit 

cost, and selection methods. These stipulations are considered draft and will be fine-tuned as the 

process unfolds.

Availability of Resources: 

This program will increase overall costs of refuge operations, including but not limited to, 

development and review of policy and procedure, yearly administration of permits (inquiries, 

screening and selecting applicants, issuing permits), and enforcement of permit conditions. In the 

short-term, existing staff is adequate if shifts in priorities and assignments are made to accommodate 

a modest guiding program. However, the size and scope of the guiding program, and the number of 

permits that will be available, will have to be limited in balance with permit fees received. In the longterm, a comprehensive guiding program, when combined with other new initiatives requiring permits, 

will require additional administrative and/or other personnel as identified in the CCP. Existing 

facilities (launch ramps) and other infrastructure are currently sufficient to accommodate this use.

Fees for special use permits will be determined annually, based on fair market value of the service.
280 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Species that may be affected by guided tours include many of the species that use aquatic, marsh, 

and floodplain habitat. Disturbance of wildlife is the primary concern regarding this use. Visitors 

could cause disturbance to waterfowl, waterbirds, alligators, and other wildlife. While field trip routes 

and observation sites are usually located in areas open to the general public, disturbance caused by 

group tours could be more intense because the number of people, and desire to get close to wildlife, 

may be greater than normally occurs during general public activities. This disturbance will displace 

individual animals to adjacent areas of the refuge. However, the level of disturbance, through control 

of areas used and seasons of use, should limit the disturbance during critical feeding, resting, and 

breeding periods and not measurably affect overall refuge populations. 

Guided tour activities may also conflict with other refuge users. For example, commercial tours will 

most likely use the same areas as the independent wildlife viewer, kayakers and canoeists, and 

hunters and anglers during open seasons. Unregulated or inadequately regulated commercial 

guiding operations may adversely affect the safety of other refuge users, the quality of their 

experience, and the equity of opportunity. Stipulations proposed should mitigate these concerns by 

volume and space restraints for commercial operators. 

Guide operations may increase use of some refuge facilities, such as boat launch ramps, and wildlife 

auto tour routes but, if regulated, this increase would not be significant compared to overall use.

 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

Issuance of special use permits would be determined on an annual basis; special conditions will be 

formulated based on current conditions and demand. Any impacts observed would be considered 

before the issuance of the next year's special use permit. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Justification: 

The issuance of special use permits for commercial guiding for wildlife/wildlands observation does not 

significantly impact biological resources for which the refuge was established and requires no 

additional facilities. The administrative requirement is minimal. In fact, this activity has a positive 
 

Appendices 281

effect on the overall interpretive, environmental education, and wildlife observation programs of the 

refuge, facilitating the message to reach a much larger audience. 

This use would contribute to the mission of the refuge by increasing the audience that receives the 

message of the Service, producing a greater appreciation of wildlife resources in participants, and 

building relationships between the refuge and area businesses.

Allowing commercially guided wildlife and wildlands observation on the refuge will not materially 

interfere with the purposes of the refuge or the mission of the Refuge System because: 

1. Existing federal and state agency oversight and regulation of affected species and habitat is 

sufficient to ensure healthy populations. Disturbance to fish and wildlife will be local, short-term, 

and not adversely impact overall populations. 

2. Qualifying standards for commercial operators will help ensure that the public is guided by 

competent individuals. 

3. Restricting the number of guides and managing how guided activities are conducted will reduce 

adverse habitat effects, conflicts between competing guide services, and conflicts between guided 

operations and other refuge users. 

4. Designated areas of operation (Guide Use Areas), operating requirements, and other regulation 

of guided activities will minimize conflicts with other refuge users. 

5. Administrative (application) and special use permit fees will help off-set costs to administer and 

provide oversight to this use. 

6. Regulating and limiting the number of commercial operators as stated in the refuge commercial 

guide program stipulations will provide a safe, quality experience to individuals who want to enjoy 

the resources of the refuge. It will also increase opportunities for those who wish to observe 

wildlife and experience the scenic and wild nature of the refuge, but may lack the required 

equipment, knowledge, or expertise.

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021 

Use: Environmental Education and Interpretation 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island 

NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina. 

Description of Use: 

Currently, environmental education and interpretation activities contribute nearly 5,000 visits each 

year to the Complex. Use occurs year-round, but increases between September and June, with the 

addition of individual school classes and large groups during educational field days. Environmental 
282 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

education programs focus on issues including wildlife, history, archaeology, culture, and habitats. 

Wildlife ecology programs address a number of wildlife conservation issues including wetland and 

freshwater marsh conservation, migratory bird management, and endangered species conservation. 

Although these activities do not require a special use permit, they are most often closely coordinated 

with the refuge manager and park rangers. Programs also involve development of outdoor skills 

which enhance appreciation of wildlife and their habitats. The refuges have become increasingly 

popular as outdoor classrooms for several universities. 

The refuges provide public facilities which support environmental education and interpretation 

including visitor contact stations, observation areas, hiking trails, biking trails, canoe trails, and 

two auto tour routes. The visitor center contains a number of interpretive displays and exhibits, a 

theater, an interactive computer, and a nature store sponsored by the Friends of the Savannah 

Coastal Refuges Complex 

The comprehensive conservation plan recommends additional staffing and facilities and an expanded 

environmental education and interpretation programs for several of the refuges within the Complex. 

With additional full-time visitor services specialists, more students will be given an opportunity for 

environmental education. Additional staff will be able to provide more teacher workshops and 

orientations, and help develop site-specific curricula, materials, activities, and interpretive exhibits. 

Additional field trip assistance would be available to enhance learning in an outdoor setting. Students 

and teachers would also be able to participate in coordinated restoration, and monitoring programs 

through long-term monitoring studies 

Availability of Resources: 

Currently, there are three full-time visitor services staff members for the entire Complex. 

The staff for coordinating the current level of environmental education and interpretation is available 

but limits the number and depth of programs and amount of assistance to educators. 

Maintaining the public use facilities which support environmental education and interpretation is part 

of routine management duties and staff and funding is available. Additional facilities and visitors 

services specialists as outlined in the refuges’ CCP will enhance opportunities for environmental 

education and interpretation and improve the quality and quantity of programs. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

There is some temporary disturbance to wildlife due to environmental education activities. However, the 

disturbance is local, temporary, and generally not detrimental to individual animals or populations. Some 

habitat is disturbed during activities, but of little long-term consequence. Future increases in facilities and 

participants would cause some displacement of habitat and increase in disturbance, but this is negligible 

given the controlled nature of environmental education and the size of the Complex. Control of areas used 

by groups would avoid or minimize intrusion into sensitive habitats or wildlife areas. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 
 

Appendices 283

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

1. Environmental education activities not lead by refuge staff will require, at a minimum, verbal 

approval by the respective refuge manager or visitor services specialist to minimize conflicts with 

other groups, safeguard students and resources, and to allow tracking of use levels. Refuge 

managers may require special use permits at their discretion. 

2. Environmental education (including refuge-conducted) will not be allowed in closed areas when 

closed to hunting, or administrative closed areas. 

3. Students and teachers will continue to be instructed on the best ways to view wildlife with minimal 

disturbance. 

4. Educational groups are required to have a sufficient number of adults to supervise their groups, a 

minimum of 1 adult per 30 students. 

5. Increased communication with teachers conducting their own activities on the refuge will help 

educate about minimizing wildlife disturbance. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Justification: 

Environmental education and interpretation are used to foster an understanding in citizens of all ages 

to act responsibly in protecting a healthy ecosystem. They are tools to use in building land ethic, 

developing support of the Refuge System, and decreasing wildlife violations. Environmental 

education and interpretation increases visibility in the community and improves the image of the 

Refuge System and the Service. 

Environmental education and interpretation are important and provide visitors with an awareness of 

refuge-specific issues such as wetland ecology, migratory bird management, and issues relating to 

the entire Refuge System. Environmental education is expected to increase while ensuring 

compatibility with the purpose for which the refuge was established.

Most environmental education and interpretation will occur at, or be directed to, existing and future 

facilities in strategic locations providing quality opportunities while limiting wildlife and habitat 

disturbance. Disturbance to wildlife is also limited by the size and remote nature of large parts of the 

refuges. Many species have also grown more tolerant of human presence due to railroads, 

highways, and river traffic adjacent to or through the refuges. Disturbance is also generally shortterm and only temporarily displaces wildlife, and adequate adjacent habitat is usually available for 

wildlife. The approval process for groups will limit disturbance to wildlife and ensure avoidance of 

sensitive areas. Numerous other stipulations will be in place to facilitate these uses while reducing 

direct and indirect impacts. 
284 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

As two of the six priority public uses of the Refuge System, these uses are to be encouraged when 

compatible with the purposes of the refuges. The refuges provide outstanding environmental education 

and interpretation opportunities due to the diversity of wildlife and habitat, and the range of 

environmental issue. For example, increasing concerns with invasive species provide a subject for 

environmental education exploration and interpretation. The extensive education community bordering 

the refuges desires more opportunities for hands-on experiential learning. Educating students of all 

ages about the resources and challenges of the Refuge System is an important way to influence the 

future well-being of this Complex of refuges. Only through understanding and appreciation will people 

be moved to personal and collective action to ensure a healthy refuge for the future. 

Mandatory 15-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2026 

Use: Recreational Fishing 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island 

NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

The refuges allow public recreational fishing in accordance with state regulations and seasons 

and applicable refuge regulations. The refuge offers a variety of fishing opportunities throughout 

the year. However, areas open to fishing vary seasonally to avoid conflicts with other 

management activities. Fishing is one of the most popular activities on the Complex, with almost 

79,000 fishing visits reported in 2008. 

With the exception of Tybee and Wolf Island NWRs, refuges are open to fishing year-round as 

outlined in the comprehensive conservation plan. Savannah NWR has a seasonal closure on the 

managed impoundments during the times that wintering waterfowl are on the refuge, from 

December 1 - February 28. 

All fish species allowed by the South Carolina and Georgia Departments of Natural Resources will be 

permitted for harvest. Harvest methods may be more restrictive than state regulations permit. 

Closed areas may be established in the future if refuge personnel determine that wildlife species are 

negatively impacted by fishing activity. Only non-motorized boats or boats with electric motors are 

allowed in freshwater areas of the refuges that are open to fishing. Anglers can access the refuge via 

the main refuge road or by boat for the island refuges. 

Availability of Resources: 

Anglers use the existing network of roads to access the various areas of the Complex for fishing. 

Harris Neck NWR provides a boat ramp, fishing pier, signs, and other facilities to assist anglers. The 

refuge provides staff to maintain facilities, disseminate information to visitors, and enforce regulations. 

No fisheries management is conducted on any of the refuges within the Complex. 
 

Appendices 285

Adequate resources are available to manage the existing fishing program at the current level of 

participation. However, funding for law enforcement staff time and printing of the Hunting and Fishing 

Regulations brochure is lacking some years, calling for a redirection of existing refuge funding. This 

redirection is often at the expense of other refuge programs such as monitoring, maintenance, and 

other public use programs. 

Proposals in the comprehensive conservation plan should help address these funding concerns. 

As funding becomes available, additional parking, information kiosks, fishing piers, boat ramps, 

docks, and piers may be added. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Recreational fishing should not adversely affect the fisheries resource, wildlife resource, or any other 

natural resources of any of the five refuges open to the public. There may be some limited 

disturbance to certain species of wildlife and some trampling of vegetation; however, this should be 

short-lived and relatively minor and would not negatively impact wetland values of the refuge. Known 

bird rookery sites do not occur at locations currently popular for fishing activities; therefore, 

disturbance should not be a problem. If disturbance at these sites is identified as a problem in future 

years, closed areas would be established during the nesting season. 

Time and space zoning of refuge use wiould be utilized as necessary to minimize wildlife disturbance. 

Problems associated with littering and illegal take of fish would be controlled through law enforcement 

activities. Providing information to refuge visitors about rules and regulations, along with increased 

law enforcement patrol, would keep these negative impacts to a minimum. 

Based on available information, threatened and/or endangered species documented on the refuges 

include wood stork, manatee, sea turtles, and piping plover. It is anticipated that expected levels of 

fishing or other wildlife-dependent recreation activities would not directly, indirectly, or cumulatively 

impact any listed, proposed, or candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat. Data 

gathered from future biological surveys regarding the importance or potential importance of the 

refuge to threatened or endangered species or critical habitat (or proposed threatened, endangered, 

or critical habitat), could result in changes to public use activities in the future; however, these 

changes would have no effect on listed species. Accommodating this wildlife-dependent use is 

expected to result in minimal impacts. 

All motor vehicle use associated with fishing is restricted to designated roads, trails, and parking 

areas which reduces disturbance to wildlife. Disturbance to habitat is minimal. Undoubtedly some 

shoreline erosion would be caused by boat wakes, but it is relatively minor compared to that caused 

by high water events and wind driven wave action. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

To ensure compatibility with refuge purposes and the mission of the Refuge System, recreational 

fishing can occur on the refuges if the following stipulations are met: 
286 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

1. This use must be conducted in accordance with state and federal regulations, and applicable 

special refuge regulations published in the Public Use Regulations brochure. 

2. Closed areas and no motors allowed limit disturbance to large numbers of resting and feeding 

waterfowl. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Justification:

Recreational fishing is one of the six priority public uses made available on national wildlife refuges 

as indicated by the Improvement Act. This use will allow the visiting public to safely enjoy quality 

fishing on public land while other visitors enjoy wildlife observation, photography, hiking, or learning 

about the natural resources of the area.

Fishing seasons and limits are established by the states and adopted by the refuge. These restrictions 

ensure the continued well-being of overall populations of fish. Fishing does result in the taking of many 

individuals within the overall population, but restrictions are designed to safeguard adequate population 

and recruitment from year-to-year. Specific refuge regulations address equity and quality of opportunity 

for anglers, and help safeguard refuge habitat. Disturbance to other fish and wildlife does occur, but this 

disturbance is generally short-term and adequate habitat occurs in adjacent areas. 

Conflicts between anglers are localized and addressed through law enforcement, public education, 

and continuous review and updating of state and refuge regulations. Allowing this use also furthers 

the mission of the Refuge System by providing renewable resources for the benefit of the American 

public while conserving fish, wildlife, and plant resources on the refuge. Fishing seasons and limits 

are established by the states and adopted by the refuge. These restrictions ensure the continued 

well-being of overall populations of fish. 

Allowing this use also furthers the mission of the Refuge System by providing renewable resources for the 

benefit of the American public while conserving fish, wildlife, and plant resources on the refuges. 

Mandatory 15-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2026 
 

Appendices 287

Use: Hiking 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Hiking is an existing use on Pinckney Island, Savannah, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard 

Island NWRs. Vehicular access is non-existent or limited on these refuges and bicycling and hiking 

are the primary means by which wildlife-dependent activities such as wildlife observation and 

photography are conducted. Public use on all refuges is limited to day use activities. 

On Pinckney Island NWR, foot and bicycle traffic are permitted on all refuge roads and trails, other 

than roadways within the manager’s residence which are closed to public access. Motorized vehicles 

are restricted to the refuge entrance road and the paved parking area. 

On Savannah NWR, foot and bicycle travel is permitted on all refuge roads and dikes other than 

the maintenance shop entrance road, north of U.S. 17 between impoundments #6 and #7. 

Access to all impoundments (#31-39) via the dike network north of U.S. 17 is closed to the 

general public from November 1 through March 14 to reduce disturbance to wintering waterfowl. 

The Laurel Hill Wildlife Drive, a 1-way, unpaved, 4.5-mile-long drive through the refuge’s 

impoundment system south of U.S. 17, is open to vehicular, foot, and bicycle traffic. The 1-mile 

Tupelo Swamp Trail is open to foot traffic only. The Cistern Walk is also restricted to foot travel. 

On Wassaw NWR, hiking and bicycling is permitted along the 40 miles of primitive roads and 7 miles 

of beach. Only foot travel is permitted on Pine Island, one of the units of the refuge. Other islands 

within this refuge are closed to public entry. Additionally, 180 acres of a private inholding are closed 

to public entry except along the Main Road and the Avenue, roads that intersect the property. 

On Harris Neck NWR, all refuge roads and trails are open to foot and bicycle travel unless the area is 

posted as closed. 

On Blackbeard Island NWR, all roads, trails, and levees are open to foot and bicycle travel. There is 

no vehicular access on this offshore island. Additionally, hiking and bicycling is permitted along 7 

miles of beach. Only a small percentage of refuge visitors venture off the beach onto the trail system. 

Availability of Resources: 

As this use supports wildlife observation and photography, no additional resources above those 

needed to facilitate these priority public uses are needed to manage hiking. 

At Savannah NWR, two trails (the Tupelo Swamp and Cistern Walk) were developed specifically for 

foot traffic. Maintenance costs for these primitive trails are less than $1,000 annually as they are only 

periodically maintained. 
288 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Short-term impacts: Mechanized forms of recreation can have the greatest impact on wildlife, 

causing habitat destruction, disturbance, and disruption of animal behavior, noise pollution, and even 

direct mortality (Boyle and Samson 1983, Boyle and Samson 1985). Since motorized vehicles are 

not permitted on three of the refuges, the primary disturbance factor may be the size of groups 

participating in various activities, such as hiking. 

Of particular concern at Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs is disturbance to beach nesting 

birds such as gulls, terns, and other shorebirds. Large numbers of shorebirds congregate for the 

purposes of breeding, feeding, loafing, nesting, and wintering during various seasons throughout 

the year. Hiking may disturb these activities. Additionally, hiking may destroy vegetation. Other 

impacts involve violation of refuge regulations (e.g., harassing wildlife, removing animals and 

plants, littering, and vandalism). 

On other refuges, disturbance will primarily occur along the wildlife drives and trails and the dikes that 

insect these drives. 

There are no anticipated long-term or cumulative impacts. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

Pinckney Island NWR: The refuge's road and trail system will be open during daylight hours to foot 

and bicycle travel. No motorized vehicles will be permitted beyond the public parking area. Access 

to trails adjacent to freshwater ponds will be prohibited during periods of high concentrations of 

nesting wading birds. Law enforcement patrol will minimize impacts from violations. Outlying islands 

within the refuge (Big Harry, Little Harry, Corn and Buzzard Islands) will remain closed to the public. 

Savannah NWR: Refuge roads and trails will be open during daylight hours only. Only foot and 

bicycle travel will be permitted on refuge dikes. The Tupelo Swamp and Cistern trails will be open for 

foot traffic only. Access to dikes north of U.S. 17 will be closed to public access from November 1 

through March 14, to prevent disturbance to wintering waterfowl. Law enforcement patrol will 

continue in an effort to minimize impacts from violations. 

Wassaw NWR: Law enforcement patrol of the beach and roadways will continue to minimize impacts. 

Current regulations which limit public use to day use only will be maintained. In addition, roads and trails 

leading to freshewater ponds that support wading bird rookeries or roosts will be closed when these sites 

are active. Beach use at the dune level will be regulated as needed by closure of specific areas (e.g., 

loggerhead turtle nesting areas and or shorebird nesting areas). Beach use from the high-water to the 

low-water marks will be regulated through enforcement of Title 50 CFR. 

Harris Neck NWR: The public access route of the refuge will remain open during daylight hours. 

During wood stork and wading bird nesting season, rookery sites will be closed to the public. Other 

sensitive areas, such as the wood duck banding site at Bluebill Pond, will be closed seasonally to 

prevent disturbance. 
 

Appendices 289

Blackbeard Island NWR: Law enforcement patrol of the beach and roadways will continue to 

minimize impacts. Current regulations of day-use only will be maintained. In addition, Flag Pond and 

adjacent levees will be closed March 1 to August 31 to protect sensitive stork and wading bird 

rookeries from disturbance. Other rookery sites will be seasonally closed, as well. Beach use at the 

dune level will be restricted during sea turtle nesting season (May 1 through October 30). 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Justification:

On the five refuges within the Complex where this activity will be permitted, hikers account for a small 

percentage of visitors (Pinckney Island NWR, 30 percent; Savannah NWR, 20 percent; Wassaw 

NWR, 30 percent; Harris Neck NWR, 12 percent; and Blackbeard Island NWR, 40 percent). Hiking is 

a low-impact and low-cost activity to manage. Only two trails have been developed to specifically 

facilitate this activity. The refuges’ existing road and dike systems, maintained for management 

purposes, are ideally suited for this activity. Additionally, two of the refuges are island refuges 

accessible by boat only. Hiking supports wildlife observation and photography, two of the six priority 

public uses of the Refuge System and facilitates the public’s ability to experience and appreciate 

wildlife on the refuges. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021

Literature Cited

Boyle, S. A. and F. B. Samson. 1983. Nonconsumptive outdoor recreation: An annotated 

bibliography of human-wildlife interactions. Special Scientific Re.-Wildl. No. 252, 

USDI, Washington, D.C. 113 pp. 

Boyle, S. A. and F. B. Samson. 1985. Effects of nonconsumptive outdoor recreation of wildlife: 

A review. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 13(2):110-116. 
290 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Use: Public Hunting 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and 

Wolf Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Allow public hunting for big-game (white-tailed deer, wild turkey, and hogs), upland/small game, and 

waterfowl. About 60 percent of the Complex is open to hunting for these species. Season dates, bag 

limits, and harvest methods are generally consistent with state regulations, with a few refuge-specific 

regulations. To increase wildlife observation opportunities during the hunting season or to minimize 

conflict between user groups, several “No Hunting” zones have been designated. A Hunting 

Regulations brochure is available to inform the public of hunting opportunities and refuge regulations.

Availability of Resources: 

The designated areas open to public hunting are open in accordance with state and refuge 

regulations and do not require preparation and administration of special hunts. An estimated 2,037 

visits for hunting were made to the refuges in 2008. Except for 1-day quota firearms hunts for deer, 

crowding has not been an issue as sufficient resources appear to exist to accommodate the current 

level of participation and provide a quality hunting experience. 

Hunters use the existing network of roads to access areas open to hunting. Parking lots, boat ramps, 

restrooms, docks, leaflets, information kiosks, and signs are provided by the refuge for use by 

hunters. The refuge also provides staff and volunteers to maintain these facilities and disseminate 

information to visitors. Additional parking lots and boat ramps are provided by other agencies, local 

units of government, or private interests. Hunters residing next to the refuge boundary are often able 

to access open hunting areas from their property. Refuge law enforcement officers, Service special 

agents, and state conservation officers and wardens enforce state and refuge hunting regulations. 

Adequate resources are available to manage the existing hunting program at the current level of 

participation. However, funding for law enforcement staff time and printing of the Hunting 

Regulations brochure is lacking some years, calling for a redirection of existing refuge funding. This 

redirection is often at the expense of other refuge programs such as monitoring, maintenance, and 

other public use programs. Proposals in the comprehensive conservation plan should help address 

these funding concerns. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Accommodating this wildlife-dependent use is expected to result in minimal impacts. Although 

hunting causes mortality to wildlife, season dates and bag limits are set with the long-term health of 

populations in mind. Populations of certain species (e.g., white-tailed deer) are monitored by refuge 

staff. Survey information indicates that a limited harvest will not adversely affect the overall deer 

population level. Without harvests, deer will quickly overpopulate an area causing degradation to the 

quality and quantity of vegetation. Therefore, deer hunting promotes a healthier, more robust, and 

diverse refuge plant community. Deer hunting may also reduce the number of deer/car collisions on 

adjacent highways. 
 

Appendices 291

Disturbance to wildlife may also result from hunting activity. This disturbance is expected to be 

limited in scope and duration. Because hunting is not permitted in refuge “No Hunting” zones during 

the duck hunting season, this use is not a source of disturbance to waterbirds concentrated in these 

areas. All motor vehicle use is restricted to designated roads, trails, and parking areas which reduces 

disturbance to wildlife. Disturbance to habitat is minimal given the nature of this hunting and 

restriction of vehicle use. Hunting is prohibited on the Complex when seasons are closed. This 

regulation reduces the potential for conflicts between the various refuge user groups. Hunters 

occasionally violate regulations, such as exceeding the daily bag limit, using permanent tree stands, 

or hunting in the wrong area. However, these incidents usually have only minor impacts to wildlife 

populations or refuge resources. Positive impacts will occur from the removal of feral hogs. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

To ensure compatibility with refuge purposes and the mission of the Refuge System, hunting can 

occur on the refuge if the following stipulations are met: 

1. This use must be conducted in accordance with state and federal regulations, and special refuge 

regulations published in the Hunting Regulations and Public Use Regulations brochures. 

2. Administrative closed areas are closed to all hunting and reduce conflicts between hunting and 

non-hunting users groups. Closed areas, by default, also reduce conflicts since they are closed 

to hunting during waterfowl seasons but open to most other public uses, although the public is 

asked to avoid the areas. 

3. To minimize potential conflicts between user groups, no hunting should occur on the refuge prior 

to September 1 of each year and all hunting should end March 15, except for spring wild turkey 

hunting. 

4. This use is subject to modification if on-site monitoring by refuge personnel or other authorized 

personnel results in unanticipated negative impacts to natural communities, wildlife species, or 

their habitats. 

5. Changes outlined in the comprehensive conservation plan, if approved, could have some effect 

on hunting covered in this determination. Changes will be incorporated in a new Hunt Plan and a 

new compatibility determination will be prepared at that time. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 
292 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Justification: 

Hunting seasons and bag limits are established by the states and generally adopted by the refuge. 

These restrictions ensure the continued well-being of overall populations of game animals. Hunting 

does result in the taking of many individuals within the overall population, but restrictions are designed 

to safeguard adequate breeding populations from year-to-year. Specific refuge regulations address 

equity and quality of opportunity for hunters, and help safeguard refuge habitat. Disturbance to other 

fish and wildlife does occur, but this disturbance is generally short-term and adequate habitat occurs in 

adjacent areas. Loss of plants from boat or foot traffic is minor, or temporary, since hunting occurs 

mainly after the growing season. Conflicts between hunters are localized and are addressed through 

law enforcement, public education, and continuous review and updating to state and refuge hunting 

regulations. Conflicts between other various user groups are minor given the season of the year for 

hunting, the location of most hunting away from public use facilities, and the system of closed areas. 

Stipulations above will ensure proper control of the means of use and provide management flexibility 

should detrimental impacts develop. Allowing this use also furthers the mission of the Refuge System 

by providing renewable resources for the benefit of the American public while conserving fish, wildlife, 

and plant resources on the refuge. 

Mandatory 15-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2026 

Use: Mosquito Control 

Refuge Name: Savannah, Tybee, and Wassaw NWRs 

Counties: Chatham and Effingham Counties, Georgia; Jasper County, South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Chatham County Mosquito Control proposes the control of black salt marsh mosquitoes (Aedes 

taeniorhynchus) and brown salt marsh mosquitoes (Aedes sollicitans) on portions of three refuges. 

On Savannah NWR, the treatment area would include Onslow Island. On Tybee NWR, treatment 

would occur on the high salt marsh depressions and swales. On Wassaw NWR, 160 acres of marsh 

would be treated. This is a historic use that has occurred on these refuges since 1977. This 

Compatibility Determination is an interim determination to be in place until such time as an Integrated 

Pest Management Plan and Environmental Assessment can be completed for the mosquito control 

program on Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex. 

Chatham County practices integrated pest management (IPM) which incorporates physical, 

biological, and chemical controls. Surveillance, the location and monitoring of mosquito-breeding 

sites, is essential for successful implementation of control strategies. Physical control occurs when 

known mosquito breeding sites are altered to reduce or eliminate immature mosquito populations. 

Physical control is the longest lasting and most economical strategy for mosquito control. It may 

reduce or eliminate the need for chemical controls. Biological controls, such as mosquito eating fish, 

are not used on refuges at this time. In the future, if there is a native, non-invasive fish species that 

can be utilized without causing irreparable harm, biological controls may be implemented. 
 

Appendices 293

Currently, chemical control is the preferred method of treatment of the three refuges. Pesticide 

applications supplement physical controls. Chemicals used are registered by the Georgia 

Department of Agriculture and labeled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticide 

applications are made only when needed and post-treatment inspections are conducted to measure 

effectiveness. Applications are not made in the absence of mosquitoes except in a limited number of 

known mosquito breeding sites. Chemical controls include both larviciding and adulticiding, but 

adulticiding is not permitted on any of the refuges within the Complex. 

Larviciding is the application of pesticide to water for control of immature mosquitoes. Altosid, an 

insect growth regulator, is used on Savannah, Tybee, and Wassaw NWRs. Altosid blocks 

development of the mosquitoes into the adult stage, which prevents the emergence of breeding, 

biting adults without upsetting the food chain or impacting non-target species. The Altosid 

formulation contains methoprene, which is target-specific and will not affect fish, waterfowl, mammals 

or beneficial predatory insects. Altosid products also have the lowest toxicity rating of any larvicide; 

therefore, it is the preferred pesticide for sensitive areas. 

Employees of Chatham County Mosquito Control are licensed by the Georgia Department of 

Agriculture or work under the supervision of licensed technical staff. All application equipment is 

regularly calibrated to ensure that correct amounts of pesticide are delivered. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

There are no anticipated short-term, long-term or cumulative impacts. Only non-phytotoxic chemicals 

may be used. The larvicide formulation contains methoprene, which is target-specific and will not 

affect fish, waterfowl, mammals, or beneficial predatory insects, and also has a low toxicity rating 

preferred for sensitive areas. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

1. A special use permit outlining the treatment areas, chemicals, application rates, and application 

methods will be issued each year treatment is required. 

2. Only Georgia Department of Agriculture and EPA approved larvicides will be approved for 

application in sensitive salt marsh areas. 

3. The permittees will obtain all required federal, state, and local permits. These permits shall be 

presented upon application for the special use permits. 

4. Permits may be revoked for violations or noncompliance with the permit and/or federal, state, or 

local laws and regulations. 
294 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

5. Prior to any and all flights over refuge lands, permittee will notify the appropriate refuge staff as 

follows: 

a. Wassaw NWR – Peter Range (912) 652-4415, ext. 112; cell (912) 313-1364 

b. Savannah and Tybee NWRs – Russ Webb (843) 784-6758; cell (912)313-1366 

In the event that the appropriate staff cannot be contacted, please call Savannah Coastal 

Refuges Complex headquarters at (912) 652-4415 and request that the manager be 

contacted by radio and be notified of the flight schedule. 

6. The portions of refuge lands to be inspected and treated include the dredge disposal areas within 

the Savannah NWR boundaries, all of Tybee NWR, and the marsh areas of Wassaw NWR, 

excluding the eagle nesting area on Flora hamock as described below. 

7. The eagle nest located on Wassaw NWR, Flora Hammock, will be excluded from inspection 

flights during the breeding season from December 1 – May 15. The eagle nest will have a 1,500-

foot no fly buffer zone in effect during this time. A prescribed flight path, designed to avoid 

possible disturbance to nesting eagles, was determined by staff from the refuge and Chatham 

County and is attached. 

8. Pilots from Chatham County will phone in any illegal activity witnessed while in flight to Chatham 

County headquarters, who will then immediately notify Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

headquarters. 

9. In the event of a potential outbreak of disease that could affect human health, Savannah Coastal 

Refuges Complex headquarters will be notified immediately. 

10. Permittee, its successors and assigns, agree to protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless the 

United States of America from any and all loss, damage, liability, claims, demands, or suits of 

any nature whatsoever asserted by employees of the permittee or by third persons for property 

damage or loss, personal injury or death, arising out of, in connection with, or incidental to 

activities conducted under the special use permit. This indemnity shall include, without limitation, 

costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees occasioned by said loss, damage liability, claims, demands, 

or suits, as well as the full amount of any judgement rendered or compromise settlement made, 

plus court costs and interest. This indemnity shall inure to the benefit of agents, officers, and 

employees of the United States of America. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 
 

Appendices 295

Justification: 

The black salt marsh mosquito and the brown salt marsh mosquito are the primary pest mosquitoes 

for coastal Georgia. These species breed in the high salt marsh areas flooded by rain or extreme 

tidal flooding. Their breeding sites are relatively small areas which allow a focused control response. 

The larvicide to be used is species specific and approved for application in sensitive salt marsh 

habitats. The larvicide is non-phytotoxic and does not enter the food chain or impact non-target 

species. The larvicide will not affect fish, waterfowl, mammals or beneficial predatory insects. 

Further, the larvicide used by Chatham County Mosquito Control has the lowest toxicity rating of 

commonly applied larvicides; therefore, it is the preferred pesticide for sensitive areas. Tybee NWR 

is close to high-density urban areas in the city of Savannah and Chatham County. Uncontrolled 

mosquito populations on all three refuges can make a significant impact on the quality and health of 

life of surrounding residents. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021

Use: Scientific Research 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and 

Wolf Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Scientific research (including collecting and surveys) is an existing use of the refuges. While it is not one 

of the six priority public uses of the Refuge System, this use contributes to staff’s knowledge concerning 

flora and fauna of the refuges, and often provides information that assists in habitat management. 

Current projects include: tidal wetland study; population dynamics of short nose sturgeon; population 

monitoring and recovery of striped bass; population dynamics, feeding habits, and survivorship of 

loggerhead sea turtles; population monitoring of painted buntings; population monitoring of red knots and 

piping plovers; impacts of wetland restoration on plant and herptofauna communities; genetics, juvenile 

movement, mercury levels, and survivorship of wood storks; and, life history of Chinese tallow tree. 

Research projects involve approximately 30 people annually, with work projects often spread over 

multiple refuges. The geographic position of seven coastal refuges affords researches the 

opportunity to form replicates of their studies to determine whether results are area specific or can be 

applied range wide. Long-term projects and surveys may occur year-round, while special surveys 

may be of a short duration. Typically, each researcher provides all the necessary personnel and 

equipment to conduct the project. Each project proposal is evaluated by station biologists on its 

individual merit through the special use permit process. Special conditions that are site-specific are 

attached to the permit. Additionally, projects that involve threatened and endangered species will be 

evaluated through the Section 7 Consultation Process with the Service’s Ecological Services Division. 

It is important to note that not all research proposals are permitted and emphasis is placed on 

projects that will directly benefit refuge management programs. 
296 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Availability of Resources: 

Ancillary administrative and maintenance costs are associated with managing this use. Researchers 

typically provide their own equipment and personnel. Requests for the station to provide support for 

research projects in the form of personnel assistance, equipment, facilities, or maintenance of project 

sites, will be closely scrutinized during the project proposal and special use permit evaluation phases. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Short-term impacts: Presence of researchers may cause temporary habitat destruction, disturbance, 

displacement, and disruption of animal behavior. The benefits of the findings from the research 

projects far outweigh any temporary negative effects. For threatened and endangered species, or 

species of concern or in decline, research designed to monitor, enhance, or sustain these populations 

will be emphasized. Habitat management projects with implications to enhance management on the 

refuges for particular species or suites of species will be encouraged. Each research proposal will be 

reviewed on an individual basis, with higher emphasis granted to research related to threatened and 

endangered species, priority habitats, and that support the purposes for which each refuge was 

established. Finally, research for the sake of pure research, with no application to management 

practice, will be scrutinized and discouraged. 

There are no anticipated long-term or cumulative impacts. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

Suveys, research, and collecting will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis through project 

proposals, special use permits, Section 7 Consutlations, and other documents. Refuge biologists and 

managers will review proposals and provide recommendations as to the appropriateness and value of 

each project. Special conditions governing time, location, and methodolgy will be attached to special 

use permits to ensure compatibility with each refuge’s purpose. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 
 

Appendices 297

Justification: 

Use of the refuges for scientific research, collection, and surveys is consistent with improving habitat 

conditions and enhancing wildlife and habitat management. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2026

Use: Timber Harvest 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and 

Wolf Island NWRs. 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Active forest management utilizing conversion of existing pine plantations, and implementing unevenaged, selective timber harvest will be proposed in the Forest Habitat Management Plan for the 

Complex. This timber harvest would restore altered/degraded habitats through use of customary 

Service timber sale procedures. We would utilize common silvicultural actions (individual tree selection 

techniques designed to create uneven-aged, highly diverse stands) based on site-specific needs 

identified through review of current priority wildlife species habitat requirements. This alternative would 

be implemented utilizing timber sales with special conditions incorporated to achieve needed 

restoration, and would include gradual implementation of silvicultural actions across a 15-year cycle. 

Pine plantations would be converted to a mixed pine-hardwood condition through the use of prescribed 

fire and thinning within the plantations, allowing hardwood regeneration. This uneven-aged system 

would also be beneficial in the restoration and management of the longleaf pine ecosystem. 

Some of these plantations are currently in a merchantable age class and are ready for a first thinning. 

This thinning should occur within the next 5 years, followed by a second thinning over the following 

10 years. These plantations will be converted to a mixed pine-hardwood type during the 15-year 

cycle. Forest prescriptions will describe the specific management techniques proposed to accomplish 

refuge objectives on specific stands of forest habitat within the compartment. The prescription, with 

approval from the appropriate Ecological Services Office and Regional Office, will become a working 

plan to be used by field personnel to accomplish the proposed management objectives. 

The forest management program on the Complex is designed to produce or maintain the desired 

wildlife habitat, focusing on threatened and endangered species, migratory forest birds, and resident 

wildlife in general. As long as commercial harvesting activities can be adapted to meet refuge 

objectives, they will be utilized to produce the desired habitat. 

Availability of Resources: 

Administrative and maintenance costs may be associated with managing the implementation of the 

timber harvest. Currently, there are no forest management staff based at this Complex; however, 

assistance will be sought from foresters within the Region to prepare compartment prescriptions. 
298 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Monitoring of timber harvests to ensure compliance will be accomplished by refuge wildlife biologists 

and the prescribed fire specialist. Forest habitat management expenses will involve funding of any 

non-commercial treatments or other forestry operations, or improvements of roads for forest 

management. Operating expenses will include purchase of fuel, marking paints, computers, office 

supplies, and other miscellaneous expenses. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

The majority of anticipated impacts of the timber harvest are expected to be positive. These positive 

impacts include timber stand improvements, which, in turn, will provide better habitat for wildlife, and 

will improve the health and safety of the forest ecosystems. 

Negative short-term impacts associated with forest thinning may include low productivity habitats, 

potential rutting and siltation, and wildlife disturbance through equipment use during the periods of 

timber harvest. Negative impacts associated with silvicultural treatments will be short-term and 

minimized through consideration and biological planning. There are no anticipated long-term or 

cumulative negative impacts associated with timber harvest as described.

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility:

Before any timber harvest is conducted, a forest habitat management prescription on the 

compartment will be completed. Prescriptions will be written in accordance with the Service’s Refuge 

Manual. All prescriptions will be submitted to the Regional Office for approval prior to harvest. All 

management activities (prescribed fire and timber management) will be in compliance with Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 

Timber sales will be conducted according to established Service policy. Upon selection of a 

successful bidder by the refuge manager, a harvesting permit will be issued. The Harvesting 

Permit will include a special use permit, maps locating all sale units, and a copy of the conditions of 

sale applicable to the timber harvesting. 

Close inspection and supervision of all timber sales will be necessary to ensure that harvesting 

operations meet the condition of the permit and refuge objectives. Once harvesting is complete, the 

refuge manager or designee will inspect the site for compliance with all requirements of the contract. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 
 

Appendices 299

Justification: 

Section 6 RM 3.2 of the Service’s Refuge Manual states, "The policy of the Service is to manage 

forests in a manner that best meets the overall objectives of a particular refuge." The Complex’s 

Forest Management Plan will adhere to the approved procedures, principles, and techniques listed in 

the Service’s Refuge Manual. This timber harvest will allow refuge staff to conduct appropriate 

management actions to improve existing forest conditions to benefit a variety of wildlife species and 

communities. In addition, this plan allows for necessary thinning and fuels reduction that will greatly 

protect adjacent property and homeowners. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021 

Use: Salvage Timber Harvest and Sale 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and 

Wolf Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Salvage harvesting is the removal of dead trees or trees damaged or dying because of injurious 

agents other than competition (Helms 1998). Traditionally, salvage has been utilized to recover 

economic value that would otherwise be lost. In the context of the “wildlife first” mission of the Refuge 

System, salvage harvesting is used to contain the spread of damage agents such as insects (e.g., 

southern pine beetle, gypsy moth) and disease, and rehabilitate or restore ecological integrity 

degraded by these agents, as well as by hurricanes, tornados, ice storms, and wildfire. 

Due to the wide range of potential injurious agents (e.g., storms, wildfire, insects, and disease) 

and the seasonality’s of the different agents, the potential need for salvage harvesting exists 

year-round. Salvage harvesting on a refuge is utilizing an economic activity to achieve a 

biological objective. While the biological impacts of the activity may drive the decision whether or 

not to implement the activity, the economics determine its feasibility. Damaged timber degrades 

quickly, loosing value rapidly: 

Approximate timeline for timber to be salvaged to prevent degradation 

(NC Forest Service Division of Forest Resources 2000) 

Product Harvest Within: Comments 

Pine and hardwood veneer and 

appearance lumber 4-6 weeks Blue stain prohibits use if left longer 

Pine framing lumber 3-4 months Should be kiln dried to prevent 

emergence of secondary insects 
300 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Product Harvest Within: Comments 

Pine posts 4-6 weeks Blue stain will affect toughness and 

preservative treatment 

Pine and hardwood pulp, 

fiberboard, particle board, and 

OSB 

8-12 months 

As wood begins to decay, pulping 

process will be affected. Storm damaged 

wood should be mixed with sound wood 

If it is determined that there is a biological need for a salvage harvest, but the timelines are ignored, 

the harvest could become economically unviable. Given the necessity of speed, these types of 

timber sales are not sold to the highest bidder. Instead, prospective bidders are contacted, prices for 

wood products negotiated, and a special use permit issued. While a Section 7 Endangered Species 

Consultation and a Section 106 Request for Cultural Resource Compliance are required, they are 

initiated after the salvage is implemented. 

Storms such as hurricanes, tornados, and ice storms, wildfires, insects such as southern pine beetle 

and gypsy moth, and diseases such as annosum root rot, all have the potential to degrade refuge 

forests in terms of goals and objectives. Basically, the manager must use sound professional 

judgment to determine if the injurious agents have degraded the ecological integrity of the refuge. If 

so, and salvage harvesting would help restore ecological integrity, then its use is warranted. If not, 

then no salvage harvesting should occur. 

While ecological integrity provides the basic guidance regarding salvage harvesting, other factors need to 

be considered. For example, dead timber from a stand-replacing wildfire increases the fuel load in the 

large diameter size classes. Fine fuels are the primary carrier of a fire, not the large diameter fuels from 

dead timber (Rothermel 1983). Fire severity, however, is dependent on the availability of surface and 

ground fuels, of which fallen dead timber is a part (Alexander 1982, Van Wagner 1972). Salvaging dead 

timber can reduce the total fuel load, possibly reducing fire severity. That said salvage harvest can 

increase the small and mid-sized fuel load, potentially increasing fire intensity. Ultimately, the question to 

ask is will the salvage activities result in conditions that, in the event of an unwanted ignition, reduce the 

possibility of a wildfire that is large, intense, or difficult to control. 

This decision-making process must also consider the potential for future damaging agents initiated by 

the current damage. For example, current storm damaged stands that are not salvaged may cause 

future insect or disease epidemics: 

Timeline for invasion of damaging insects and diseases after storm damage 

(NC Forest Service Division of Forest Resources 2000) 

Species Year One Year Two 

Pine Bark beetles, ambrosia beetles, 

sawyers, blue stain fungi, soft rot fungi Decay fungi 

Oak and Hickory Wood borers, ambrosia beetles, 

sawyers, soft rot fungi Sapwood decay fungi 

Other hardwoods Wood borers, ambrosia beetles, 

sawyers, soft rot fungi 

Sapwood and heartwood 

decay fungi 
 

Appendices 301

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Short-term impacts:

Salvage harvesting disturbs the soil, causing concerns about non-point source pollution. Forestry 

Best Management Practices are the most appropriate or applicable forest practices or activities to 

attain a silvicultural goal while protecting the chemical, physical and biological integrity of waterways. 

Best Management Practices achieve this by minimizing non-point source pollution (i.e., erosion and 

stream sedimentation) from forestry practices such as salvage harvesting. 

Damaged stands may be a source of injurious insect populations that can infest adjacent 

undamaged stands. Harvesting the damaged timber should reduce the likelihood of adjacent 

stand becoming infested. 

Fallen dead timber increases the large diameter fuel load, increasing the severity of wildfires, 

especially during drought. However, salvage harvesting can increase the small and mid-sized fuel 

load, thus increasing the fire intensity. Salvage harvesting after wildfire should be integrated with 

prescribed fire to mitigate this negative effect. 

Long-term impacts:

Damage to existing stands has the potential to convert the current forest type to something else. 

Whether or not that conversion is desirable depends on refuge goals and objectives for those stands. 

If the conversion is undersirable, further management action will be necessary to ensure future 

stands that are compatible with refuge goals and objectives – for example, planting pine after a 

southern pine beetle epidemic to restore red-cockaded woodpecker habitat. 

The potential exists for the damage agent to release invasive exotic plants that were suppressed by 

the overstory of the previous stand. Aggressive management action, from salvage harvesting to 

allow access to the site to integrated pest management as control measures, may be required to 

contain the exotic plants. 

Cumulative impacts:

Inappropriately utilizing salvage harvesting on a refuge (i.e., with an economic incentive) may 

degrade ecological integrity. Properly implementing salvage harvesting (i.e., with an eye towards 

maintaining or even improving ecological integrity) should have positive cumulative impacts on the 

refuge by restoring desirable forest conditions in accordance with refuge goals and objectives. 

Salvage harvesting is a valuable tool in responding to and recovering from various damaging agents. 

Salvage can be used to contain a spreading insect or disease epidemic, and can aid in recovering 

from storm damage or an intense wildfire. Using sound professional judgment to determine, on a 

case-by-case basis, whether or not salvage harvesting is ecologically justified is a biologically sound 

and economically efficient approach to responding to unplanned events that impact the forest 

resources of the refuge. 

The Code of Federal Regulations states, “We may only authorize public or private economic use of 

the natural resources of any national wildlife refuge ... where we determine that the use contributes to 

the achievement of the national wildlife refuge purposes or the National Wildlife Refuge System 

mission” (50 CFR 29.1). Salvage harvesting on a refuge is utilizing an economic activity to achieve a 

biological objective. The manager, using sound professional judgment, determines if the injurious 
302 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

agents have degraded the ecological integrity of the refuge. If so, and salvage harvesting would help 

restore ecological integrity, then its use is justified. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

Before any timber harvest is conducted, a forest habitat management prescription on the 

compartment will be completed. Prescriptions will be written in accordance with the Service’s Refuge 

Manual. All prescriptions will be submitted to the Regional Office for approval prior to harvest. All 

management activities (prescribed fire and timber management) will be in compliance with Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 

Timber sales will be conducted according to established Service policy. Upon selection of a 

successful bidder by the refuge manager, a harvesting permit will be issued. The harvesting permit 

will include a special use permit, maps locating all sale units, and a copy of the conditions of sale 

applicable to the timber harvesting. 

Close inspection and supervision of all timber sales will be necessary to ensure that harvesting 

operations meet the condition of the permit and refuge objectives. Once harvesting is complete, the 

refuge manager or designee will inspect the site for compliance with all requirements of the contract. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021

References 

Alexander, M.E. 1982. Calculating and interpreting forest fire intensities. Canadian Journal of Botany 

60(4):349-357. 

Helms, J., ed. 1998. The dictionary of forestry. The Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD. 

NC Forest Service Division of Forest Resources. 2000. Timber salvage guidelines. Raleigh, NC. 
 

Appendices 303

Rothermel, R.C. 1983. How to predict the spread and intensity of forest and range fires. U.S. For. 

Ser. Gen Tech Rep. INT-143. 

Van Wagner, C.E. 1972. Duff consumption by fire in eastern pine stands. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research 2:34-39. 

Use: Utility Right-of-Way 

Refuge Name: Savannah NWR 

Counties: Chatham County, Georgia; Jasper County, South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Maintenance of two 30-inch O.D. underground natural gas pipelines over, across, in and upon lands 

administered by the Savannah NWR, and crossing under the Savannah Front River, approximately 

1,800 feet north of the Houlihan Bridge, as described in the original special use permit application 

dated February 7, 1974. 

Maintenance will include up to 200 tons of riprap to be placed within 100 feet of pipelines along 30-

year rights-of-way granted to the Southern Natural Gas Company by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service on October 9, 1974. Maintenance may also include re-painting of signs and vegetation 

control along the pipeline right-of-way. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

There have been no long-term negative impacts to the refuge. However, there has been some shortterm disturbance to wildlife as a result of increased human activity and noise during maintenance 

operations. This disturbance is minimal. 

Positive impacts from laying of riprap has included a reduction in erosion along river banks caused by 

natural flow patterns around established pipeline structures, excessive tidal flows, and storm runoff, 

protection of pipelines from accidental rupture and the corresponding habitat degradation which 

would likely follow a gas spill, and the protection of pipelines from sabotage and vandalism. 

Positive impacts from vegetation control and sign repainting have included additional safety from 

accidental pipeline rupture from dredging or shipping operations. In addition, mechanical 

vegetation control of rights-of-way may increase the biodiversity of the immediate area by 

establishing a wider diversity of plant species, creating divergent microhabitats, and producing 

additional edges, all of which promotes a greater usage by both plant and animal species. If the 

pipeline were to be removed, the environmental impacts and damage would be severe since it 

has been established on the refuge for 30 years. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 
304 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

1. All terms and conditions set forth in the original right-of-way permit as granted on October 9, 

1974, and the amednment to this permit dated July 25, 1990, will be adhered to. 

2. All general conditions as stated on the reverse of the special use permit will be in effect. 

3. All vegetation removal along the pipeline rights-of-way will be accomplished by mechanical 

means only. 

4. No pesticide, solvents, or fuel tanks are allowed on site. 

5. Work areas will be kept clean at all times. 

6. Firearms are not permitted. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Justification: 

The basic entitlements of this special use permit fall within the provisions originally granted to the 

Southern Natural Gas Company by the right-of-way agreement signed October 9, 1974, and as 

amended July 25, 1990. The only divergence with the original permit is the width of the right-of-way 

where the pipeline intercepts the Savannah Front River. This enlargement was first approved by the 

Service’s Regional Director in the July 25, 1990, amendment to the original right-of-way permit. 

Enlargement of the right-of-way in this area has provided necessary safety to the pipeline and has vastly 

reduced the possibility of a fuel spill from human accidents or natural factors. This right-of-way 

enlargement has also been necessary for the Southern Natural Gas Company to affectively adhere to 

conditions stipulated in the original contract. Factors which influenced this need for change in right-of-way 

size were natural phenomenon, were not caused by Southern Natural Gas Company, and were beyond 

its control. Continuation of this maintenance program is in the best interest of the Service to provide for 

security of lands administered by the Service contained within the Savannah NWR. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2021
 

Appendices 305

References 

Electromagnetic Fields. 1994. Consumer Reports. May, pp 354-359. 

Shem, L.M., R.E. Zimmerman, S.D. Zellner, G.D. Van Dyke and J.R. Rastorfer. 1994. Regeneration 

of vegetation on wetland crossings for gas pipeline rights-of-way one year after construction. 

Argonne National Laboratory. 14 pp. 

Wilkey, P. and R.E. Zimmerman. 1993. Research Summary: Natural Gas Pipeline Corridors 

through Wetlands. Argonne National Laboratory. 6 pp. 

Zimmerman, R.E., G.D. Van Dyke, C.T. Hackney and E.D. Pentecost. 1991. Pipeline corridors 

through wetland – impacts on plant and avian diversity: boreal wetlands, Oconto County, 

Wisconsin, Gas Research Institute, Report GRI-91/0046, November. 

Zimmerman, R.P., L.M. Shem and G.D. Van Dyke. 1994. Insights gained from studies of gas 

pipeline rights-of-way of varying ages through wetlands. Argonne National Laboratory. 3pp. 

Use: Wildlife Observation and Photography 

Refuge Name: Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Harris Neck, Blackbeard Island, and 

Wolf Island NWRs 

Counties: Chatham, Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia; Jasper and Beaufort Counties, 

South Carolina 

Description of Use: 

Currently, wildlife observation and photography account for nearly 626,000 visits annually to the 

Complex. Typical use is by individuals, family groups, school groups, and large groups during refugesponsored special events. Wildlife observation and photography are becoming increasingly popular 

activities for visitors, and a source of economic growth for many communities. As two of the six 

priority public uses of the Refuge System, these uses are to be encouraged when compatible with the 

purposes of the refuge. The refuges provide outstanding wildlife viewing opportunities due to the 

abundance of ducks, warblers, pelicans, herons, and other birds that people find unique and 

interesting. The highway system that leads to the refuges provides easy access to the lands and 

waters, making the Complex one of the premier wildlife viewing and photography areas in Georgia 

and South Carolina. The public and communities desire more opportunities for these uses.

The Complex allows general public access during any time of the year to areas designated as open 

for observation and photography. The Complex provides some facilities to support wildlife 

observation and photography including wayside stops and overlooks, hiking trails, canoe, kayak and 

boat access, and auto tour routes. These facilities offer outstanding wildlife viewing opportunities. 

The comprehensive conservation plan recommends adding a full-time volunteer coordinator, an 

environmental education specialist, a law enforcement officer, and additional facilities including: three new 

environmental education centers, three observation decks/overlooks/towers, photo blinds, one fishing 

pier, recreational vehicle pads for volunteers, additional wayside exhibits, and trail guides and maps. 
306 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Guided Observation: Commercially guided observation is discussed in the compatibility determination for 

this economic use. However, various no-fee or not-for-profit tours are conducted by non-profit groups, 

schools and colleges, or other agencies. Unlike general public wildlife observation, this use does require 

a special use permit from the project leader due to the impacts that concentrated groups of people may 

have. Impacts can also be greater since these tours target backwater areas of the refuge, which often 

contain sensitive wildlife populations such as nesting colonies of herons and egrets. At present, many of 

these tours are likely occurring without refuge knowledge.

Availability of Resources: 

Currently, there are three full-time visitor services staff members for the entire Complex. The needed staff 

for coordinating the wildlife observation and photography programs is available, but limits the number of 

guided or facilitated programs. Maintaining the public use facilities is part of routine management duties 

and staff and funding are available. Additional facilities and visitors services specialists will enhance 

public opportunities for these uses and improve the quality and quantity of programs. Administering 

special use permits for non-profit guided observation increases overall costs of refuge operations, 

including but not limited to, development and review of policy and procedure, yearly administration of 

permits (inquiries, screening applicants, issuing permits), and enforcement of permit conditions. In the 

short-term, existing staff is adequate. However, the number of permits issued will have to be limited in 

balance with staff resources. In the long-term, additional administrative and/or other personnel as 

identified in the comprehensive conservation plan will be needed. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: 

Disturbance of wildlife is the primary concern regarding these uses. Disturbance to wildlife, such as 

the flushing of feeding, resting, or nesting birds, is inherent to these activities. There is some 

temporary disturbance to wildlife due to boating and human activities on trails (canoe, hiking, and 

biking); however, the disturbance is temporary and generally localized. Increased facilities and 

visitation would cause some displacement of habitat and increase some disturbance to wildlife, 

although this is expected to be minor given the size of the refuge and by avoiding or minimizing 

intrusion into important wildlife locations and habitat. 

Guided observation tours generally have impacts similar to the above, but have the potential for 

significant impacts to nesting colonies of wood storks and egrets, nesting bald eagles, or other 

species or sensitive habitats without proper restrictions and oversight. These impacts can include 

nest abandonment and/or separation of young from parents. Larger boats used in guided tours can 

also uproot plants and increase turbidity in shallow tidal marsh areas, negatively affecting habitat 

quality or displacing fish and other aquatic species. Guided tours also introduce more people into 

areas than would generally occur, with an overall increase in noise and visual disturbance to wildlife. 

Determination (Check One Below): 

 

____ Use is not compatible. 

__X_ Use is compatible with the following stipulations. 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 

1. Staff and volunteers will monitor use patterns and densities and make adjustments in timing, 

location, and duration as needed to limit disturbance. 
 

Appendices 307

2. Use will be directed to public use facilities (both existing and in the future), which are not in or 

near sensitive areas. 

3. Personal portable photo or viewing blinds must be removed each day. 

4. Observation areas will provide wildlife viewing scopes to enhance viewing from a distance which 

reduces disturbance. 

5. Commercial and not-for-profit guiding operations will be regulated by permit with timing and 

spacing constraints to protect sensitive wildlife or habitat. 

6. Not-for-profit guiding requests will be considered without fee but under the applicable stipulations 

governing commercial guides (areas, licensing, insurance, record keeping and reporting, etc.) 

7. Interpretive, wildlife observation and photography activities (including refuge conducted) will be 

discouraged in closed areas or administrative closed areas. 

8. Trail layout and design will continue to ensure adequate adjacent cover for wildlife and avoid 

sensitive wildlife areas or habitat. 

9. Interpretive presentations and products will continue to include messages on minimizing 

disturbance to wildlife. 

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Decision: Place an X in appropriate space.

_____ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement 

_____ Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement 

_ X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 

_____ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision 

Justification: 

Most uses will occur, or be directed to, existing and future facilities in strategic locations providing 

quality wildlife observation and photography opportunities while limiting wildlife and habitat 

disturbance. Disturbance to wildlife is limited by the size and remote nature of large parts of the 

Complex. Many species have grown more tolerant of human presence due to railroads, highways, 

and boat traffic adjacent to or through the refuge. Disturbance is also generally short-term and only 

temporarily displaces wildlife, and adequate adjacent habitat is usually available for wildlife. The 

permitting process for guided tours will limit disturbance to wildlife from larger groups and ensure 

avoidance of sensitive areas. Numerous other stipulations will be in place to facilitate these uses 

while reducing direct and indirect impacts. 

Mandatory 15-Year Re-evaluation Date: 06/17/2026 
308 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Approval of Compatibility Determinations 

The signature of approval is for all compatibility determinations considered within the Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan for the Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex. If one of the descriptive uses is 

considered for compatibility outside of the comprehensive conservation plan, the approval signature 

becomes part of that determination. 
 

Appendices 309

Appendix G. Intra-Service Section 7 Biological 

Evaluation 

REGION 4

 INTRA-SERVICE SECTION 7 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FORM

[Note: This form provides the outline of information needed for intra-Service consultation. If additional space is needed, 

attach additional sheets, or set up this form to accommodate your responses.]

Originating Person: Jane Griess 

Telephone Number: 843-784-2468 E-Mail: Jane_Griess@fws.gov

Date: 07/05/09

PROJECT NAME (Grant Title/Number): Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex (Savannah, Tybee, 

Pinckney, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard NWRs) Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

____________________________________________________________________________

I. Service Program:

___ Ecological Services 

___ Federal Aid 

 ___ Clean Vessel Act 

___ Coastal Wetlands 

___ Endangered Species Section 6 

___ Partners for Fish and Wildlife 

___ Sport Fish Restoration 

___ Wildlife Restoration 

___ Fisheries 

 X Refuges/Wildlife

II. State/Agency: 

III. Station Name: Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

- Pinckney NWR 

- Savannah NWR 

- Tybee NWR 

- Wassaw NWR 

- Blackbeard Island NWR 

- Harris Neck NWR 

IV. Description of Proposed Action (attach additional pages as needed): 

The proposed action would result in the implementation of the Comprehensive Conservation 

Plan for Pinckney, Savannah, Tybee, Wassaw, Blackbeard Island, and Harris Neck NWRs, a 

58,000-acre Complex spanning over 100 miles of coastline along South Carolina and Georgia. 

Approval and subsequent implementation of the CCP will direct management actions on the 

Complex for the next 15 years. 
310 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

V. Pertinent Species and Habitat:

A. Include species/habitat occurrence map:

B. Complete the following table: 

SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT STATUS1

Loggerhead Sea Turtle T 

West Indian Manatee E 

Wood Stork E 

Piping Plover T, CH 

 

1

STATUS: E=endangered, T=threatened, PE=proposed endangered, PT=proposed threatened, CH=critical habitat, 

PCH=proposed critical habitat, C=candidate species

VI. Location (attach map):

A. Ecoregion Number and Name: 

Pinckney, Tybee and Savannah NWRs – Ecoregion 33 – Savannah-Santee-Pee Dee 

Ecosystem 

Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island NWRs – Ecoregion 31 – Altamaha 

Ecosystem 

B. County and State: 

Pinckney, Tybee and half of Savannah NWRs – Jasper and Beaufort Counties, South 

Carolina 

Wassaw, Harris Neck, half of Savannah, and Blackbeard Island – Chatham and 

McIntosh Counties, Georgia 
 

Appendices 311

C. Section, township, and range (or latitude and longitude): 

Pinckney – 80o 45’ 41.9” 32o 15’ 2.0” 

Tybee – 80o

 54’ 57.1” 32o 2’ 37.6” 

Savannah – 81o

 6’ 17.6” 32o 10’ 12.6” 

Wassaw - 80o 59’ 41.6” 31o 53’ 46.1” 

Harris Neck – 81o

 16’ 35.4” 31o 37’ 50.84” 

Blackbeard Island - 81o

 12’ 22.6” 31o 30’ 19.7” 

D. Distance (miles) and direction to nearest town: 

Pinckney NWR – located approximately 6 miles from Bluffton, SC. 

Tybee – Located approximately 10 miles from Savannah, GA 

Savannah – Located approximately 1 mile from Savannah, GA 

Wassaw – Located approximately 8 miles from Savannah, GA 

Harris Neck – Located approximately 26 miles from Darien, GA 

Blackbeard Island – Located approximately 35 miles from Darien, GA 

E. Species/habitat occurrence:

Loggerhead Sea Turtle - habitat and species both occur - (Wassaw, Blackbeard). 

West Indian Manatee - habitat and species both occur - (Savannah, Tybee, Pinckney, 

Harris Neck, Blackbeard, Wassaw). 

Wood stork - habitat and species both occur (Savannah, Pinckney, Wassaw, Harris 

Neck, Blackbeard). 

Piping Plover - habitat and species both occur (Blackbeard, Wassaw). 

American Alligator - habitat and species both occur (Savannah, Pinckney, Harris 

Neck, Wassaw, Blackbeard). 

Shortnose Sturgeon - habitat and species both occur (Savannah, Tybee, Harris 

Neck, Blackbeard, Wassaw). 
312 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

VII. Determination of Effects:

A. Explanation of effects of the action on species and critical habitats in item V. B (attach 

additional pages as needed): 

SPECIES/ 

 CRITICAL HABITAT

IMPACTS TO SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT

Loggerhead Sea Turtle No impacts anticipated; may expect reduction in impacts through 

increased habitat monitoring, education, cooperation with 

partners and increased staff. 

West Indian Manatee Reduction in impacts through increased habitat monitoring, 

education, cooperation with partners and increased staff. 

Wood Stork No impacts anticipated on refuge lands; reduction in impacts 

through increased habitat monitoring, education, cooperation with 

partners and increased staff. 

Piping Plover Reduction in impacts through increased habitat monitoring, 

education, cooperation with partners and increased staff. 

B. Explanation of actions to be implemented to reduce adverse effects: 

SPECIES/ 

 CRITICAL HABITAT

ACTIONS TO MITIGATE/MINIMIZE IMPACTS

Loggerhead Sea Turtle Additional staff to conduct surveys and increase law 

enforcement efforts. Increased outreach for education. 

West Indian Manatee Increased water quality monitoring efforts; additional staff to 

conduct surveys and increase law enforcement efforts. 

Wood Stork Increased water quality monitoring efforts; additional staff to 

conduct surveys and increase law enforcement efforts. Continue 

seasonal closure around colony. 

Piping Plover Additional staff to conduct surveys and increased law 

enforcement. 
 

Appendices 313

VIII. Effect Determination and Response Requested:

SPECIES/ 

 CRITICAL HABITAT

 DETERMINATION1 RESPONSE1

REQUESTED

NE NA AA

Loggerhead Sea Turtle X 

West Indian Manatee X 

Wood Stork X 

Piping Plover X 

1

DETERMINATION/RESPONSE REQUESTED: 

NE = no effect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action will not directly, indirectly, or 

cumulatively impact, either positively or negatively, any listed, proposed, candidate species or 

designated/proposed critical habitat. Response Requested is optional but a “Concurrence” is recommended for a 

complete Administrative Record. 

NA = not likely to adversely affect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action is not likely to 

adversely impact any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat or there may be 

beneficial effects to these resources. Response Requested is a “Concurrence”. 

AA = likely to adversely affect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action is likely to adversely 

impact any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat. Response Requested for 

listed species is “Formal Consultation”. Response Requested for proposed or candidate species is “Conference”. 
314 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 315

Appendix H. Wilderness Review 

The Wilderness Act of 1964 defines a wilderness area as an area of federal land that retains its 

primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human inhabitation, and is 

managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which: 

1. generally appears to have been influenced primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of 

man’s work substantially unnoticeable; 

2. has outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined types of recreation; 

3. has at least 5,000 contiguous roadless acres or is of sufficient size to make practicable its 

preservation and use in an unimpeded condition; or is a roadless island, regardless of size; 

4. does not substantially exhibit the effects of logging, farming, grazing, or other extensive 

development or alteration of the landscape, or its wilderness character could be restored 

through appropriate management at the time of review; and 

5. may contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or 

historic value. 

The lands within Blackbeard Island, Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, Savannah, Tybee, and Wassaw 

NWRs were reviewed for their suitability in meeting the criteria for wilderness, as defined by the 

Wilderness Act of 1964. 

No additional lands in the refuges were found to meet these criteria. Therefore, the suitability of 

refuge lands for wilderness designation is not further analyzed in this plan. 
316 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 317

Appendix I. Refuge Biota 

BIRDS

There are seven national wildlife refuges administered from the Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

office in Savannah, Georgia. The chain of coastal refuges composing the Complex extends from 

Pinckney Island NWR, near Hilton Head, South Carolina, to Wolf Island NWR, near Darien, Georgia. 

Between these lie Savannah, (the largest unit in the Complex), Wassaw, Tybee, Harris Neck, and 

Blackbeard Island NWRs. Together they span a 100-mile stretch of coastline and total over 54,019 acres. 

The diversity of habitats within this acreage enhances the value of these coastal refuges to a great variety 

of migratory birds. Within the Complex there are freshwater and saltwater marshes, tidal rivers and 

creeks, bottomland hardwoods, maritime forests, barrier island beaches, and more. 

The list of birds recorded on the seven coastal refuges includes 309 species, of which 25 are accidentals 

(species sighted less than 6 times over the last 20 years and outside of their normal range). The following 

legend indicates the refuge on which each species is found, as well as the relative abundance and 

seasonal occurrence of each. Birds known to nest are designated with an asterisk (*) preceding the 

refuge abbreviation. Birds classified as threatened or endangered are in italics. 

This list incorporates the common names for birds recommended by the 7th (1983) Edition of the A.O.U. 

Checklist and the 39th Supplement (1993). Species are also listed in the sequence set by the A.O.U. 

REFUGE 

B .................. Blackbeard Island 

H................... Harris Neck 

P .................. Pinckney Island 

S .................. Savannah 

T .................. Tybee Island 

W.................. Wassaw Island 

Wo ............... Wolf Island 

Complex ...... all refuges 

RELATIVE ABUNDANCE 

C .... Common, seen in good numbers in 

 appropriate habitat and season. 

FC .. Fairly common, seen in moderate 

 numbers in appropriate habitat and 

 season. 

U .... Uncommon, seen in small numbers and/or 

 not seen every time in appropriate 

 habitat and season. 

R .... Rare, seen in small numbers, between five 

 and ten records over the past twenty years. 
318 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

SEASONAL OCCURRENCE 

PR ... Permanent resident, present year-round. 

SR ... Summer resident, breeds. 

SV ... Summer visitor, present in summer, 

 but does not breed. 

WV... Winter visitor, present in winter. 

M...... Migrant, transient during spring/fall migration.

Bird List Begins on Next Page. 
 

Appendices 319

BIRD SPECIES REFUGES ABUND. SEASON

Loons 

Red-throated Loon B H P S T W Wo FC WV 

 Common Loon Complex C WV 

Grebes 

 Pied-billed Grebe Complex C PR 

 Horned Grebe Complex C WV 

 Red-necked Grebe Complex R WV 

 Eared Grebe B H T W R WV 

Gannets 

 Northern Gannet B P T W Wo FC WV 

Pelicans 

 Brown Pelican Complex FC PR 

Cormorants 

 Double-crested Cormorant Complex FC PR 

Anhingas 

 Anhinga *B *H *P *S T W Wo C PR 

Herons 

 American Bittern Complex U WV 

 Least Bittern *B *H *P *S *W Wo FC SR 

 Great Blue Heron *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Great Egret *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Snowy Egret *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Little Blue Heron *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Tricolored Heron *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Cattle Egret B *H P *S T W Wo C PR 

 Green-Heron *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C SR 

 Black-crowned Night-Heron *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Yellow-crowned-Night-Heron *B *H *P *S T *W Wo FC PR 

Ibises 

 White Ibis *B *H *P *S W Wo C PR 

 Glossy Ibis Complex FC PR 

Storks 

 Wood Stork *B *H P S W Wo FC SR 

Swans, Geese, Ducks 

 Black-bellied 

 Fulvous Whistling-Duck H S R WV 

 Tundra Swan S U WV 

 Greater White-fronted Goose H S R WV 

 Snow Goose B H S T U WV 

 Brant H S R WV 

 Canada Goose B *H P S W FC WV 

 Wood Duck *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Green-winged Teal Complex C WV 

 American Black Duck B H P *S T W Wo U PR 

 Mottled Duck B H P *S T W Wo FC PR 

 Mallard Complex C WV 

 Northern Pintail Complex C WV 

 Blue-winged Teal Complex C WV 

 Cinnamon Teal Complex R WV 
320 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

BIRD SPECIES REFUGES ABUND. SEASON

Swans, Geese, Ducks, Continued 

 Northern Shoveler Complex C WV 

 Gadwall Complex C WV 

 Eurasian Wigeon S R WV 

 American Wigeon Complex C WV 

 Canvasback Complex FC WV 

 Redhead Complex U WV 

 Ring-necked Duck Complex C WV 

 Greater Scaup Complex U WV 

 Lesser Scaup Complex C WV 

 Long-tailed Duck B P T W Wo R WV 

 Black Scoter B P T W Wo C WV 

 Surf Scoter B P T W Wo C WV 

 White-winged Scoter B P T W Wo U WV 

 Common Goldeneye S U WV 

 Bufflehead Complex C WV 

 Hooded Merganser B H P *S T W Wo C WV/PR 

 Common Merganser Complex R WV 

 Red-breasted Merganser Complex C WV 

 Ruddy Duck Complex C WV 

Vultures 

 Black Vulture *B H P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Turkey Vulture *B H P *S T *W Wo C PR 

Kites, Hawks, Eagles 

 Osprey *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Am. Swallow-tailed Kite B H P *S W U SR 

 Mississippi Kite B H P *S T W Wo U SR 

 Bald Eagle B H P *S T W Wo FC WV/M 

 Northern Harrier Complex C WV 

 Sharp-shinned Hawk Complex U PR 

 Cooper's Hawk *B *H *P *S T *W Wo U PR 

 Red-shouldered Hawk B *H *P *S T W Wo FC PR 

 Broad-winged Hawk P S W R SV/M 

 Red-tailed Hawk *B *H *P *S *T *W Wo C PR 

 Golden Eagle P S R WV 

Falcons 

 American Kestrel Complex C WV 

 Merlin Complex U WV 

 Peregrine Falcon Complex U WV 

Quail, Allies 

 Wild Turkey H P S U PR 

 Northern Bobwhite *H *P *S C PR 

Rails, Allies 

 Yellow Rail S R WV 

 Black Rail B S W R SR 

 Clapper Rail *B *H *P *T *W C PR 

 King Rail *B *S FC PR 

 Virginia Rail B H P S W FC WV 

 Sora H S FC WV 
 

Appendices 321

BIRD SPECIES REFUGES ABUND. SEASON

Rails, Allies, Continued 

 Purple Gallinule *B *H *S FC SR 

 Common Moorhen *B *H P *S C PR 

 American Coot B H P S W C PR 

Plovers 

 Black-bellied Plover Complex C WV 

 American Golden-Plover H T R M 

 Wilson's Plover *B H P S T *W Wo C SR 

 Semipalmated Plover Complex C PR 

 Piping Plover B H P T W Wo FC WV 

 Killdeer *P *S *T *W *Wo C PR 

Oystercatchers 

 Am. Oystercatcher *B H *P *T *W *Wo FC PR 

Stilts, Avocets 

 Black-necked Stilt H P *S W U SR 

 American Avocet B H P S W U M 

Sandpipers, Allies 

 Greater Yellowlegs Complex C WV 

 Lesser Yellowlegs Complex C WV 

 Solitary Sandpiper Complex FC M 

 Willet *B *H *P S *T *W *Wo C PR 

 Spotted Sandpiper Complex C M 

 Upland Sandpiper P S T W Wo R M 

 Whimbrel B H P T W Wo U M 

 Long-billed Curlew H R WV 

 Marbled Godwit B P FC WV 

 Ruddy Turnstone B H P T W Wo C PR 

 Red Knot B H P T W Wo FC WV 

 Sanderling B H P T W Wo FC WV/M 

 Semipalmated Sandpiper Complex R M 

 Western Sandpiper B H P S W C PR 

 Least Sandpiper B H P S W Wo C PR 

 White-rumped Sandpiper P S W U M 

 Pectoral Sandpiper B H P S T W Wo FC M 

 Purple Sandpiper T F U WV 

 Dunlin B H P S T W Wo C WV 

 Stilt Sandpiper P S U M 

 Buff-breasted Sandpiper S R M 

 Short-billed Dowitcher Complex C M 

 Long-billed Bowitcher B P S W Wo U M 

 Common Snipe Complex C WV 

 Am. Woodcock B H P S W FC WV 

 Wilson's Phalarope P S U M 

Gulls, Terns, Skimmers, Allies 

 Parasitic Jaeger B P W R WV 

 Laughing Gull Complex C PR 

 Bonaparte's Gull Complex C WV 

 Ring-billed Gull Complex C PR 

 Herring Gull Complex C PR 
322 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

BIRD SPECIES REFUGES ABUND. SEASON

Gulls, Terns, Skimmers, Allies, Continued 

 Great Black-backed Gull B P S T W Wo U WV 

 Gull-billed Tern B H *P S T W Wo FC SR 

 Caspian Tern Complex U SR 

 Royal Tern B H P S T W Wo C PR 

 Sandwich Tern Complex FC SR 

 Common Tern Complex U M 

 Forster's Tern Complex C PR 

 Least Tern *Complex C SR 

 Sooty Tern B P T W Wo R SV 

 Black Tern Complex FC M 

 Black Skimmer Complex C PR 

Pigeons, Doves 

 Rock Dove B H P S T W C PR 

 Mourning Dove *B *H *P *S T *W C PR 

 Common Ground-Dove *B *H *P *S T *W U PR 

Cuckoos 

 Black-billed Cuckoo S W U M 

 Yellow-billed Cuckoo *B *H *P *S T *W C SR 

Owls 

 Common Barn Owl *B H P *S W U PR 

 Eastern Screech Owl *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

 Great Horned Owl *B *H *P *S T *W C PR 

 Barred Owl *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

 Long-eared Owl P S R WV 

 Short-eared Owl P S U WV 

Nightjars 

 Common Nighthawk *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C SR 

 Chuck-will's widow *B *H *P *S *W Wo C PR 

 Whip-poor-will B H P S W FC M 

Swifts 

 Chimney Swift *B H *P *S T W C SR 

Hummingbirds 

 Rudy-throated Hummingbird *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C SR 

Kingfishers 

 Belted Kingfisher B H *P *S *W Wo C PR 

Woodpeckers 

 Red-headed Woodpecker *B *H P S W FC PR 

 Red-bellied Woodpecker *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

 Yellow-belllied Sapsucker B H P S W FC WV 

 Downy Woodpecker *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

 Hairy Woodpecker B H PS W R PR 

 Red-cockaded Woodpecker S U PR 

 Northern (yellow-shafted) 

 Flicker *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

 Pileated Woodpecker *B *H *P *S T *W C PR 

Flycatchers 

 Eastern Wood-Pewee *B *H *P *S *W C SR 

 Acadian Flycatcher *B *P *S *W C SR 
 

Appendices 323

BIRD SPECIES REFUGES ABUND. SEASON

Flycatchers, Continued 

 Eastern Phoebe B H P S W C WV 

 Great Crested Flycatcher B *H *P *S *W FC SR 

 Eastern Kingbird B *H *P *S *W C SR 

 Gray Kingbird P W U SV 

Swallows 

 Purple Martin *B H *P *S W C SR 

 Tree Swallow B H P S W Wo C PR/M 

 Northern Rough-winged 

 Swallow B H P S W C SR 

 Bank Swallow P S U M 

 Barn Swallow B H P *S W C PR 

Jays, Crows 

 Blue Jay B H *P *S *W C PR 

 Am. Crow *B *H *P *S T *W Wo C PR 

 Fish Crow *Complex C PR 

Chicadees, Titmice 

 Carolina Chickadee *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

 Tufted Titmouse B *H *P *S W C PR 

Nuthatches 

 Red-breasted Nuthatch H P S W U WV 

 White-breasted Nuthatch H P S W FC WV/SR 

 Brown-headed Nuthatch B H *P *S W C PR 

Creepers, Wrens 

 Brown Creeper B H P S W U WV 

 Carolina Wren *H *P *S *W C PR 

 House Wren B H P S W C WV 

 Winter Wren B H P S W U WV 

 Sedge Wren B H P S W Wo C WV 

 Marsh Wren *Complex C PR 

Kinglets, Gnatcatchers 

 Golden-crowned Kinglet B H P S W FC WV 

 Ruby-crowned Kinglet B H P S W C WV 

 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher *B *H *P *S *W C PR 

Bluebirds, Thrushes 

 Eastern Bluebird *B *H *P *S W C 
324 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

MAMMALS 

MAMMALS, Common Name Scientific Name and Order 

Bobcat Felis rufus (Order: Carnivora) 

White Tail Deer Odocoileus virginianus (Order: Artiodactyla) 

Opossum (Virginia Opossum) Didelphis virginiana ( Order: Marsupialia) 

Skunk, Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis (Order: Carnivora) 

Skunk, Eastern Spotted Skunk Spilogale putorius (Order: Carnivora) 

Otter (River Otter) Lutra canadensis (Order: Carnivora) 

Beaver Castor canadensis (Order: Rodentia) 

Rabbit, Marsh Rabbit Sylvilagus palustris (Order: Lagomorpha) 

Rabbit, Eastern Cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus (Order: Lagomorpha) 

Rabbit, Swamp Rabbit Sylvilagus aquaticus (Order: Lagomorpha) 

Raccoon Procyon lotor (Order: Carnivora) 

Coyote Canis latrans (Order: Carnivora) 

Armadillo (Nine-banded Armadillo) Dasypus novemcinctus (Order: Xenarthra) 

Squirrel, Gray Squirrel Sciurus carolinensis (Order: Rodentia) 

Squirrel, Fox Squirrel Sciurus niger (Order: Rodentia) 

Squirrel, Southern Flying Squirrel Glaucomys volans (Southern Flying Squirrel) 

Fox, Red Fox Vulpes vulpes (Order: Carnivora) 

Fox, Gray Fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus (Order: Carnivora) 

Bat, Silver-haired Bat Lasionycteris noctivagans (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Eastern Pipistrelle Pipistrellus subflavus (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Big Brown Bat Eptesicus fuscus (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Red Bat Lasiurus borealis (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Seminole Bat Lasiurus seminolus (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Northern Yellow Bat Lasiurus intermedius (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Evening Bat Nycticeius humeralis (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Rafinesque’s Big-eared Bat Plecotus rafinesquii (Order: Chiroptera) 

Bat, Brazilian Free-tailed Bat Tadarida brasiliensis (Order: Chiroptera) 

Shrew, Southern Short-tailed Shrew Blarina carolinensis (Order Insectivora) 

Shrew, Least Shrew Cryptotis parva (Order Insectivora) 

Mouse, Eastern Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys humulis (Order: Rodentia) 
 

Appendices 325

MAMMALS, Common Name Scientific Name and Order 

Mouse, Oldfield Mouse Peromyscus polionotus (Order: Rodentia) 

Mouse, Cotton Mouse Peromyscus gossypinus (Order: Rodentia) 

Mouse, Golden Mouse Ochrotomys nuttali (Order: Rodentia) 

Mouse, House Mouse I Mus musculus (Order: Rodentia) 

Rat, Marsh Rice Rat Oryzomys palustris (Order: Rodentia) 

Rat, Hispid Cotton Rat Sigmodon hispidus (Order: Rodentia) 

Rat, Eastern Woodrat Neotoma floridana (Order: Rodentia) 

Rat, Black Rat I Rattus rattus (Order: Rodentia) 

Rat, Norway Rat Rattus norvegicus (Order: Rodentia) 

Wild Hog, Feral Hog, or Wild Pig Sus scrofa (Order: Artiodactyla) 

Vole, Woodland Vole Microtus pinetorum (Order: Rodentia) 

Mink Mustela vison (Order: Carnivora) 

Weasel (Long-tailed Weasel) Mustela frenata (Order: Carnivora) 

Mole, Eastern Mole Scalopus aquaticus (Order: Talpidae) 

Mole, Star-nosed Mole Condylura cristata (Order: Talpidae) 

Myotis, Little Brown Myotis Myotis lucifugus (Order: Chiroptera) 

Myotis, Southeastern Myotis Myotis austroriparius (Order: Chiroptera) 

Manatee (West Indian Manatee) Trichechus manatus (Order: Sirenia) 

Dolphin (Bottlenosed Dolphin) Tursiops truncates (Order: Tursiops) 
326 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS 

This list contains those species of reptiles and amphibians thought to occur on lands owned by the 

refuge according to various literature sources, surveys, and observations. 

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS, Common 

Name Scientific Name 

Alligators 

American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis 

Snapping Turtles 

Common Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina 

Mud Turtles 

Mud Turtle Kinosternon subrubrum 

Box and Water Turtles 

Eastern Box Turtle Terrapene carolina 

Diamondback Terrapin Malaclemys terrapin 

Yellow-bellied Turtle Pseudemys scripta 

Gopher Tortoise Gopherus polyphemus 

Chicken Turtle Deirochelys reticularia 

Sea Turtles 

Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta 

Ridley Turtle Lepidochelys kempi 

Green Turtle Chelonia mydas 

Anoles and Fence Lizards 

Green Anole Anolis carolinensis 

Northern Fence Lizard Sceloporus undulates hyacinthinus 

Racerunners 

Six-lined Racerunner Cnemidophorus sexlineatus sexlineatus 

Skinks 

Ground Skink Scincella lateralis 

Broadhead Skink Eumeces laticeps 

Five-lined Skink Eumeces fasciatus 

Southeastern Five-lined Skink Eumeces inexpectatus 

Glass Lizards 

Eastern Glass Lizard Ophisaurus ventralis 
 

Appendices 327

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS, Common 

Name Scientific Name 

Island Glass Lizard Ophisaurus compressus 

Snakes 

Banded Water Snake Natrix fasciata 

Black Racer Coluber constrictor 

Garter Snake Thamnophis sirtalis 

Ribbon Snake Thamnophis sauritus 

Greenish Rat Snake Elaphe obsoleta quadrivittata 

Corn Snake Elaphe guttata 

King Snake Lampropeltis getulus 

Coachwhip Masticophis flagellum 

Scarlet Snake Cemophora coccinea 

Rough Green Snake Opheodrys aestivus 

Vipers 

Cottonmouth Agkistrodon piscivorus 

Diamondback Rattlesnake Crotalus adamanteus 

Amphiumas 

Two-toed Amphiuma Amphiuma means 

Newts 

Newt Notophthalmus viridescens 

Toad 

Eastern Spadefoot toad Scaphiopus holbrooki 

Oak Toad Bufo quercicus 

Southern Toad Bufo terrestris 

Treefrogs and Peepers 

Grass Frog Limnaoedus ocularis 

Southern Chorus Frog Pseudacris nigrita 

Pine Woods Tree Frog Hyla femoralis 

Green Treefrog Hyla cinerea 

Squirrel Treefrog Hyla squirella 

Barking Treefrog Hyla gratiosa 

Narrowmouth Toads 

Eastern Narrowmouth Toad Gastrophryne carolinensis 
328 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS, Common 

Name Scientific Name 

True Frogs 

Pig Frog Rana grylio 

Southern Leopard Frog Rana Sphenocephala 
 

Appendices 329

FISH 

This list contains those species of fish thought to occur in waters on and down to a depth of 10 

meters near the Savannah NWR, according to various literature sources, surveys, and observations. 

FISH, Common Name Scientific Name 

Sharks 

Bull Shark Carcharhinus leucus 

Skates and Rays 

Southern Stingray Dasyatis americana 

Roughtail Stingray Dasyatis centroura 

Pike 

Redfin Pickerel Esox americanus 

Chain Pickerel Esox niger 

Sturgeons 

Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum 

Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrhynchus 

Gars 

Longnose Gar Lepisosteus osseus 

Florida Gar Lepisosteus platyrhincus 

Tarpons 

Ladyfish Elops saurus 

Tarpon Megalops atlantica 

Eels 

American eel Anguilla rostrata 

Herrings, Shads, and Related Species 

Blueback Herring Alose aestivalis 

Hickory Shad Alosa mediocris 

American Shad Alosa sapidissima 

Yellowfin Menhaden Brevoortia smithi 

Atlantic Menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus 

Gizzard Shad Dorosoma cepedianum 

Threadfin Shad Dorosoma petenense 

Scaled Sardine Harengula pensacolae 

Atlantic Thread Herring Opisthonema oglinum 
330 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

FISH, Common Name Scientific Name 

Spanish Sardine Sardinella anchovia 

Lizardfish 

Inshore Lizardfish Synodus foetens 

Catfish 

Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus 

Bullhead Ameiurus melas 

Blue Ictalurus furcatus 

Toadfish 

Oyster Toadfish Opsanus tau 

Clingfish 

Skilletfish Gobiesox strumosus 

Frogfish 

Singlespot frogfish Antennarius radiosus 

Sargassumfish Histrio histrio 

Batfish 

Longnose Batfish Ogcocephalus vespertilio 

Needlefish 

Flat Needlefish Ablennes hians 

Northern Needlefish Strongylura marina 

Houndfish Tylosurus crocodiles 

Killifish 

Sheepshead Killifish Cyprinodon variegates 

Golden Topminnow Fundulus chrysotus 

Marsh Killifish Fundulus confluentus 

Mummichog Fundulus heteroclitus 

Striped killifish Fundulus majalis 

Livebearers 

Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis 

Lease Killifish Heterandria Formosa 

Sailfin Molly Poecilia latipinna 

Silversides 

Rough Silverside Membras martinica 
 

Appendices 331

FISH, Common Name Scientific Name 

Tidewater Silverside Menidia beryllina 

Atlantic Silverside Menidia menidia 

Sea Bass 

Rock Sea Bass Centropristis philadelphica 

Black Sea Bass Centropristis striata 

Sand Perch Diplectrum formosum 

Aguavina Diplectrum radiale 

Striped bass Morone saxatilis 

Sunfish 

Flier Centrarchus macropterus 

Warmouth Lepomis gulosus 

Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 

Black Crappie Pomoxis migromaculatus 

White Crappie Pomoxis annularis 

Grunts 

Tomtate Haemulon aurolineatum 

Pigfish Orthopristis chrysoptera 

Drums 

Silver Perch Bairdiella chrysura 

Spotted Seatrout Cynoscion nebulosus 

Silver Seatrout Cynoscion nothus 

Weakfish Cynoscion regalis 

Spot Leiostomus xanthurus 

Southern Kingfish Menticirrhus americanus 

Atlantic Croaker Micropogon undulates 

Black Drum Pogonias cromis 

Red Drum Sciaenops ocellata 

Porgies 

Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephalus 

Whitebone Porgy Calamus leucosteus 

Pinfish Lagodon rhomboids 
332 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

FISH, Common Name Scientific Name 

Northern Porgy Stenotomus chrysops 

Spadefish and Butterflyfish 

Atlantic Spadefish Chaetodipterus fabert 

Spotfin Butterflyfish Chaetodon ocellatus 

Damselfish 

Sergeant Major Abudefduf saxatilis 

Mullets 

Striped Mullet Mugil cephalus 

Gobies 

Lyre Goby Evorthodus lyricus 

Violet Goby Gobioides broussonneti 

Darter Goby Gobionellus boleosoma 

Sharp Tail Goby Gobionellus hastatus 

Freshwater Goby Gobionellus shufeldti 

Emerald Goby Gobionellus smaragdus 

Naked Goby Gobiosoma bosci 

Seaboard Goby Gobiosoma ginsburgi 

Green Goby Microgobius thalassinus 

Butterfish 

Southern Harvestfish Peprilus alepidotus 

Butterfish Peprilus triacanthus 

Searobins 

Northern Searobin Prionotus carolinus 

Leopard Searobin Prionotus scitulus 

Striped Searobin Prionotus evolans 

Bighead Searobin Prionotus tribulus 

Lefteye Flounders 

Gulf Flounder Paralichthys albigutta 

Summer Flounder Paralichthys dentatus 

Southern Flounder Paralichthys lethostigma 

Soles 

Hogchoker Trinectes maculates 
 

Appendices 333

FISH, Common Name Scientific Name 

Puffer 

Smooth Puffer Lagocephalus laevigatus 

Northern Puffer Sphoeroides maculates 

Florida Puffer Sphoeroides nephelus 
334 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

PLANTS

PLANTS, Common Name Scientific Name 

Brackish Marsh Plants 

Soft-stem bulrush Scirpus validus 

Leafy three square Scirpus robustus 

Southern wild rice Zizaniopsis miliacea 

Smooth cordgrass Spartina alterniflora 

Big cordgrass Spartina cynosuriodes 

Eastern baccharis Baccharis halimifolia 

Tidal Freshwater Marsh Plants 

Southern wild rice Zizaniopsis miliacea 

Wild rice Zizania aquatic 

Common cattail Typha latifolia 

Spider-lily Hymenocallis crassifolia 

Water hemlock Cicuta maculata 

Wapato Sagitaria lancifolia 

Eryngo Eryngium aquaticum 

Thalia Thalia dealbata 

Climbing hempweed Mikania scandens 

Swamp rose mallow Hibiscus moscheutos 

Seashore mallow Kosteletskya virginica 

Dodder Cuscuta gronovii 

Bur-marigold Bidens laevis 

Tag alder Alnus serrulata 

Button-bush Cephalanthus occidentalis 

Water ash Fraxinus caroliniana 

Bald cypress Taxodium disticum 

Ground-nut Apios Americana 

Cardinal flower Lobelia cardinalis 

Impounded Managed Wetlands Plants: 

Moist-soil plants 

Large and Southern smartweeds Polygonum pensylvanicum and 

hydropiperoides 
 

Appendices 335

PLANTS, Common Name Scientific Name 

Wild millet species Echinochloa crusgalli and walteri 

Redroot Lachnenthes caroliniana 

Giant foxtail Setaria magna 

Flatsedges Cyperus spp. 

Panicgrasses Panicum spp. 

Alligatorweed Alternarthera philoxeroides 

Southern wild rice Zizaniopsis miliacea 

Common cattail Typha latifolia 

Dwarf spikerush Eleocharis parvula 

Sesbania Sesbania exaltata 

Aquatic plants 

White waterlily Nymphaea odorata 

Coontail Ceratophyllum demersum 

Narrow-leaved pondweed Potamogeton spp. 

Bladderwort Utricularia inflata 

Southern wild rice Zizaniopsis miliacea 

Common cattail Typha latifolia 

Water-shield Brasenia schreberi 

American lotus Nelumbo lutea 

Water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes 

Duckweed Spirodela polyrhiza 

Oak Hammocks: 

Canopy Vegetation 

Live Oak Quercus virginiana 

Laurel oak Quercus laurifolia 

Sugarberry Celtis laevigata 

Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua 

Chinaberry Melia azedarach 

Chinese tallow Sapium sebiferum 

Slash pine Pinus elliottii 

Long-leaf pine Pinus palustris 
336 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

PLANTS, Common Name Scientific Name 

Understory Vegetation 

Yaupon holly Illex vomitoria 

Cherry laurel Prunus caroliniana 

Red maple Acer rubrum 

Saw palmetto Serenoa repens 

Greenbrier Smilas spp. 

Mulberry Morus spp. 

Wax myrtle Myrica cerifera 

Beautyberry Callicarpa Americana 

Chinese parasol tree Firmiana simplex 

Big leaf periwinkle Vinca major 

Bald Cypress-Tupelo Gum Swamp Forest 

Water tupelo Nyssa aquatic 

Swamp tupelo Nyssa sylvatica 

Swamp bay Persea palustris 

Water elm Planera aquatic 

Arrow wood Viburnum dentatum 

Swamp dogwood Cornus foemina 

Lyonia Lyonia lucida 

Red maple Acer rubrum 

Possumhaw viburnum Viburnum nudum 

American elm Ulmus Americana 

Bald cypress Taxodium distichum 

Swamp willow Salix caroliniana 

Sweet bay Magnolia virginiana 

Tag alder Alnus serrulata 

Fetterbush Leucothoe racemosa 

Blue flag iris Iris viginica 

Hardwood Bottoms 

Overcup oak Quercus lyrata 

Swamp chestnut oak Quercus michauxii 
 

Appendices 337

PLANTS, Common Name Scientific Name 

Laurel oak Quercus laurifolia 

Cherry-bark oak Quercus falcata 

American sycamore Platanus occidentalis 

Ironwood Carpinus caroliniana 

Wild ginger Asarum canadense 

River oats Uniola latifolia 

Sweet-gum Liquidambar styraciflua 

Hop hornbeam Ostrya virginica 

Pawpaw Asimina triloba 

Dwarf palmetto Sabal minor 

Needle palm Rhapidophyllum hystrix 

River cane Arundinaria gigantean 
338 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 339

Appendix J. Budget Requests 

The Complex’s budget requests are contained in the Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and 

Service Asset and Maintenance Management System (SAMMS) databases that include a wide 

variety of new and maintenance refuge projects. The RONS and SAMMS lists are constantly 

updated and include proitority projects. Contact the Complex or each individual refuge for the most 

current RONS and SAMMS lists. Please refer to Chapter V, Plan implementation, for the key budget 

requests associated with the proposed projects and staffing. Chapter V includes the proposed 

projects, which are linked to the applicable objectives, and Table 11, which identifies staff, first-year 

costs, and recurring costs for the outlined projects. 
340 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 341

Appendix K. List of Preparers 

Core Planning Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

 Jane Griess, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Planning Team Leader 

 Shaw Davis, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Deputy Project Leader 

 Peter Range, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Ranger 

 Debra Barnard, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Biologist 

 Amy Ochoa, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Ranger 

 Randy Breland, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Russell Webb, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Biologist 

 Scott Gilje, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Patricia Metz, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Complex Supervisory Refuge Ranger 

 Terri Jenkins, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Forest Management Officer 

 Chuck Hayes, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Complex Biologist 

 Kimberly Hayes, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Evelyn Nelson, Writer/Editor, Southeast Regional Office 

 Laura Housh, Regional Planner, Okefenokee NWR 

 Rob Wood, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Forest Management Officer 

 Monica Harris, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Visitor Services Manager 

Tennessee Valley Authority 

 Nannette Brodie, Contractor 

 Chevales Williams, Contractor 

GIS Input for the Draft CCP/EA 

 Shawn Markus, Contractor 

 Pat Hamlett, Contractor 
342 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 
 

Appendices 343

Appendix L. Consultation and Coordination 

OVERVIEW 

This appendix summarizes the consultation and coordination that occurred in the processes of 

identifying the issues, alternatives, and proposed alternative, which were presented in the Draft 

CCP/EA; during the period of time while the Draft CCP/EA was being prepared and distributed; and 

during the period of public review and comment on the Draft CCP/EA. 

The following meetings, contacts, and presentations were undertaken by the Service during the 

preparation of the Draft CCP/EA: 

Core Planning Team

The Core Planning Team was composed exclusively of Service staff and the contractor. Personnel 

from the Complex that represented Blackbeard Island NWR, Harris Neck NWR, Pinckney Island 

NWR, Savannah NWR, Tybee NWR and Wassaw NWR were on the team. Key tasks of the team 

included defining and refining the refuges’ visions; identifying, reviewing, and filtering the issues; 

defining the goals and objectives; outlining the alternatives; evaluating environmental consequences 

and impacts; and establishing project and budget details. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

 Jane Griess, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Planning Team Leader 

 Shaw Davis, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Deputy Project Leader 

 Peter Range, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Ranger 

 Debra Barnard, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Biologist 

 Amy Ochoa, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Ranger 

 Randy Breland, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Russell Webb, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Biologist 

 Scott Gilje, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Patricia Metz, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Complex Supervisory 

Refuge Ranger 

 Terri Jenkins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Forest Management Officer 

 Rob Wood, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Forest Management Officer 

 Chuck Hayes, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Complex Biologist 

 Kimberly Hayes, USFWS, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge 

Manager 

 Monica Harris, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Visitor Services Manager 

 Evelyn Nelson, Writer/Editor, Southeast Regional Office 

 Laura Housh, Regional Planner, Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge 

 Nannette Brodie, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 

 Chevales Williams, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 

GIS Input for the Draft CCP/EA 

 Shawn Markus, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 

 Pat Hamlett, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 
344 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Alternatives Workshop

The alternatives’ workshop included members of the Core Planning Team. During the workshop held 

September 29 – October 3, 2008, the team reviewed issues identified at both the internal and public 

scoping meetings and identified a range of alternatives complete with objectives and strategies for 

the proposed alternative. 

Members of the team are as follows: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

 Jane Griess, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Planning Team Leader 

 Shaw Davis, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Deputy Project Leader 

 Peter Range, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Ranger 

 Debra Barnard, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Biologist 

 Amy Ochoa, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Ranger 

 Randy Breland, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Russell Webb, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Biologist 

 Scott Gilje, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge Manager 

 Patricia Metz, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Complex Supervisory 

Refuge Ranger 

 Terri Jenkins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Forest Management Officer 

 Chuck Hayes, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Complex Biologist 

 Kimberly Hayes, USFWS, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Refuge 

Manager 

 Evelyn Nelson, Writer/Editor, Southeast Regional Office 

 Nannette Brodie, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 

 Chevales Williams, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 

GIS Input for the Draft CCP/EA 

 Pat Hamlett, Contractor, Tennessee Valley Authority 

Bioreview Teams

The Biological and Habitat Review Teams consisted of Service staff and invited participants. The 

invited participants included local and regional experts, researchers, and individuals with intimate 

knowledge of and expertise in the biological resources of the refuge. The Blackbeard Island and 

Wassaw NWRs review took place on August 27-31, 2007, the Harris Neck NWR review took place on 

June 11-14, 2007, and the Savannah, Pinckney Island, and Tybee NWRs review took place on 

May 7-10, 2008. Members of these review teams included: 

Blackbeard Island NWR Bioreview Team

Deb Barnard, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Greg Askins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

John Robinette, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Chuck Hunter, USFWS Regional Refuge Biologist 

Wilson Laney, USFWS, Regional Fishery Biologist 

Terri Jenkins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Scott Gilje, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 
 

Appendices 345

Jane Griess, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Kathy Chapman, USFWS, Brunswick ES Office 

Stefani Melvin, USFWS, Regional Waterbird Coordinator 

Bill Wikoff, USFWS, Brunswick ES Office 

Peter Range, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Shaw Davis, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Dave Brownlie, USFWS, Regional Fire Ecologist 

Mark Dodd, Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

Brad Winn, Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

Jon Ambrose, Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

David Rostal, Georgia Southern University 

Jacob Tuttle, Georgia Southern University/ USFWS 

Paul Sykes, U.S. Geological Survey (retired)

Harris Neck NWR Bioreview Team

Deb Barnard, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Greg Askins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

John Robinette, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Janet Ertel, USFWS 

Larry Bryan, Savannah River Ecology Laboratory 

Scott Gilje, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Jane Griess, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Savannah, Pinckney Island, and Tybee NWRs Bioreview Team 

Jane Griess, Project Leader, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Savannah, GA 

John Robinette, Wildlife Biologist, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Savannah, GA 

Russell Webb, Wildlife Biologist, Savannah NWR, Savannah, GA 

Laura Housh, Wildlife Biologist, Okefenokee NWR, Folkston, GA 

John Stanton, Supervisory Wildlife Biologist, Migratory Bird Field Office, Columbia, NC 

Laurel Barnhill, Bird Conservation Coordinator, SCDNR, Columbia, SC 

Steve Bennett, Biologist, SCDNR 

Ed EuDaly, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Charleston ES Office, Charleston, SC 

Randy Breland, Prescribed Fire Specialist, Savannah NWR, Savannah, GA 

Felicia Sanders, Biologist, SCDNR, Charleston, SC 

Dean Harrigal, Waterfowl Biologist, SCDNR, Green Pond, SC 

Greg Balkom, Waterfowl Biologist, GADNR, Fort Valley, GA 

Terri Jenkins, Fire Control Officer, Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, Savannah, GA 

Steve Calver, Wildlife Biologist, Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah, GA 

Wassaw NWR Bioreview Team 

Deb Barnard, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Greg Askins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

John Robinette, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Chuck Hunter, USFWS, Regional Refuge Biologist 

Wilson Laney, USFWS, Regional Fishery Biologist 

Terri Jenkins, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Scott Gilje, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Jane Griess, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 
346 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Kathy Chapman, USFWS, Brunswick ES Office 

Stefani Melvin, USFWS, Regional Waterbird Coordinator 

Bill Wikoff, USFWS, Brunswick ES Office 

Peter Range, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Shaw Davis, USFWS, Savannah Coastal Refuges 

Dave Brownlie, USFWS, Regional Fire Ecologist 

Mark Dodd, Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

Brad Winn, Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

Jon Ambrose, Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

David Rostal, Georgia Southern University 

Jacob Tuttle, Georgia Southern University/ USFWS 

Paul Sykes, U.S. Geological Survey (retired)

Visitor Services Review Teams 

The Visitor Services Review Teams consisted of staff from the Service’s Southeast Regional Office 

and other Service staff. The Blackbeard Island NWR review took place in July 2007, Harris Neck 

NWR took place in May 2007, Pinckney Island NWR took place in January 2008, Savannah NWR 

took place in January 2008, and the Wassaw NWR review took place in July 2007. Members of the 

review teams included: 

Blackbeard Island NWR Visitor Services Review Team 

Deborah Jerome, USFWS, Visitor Services and Outreach 

Robin Will, St. Marks NWR 

Blaine Eckberg, Okefenokee NWR 

Harris Neck NWR Visitor Services Review Team

Garry Tucker, USFWS, Visitor Services and Outreach 

Joanna Taylor, Pelican Island/Archie Carr NWRs 

Shawn Gillette , Okefenokee NWR 

Pinckney Island NWR Visitor Services Review Team 

Garry Tucker, USFWS, Visitor Services and Outreach 

Teresa Adams, Wheeler NWR 

Joanna Webb, Pelican Island NWR

Savannah NWR Visitor Services Review Team 

Garry Tucker, USFWS, Visitor Services and Outreach 

Teresa Adams, Wheeler NWR 

Joanna Webb, Pelican Island NWR

Wassaw NWR Visitor Services Review Team 

Deborah Jerome, USFWS, Visitor Services and Outreach 

Robin Will, St. Marks NWR 

Blaine Eckberg, Okefenokee NWR 
 

Appendices 347

Appendix M. Finding of No Significant Impact 

INTRODUCTION 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will protect and manage certain fish and wildlife resources in Chatham, 

Effingham, and McIntosh Counties, Georgia, and Jasper and Beaufort Counties, South Carolina through 

the Savannah, Tybee, Pinckney Island, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island National Wildlife 

Refuges, located within the Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex (Complex). An Environmental 

Assessment was prepared to inform the public of the possible environmental consequences of 

implementing the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for these six refuges (Wolf Island NWR is 

also contained within this Complex, for which a separate CCP was completed in 2008). A description of 

the alternatives, the rationale for selecting the preferred alternative, the environmental effects of the 

preferred alternative, the potential adverse effects of the action, and a declaration concerning the factors 

determining the significance of effects, in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 

are outlined below. The supporting information can be found in the Environmental Assessment, which 

was Section B of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan. 

ALTERNATIVES 

In developing this CCP for the six refuges of the Complex (Savannah, Tybee, Pinckney Island, Wassaw, 

Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island) the Service evaluated three alternatives for each refuge. 

The Service adopted Alternative B (Increased Management) as the preferred alternative for guiding 

the direction of these six refuges for the next 15 years. The overriding concern reflected in this CCP 

is that wildlife conservation assumes first priority in refuge management; wildlife-dependent 

recreational uses are allowed if they are compatible with wildlife conservation. Wildlife-dependent 

recreation uses (e.g., hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation) will be emphasized and encouraged. 

ALTERNATIVE A. NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

This alternative is required by NEPA and is the “no-action” or “status quo” alternative in which no 

major management changes would be initiated by the Service. This alternative also provides a 

baseline to compare the current habitat, wildlife, and public use management to the two action 

alternatives (alternatives B and C). 

Alternative A represents no change from current management of the Complex. Management 

emphasis would continue to focus on maintaining biological integrity of habitats found on each refuge. 

Under this alternative, the Service would protect and maintain all refuge lands, primarily focusing on 

the needs of threatened and endangered species, with additional emphasis on the needs of migratory 

birds and resident wildlife. The Service would continue mandated activities for protection of federally 

listed species. Conservation of federally listed threatened and endangered species would be 

continued through current habitat management and monitoring programs accomplished primarily 

through established partnership and research projects. 

Current management of migratory birds would continue to provide suitable habitat for waterfowl, 

contributing to the objective of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Surveying, 

monitoring, and managing of colonial waterbirds, shorebirds, neotropical migratory birds, wading 

birds, marsh birds, and other resident birds would continue, with no additional managing or 
348 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

monitoring. The operation and management of the refuges that would provide for the basic needs of 

these species varies, but generally would include, feeding, resting, and breeding. Measures at some 

refuges include planting vegetation used for food, nesting, and cover, as well as moist-soil management. 

Mostly opportunistic monitoring and management of resident wildlife would occur under this 

alternative. The main objective for game species management would be to sustain healthy 

populations through hunting programs and current habitat management. Only current refuge 

wildlife management programs would continue to be maintained and since little baseline 

biological information would be gathered on non-managed species or groups of species, any new 

management would not be likely. 

Complex staff would continue habitat management of existing beaches, wetlands, open waters, 

forested habitats, scrub/shrub habitat, grasslands, and open lands. All ponds, levees, moist-soil 

water management units, water control structures, and pumps would continue to be maintained to 

provide critical habitat for threatened and endangered species, waterfowl, and wetland-dependent 

birds. Current water quality information would be addressed on an as-needed basis and would 

continue to be limited. All other habitat management programs would remain unchanged. 

Control of invasive and exotic plant species would continue to be performed by Complex staff on an 

opportunistic basis as funding and staffing permitted. This limited control would be performed by 

chemical and/or mechanical means, but would remain intermittent. Thus habitats and wildlife may be 

at risk due to this limited control. Additionally, the Complex staff would continue efforts to 

control/remove invasive, exotic and/or nuisance wildlife on the refuges. These species tend to 

reproduce rapidly and can be especially destructive to habitats. Control would continue to be 

implemented by the take of these animals as part of hunting programs, offered on some of the 

refuges, and opportunistically by Complex staff. 

The Service would maintain the current levels of wildlife-dependent recreation activities (hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation 

opportunities). The Complex has a good base of facilities and equipment to support management 

operations for the 56,000 acres that span the seven refuges. Complex facilities and equipment to 

support management operations on the seven refuges include: Complex Office (currently in GSA 

rental space in Savannah, Georgia, awaiting completion of the Visitors Center/Offices located on 

Savannah NWR); Office/visitor center at Harris Neck NWR; and maintenance shop facilities and 

associated storage buildings and outbuildings located on Savannah, Harris Neck, Pinckney Island, 

Blackbeard Island and Wassaw NWRs. There is a public boat ramp and parking lot at Harris Neck 

NWR along with a commercial dock under lease to local watermen. At Pinckney Island NWR there is 

a public boat ramp and associated parking area managed under agreement with Beaufort County, 

South Carolina. This extensive network of public use facilities would continue to be maintained. 

These facilities do not interfere substantially with or detract from the achievement of wildlife 

conservation. The Complex manages an extensive visitor services program, including an 

environmental education program without an environmental education coordinator. In addition, the 

Complex manages recreation programs, volunteers, friends, and outreach. 

Land would be acquired from willing sellers within each refuge’s current acquisition boundary and in 

accordance with current Service policy. Law enforcement on each refuge would continue at the current 

level with emphasis on resource protection and public safety. This includes being designated to uphold 

current regulations and for protection of wildlife, visitors, and cultural and historical resources. The 

Service would maintain the refuge as funding allows. The Complex would continue to include a 

combined staff of 30 full-time members. These staff positions would continue to specifically support the 

seven refuges that make up the Complex. 
 

Appendices 349

ALTERNATIVE B. 

The preferred alternative, Alternative B, is considered to be the most effective management action for 

meeting the purposes of these six refuges of the Complex. Under Alternative B, the emphasis would 

be on restoring and improving refuge resources needed for wildlife and habitat management and 

providing enhanced appropriate and compatible wildlife-dependent public use opportunities, while 

addressing key issues and individual refuge mandates. 

This alternative would focus on augmenting wildlife and habitat management to identify, conserve, and 

restore populations of native fish and wildlife species with an emphasis on migratory birds and threatened 

and endangered species. This would partially be accomplished by increased monitoring of waterfowl, 

other migratory and resident birds, and endemic species in order to assess and adapt management 

strategies and actions. Additionally, information gaps would be addressed by the initiation of baseline 

surveys, periodic monitoring, and ultimately the addition of adaptive habitat management. 

Habitat management programs for impoundments, beaches, wetlands, open waters, forested 

habitats, scrub/shrub habitat, grasslands, and open lands would be reevaluated and step-down 

management plans would be developed to meet the foraging, resting, and breeding requirements of 

priority species. Additionally, monitoring and adaptive habitat management would be implemented to 

potentially counteract the impacts associated with long-term climate change and sea level rise. 

The control of invasive and exotic plant species would be more aggressively managed by 

implementing a management plan, completing a baseline inventory, and supporting research and 

control with strategic mechanical and chemical means. Additionally, the Complex staff would utilize 

this management plan and monitoring to enhance efforts to control/remove invasive and 

exotic/nuisance wildlife on the refuges. 

Alternative B enhances each refuge’s visitor services opportunities (except for Tybee NWR which 

would remained closed to the public) by: improving the quality of fishing opportunities; streamlining 

quota hunt process and where possible evaluating the options of allowing the use of crossbows and 

creating additional hunting opportunities; maintaining and where possible expanding environmental 

education opportunities by developing refuge-specific environmental education programs, enhancing 

current partnerships and construction of new environmental educaction facilities; enhancing wildlife 

viewing and photography opportunities by expanding walking, bicycling, driving, and boating access 

for wildlife observation and photography by establishing trailhead kiosks, building observation 

platforms, installing spotting scopes, providing photography workshops and identifying additional 

wildlife viewing areas; developing and implementing a visitor services management plan, and 

enhancing personal interpretive and outreach opportunities. Volunteer programs and a “Friends of 

the Refuge” group would be expanded to enhance all aspects of refuge management and to increase 

resource availability. The Complex is also evaluating the possibility of utilizing a concessionaire at 

Pinckney NWR to implement a tram tour of the refuge. This would enable the refuge to provide 

access in a controlled manner that would allow participation from patrons with mobility issues. 

Under this alternative, the priority of land acquisition at Harris Neck NWR would be to acquire lands that 

provide resource and public use values from willing sellers by: fee title purchase, donation, mitigation 

purchase and transfer, or other viable means. This would include an investigation into expanding the 

current acquisition boundary. At Savannah NWR, focus would be increased on acquiring lands that 

provide resource and public use values from willing sellers by any viable means. 
350 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Law enforcement activities to protect archaeological and historical sites and provide visitor safety 

would be intensified. The allocation of an additional law enforcement officer for the Complex 

would provide security for cultural resources, but would also ensure visitor safety and public 

compliance with refuge regulations. 

Administration plans would stress the need for increased maintenance of existing infrastructure and 

construction of new facilities. Funding for new construction projects would be balanced between 

habitat management and public use needs. Additional staff would be required to accomplish the 

goals of this alternative. Personnel priorities would include employing an environmental education 

coordinator, law enforcement officers/park rangers, a volunteer coordinator, biological technicians, 

maintenance workers, refuge managers, refuge assistant managers, and a geographic information 

systems specialist. The increased Complex budget and staffing levels would better enable the 

Complex to meet the obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

ALTERNATIVE C. 

Under Alternative C, the management of the refuge resources would be employed to allow natural 

succession to take place on the refuges, while maintaining the current slate of public use 

opportunities. All purposes of the refuges and mandated monitoring of federal trust species and 

archaeological resources would be continued, but other wildlife management would be mostly 

performed on an incidental basis. 

This alternative would utilize a custodial habitat management strategy. Impoundments, beaches, 

wetlands, open waters, forested habitats, scrub/shrub habitat, grasslands, and open lands would not 

be actively managed and would allow natural disturbance to maintain succession, unless the habitats 

primarily focus on the needs of threatened and endangered species or the needs of priority species, 

such as migratory birds. Fire management would be reduced to include wildfire response only. 

The Service would continue mandated activities for protection of federally listed species. 

Conservation of federally listed threatened and endangered species would be continued through 

current habitat management and monitoring programs accomplished primarily through established 

partnership and research projects. 

Current management of migratory birds would continue to provide suitable habitat for waterfowl, 

contributing to the objective of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Climate control 

changes and sea level rise would continue to be monitored on an opportunistic basis with very little or 

no adaptive habitat management. 

Control of invasive and exotic plant species would continue to be performed by Complex staff on an 

opportunistic basis as funding and staffing permitted. This limited control would be performed by 

chemical and/or mechanical means, but would remain intermittent. Additionally, the Complex staff 

would continue efforts to control/remove invasive, exotic and/or nuisance wildlife on the refuges. 

The Service would maintain the current levels of wildlife-dependent recreation activities (hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation). 

Public use facilities would continue to be maintained, as would the current visitor services program. 

No additional land acquisition would be pursued under this alternative. Only additional law enforcement 

staff would be added to the staff to increase emphasis on resource protection and public safety. This 

includes being designated to uphold current regulations and for protection of wildlife, visitors, and cultural 

and historical resources. The Service would maintain the refuge as funding allows. 
 

Appendices 351

Selection Rationale

Alternative B is selected for implementation because it directs the development of programs to best 

achieve the Complex purpose and goals; emphasizes adaptive management; collects comprehensive 

habitat and wildlife data; promotes wildlife-dependent recreation and environmental education; and 

ensures long-term achievement of the Complex and Service objectives. These management actions 

provide balanced levels of compatible public use opportunities consistent with existing laws, Service 

policies, and sound biological principles. It provides the best mix of program elements to achieve 

desired long-term conditions. 

Under this alternative, all lands of these six refuges under the management and direction of the 

Complex will be protected, maintained, and enhanced to best achieve national, ecosystem, and 

refuge-specific goals and objectives within anticipated funding and staffing levels. In addition, the 

action positively addresses significant issues and concerns expressed by the public. 

Environmental Effects

Implementation of the Service’s management action is expected to result in environmental, social, 

and economic effects as outlined in the comprehensive conservation plan. These effects are 

detailed, by refuge, as follows: 

Blackbeard NWR

 Wildlife Population Management – Alternative B increased monitoring, management, and 

restoration of habitat would positively impact wildlife populations, more effectively control 

invasive species, and would identify and protect threatened and endangered species, 

particularly the loggerhead sea turtle and piping plover. 

 Habitat Management – Alternative B expanded forest management activities should 

increase native forest habitat populations; and, continued evaluation and use of prescribed 

fire as a management tool would provide for more diverse habitats (and reduce hazardous 

fuels). Expanded management and restoration of freshwater impoundments would 

positively impact wetland-dependent bird populations. Increased monitoring of wetlands 

and marshes would provide information, but would not likely result in a significant effect on 

marsh “die off.” Alternative B would partner with the Corps of Engineers and increase 

active management activities to reduce beach erosion. The development and 

implementation of a habitat management plan would provide guidance for management of 

habitats for trust species and species of concern as well as increase information and 

research to enable adaptive management to cope with long-term climate change and sea 

level rise. 

 Visitor Services – An enhanced visitor services program would allow more opportunities 

for public participation in wildlife observation and interpretation, as well as expanded 

environmental education activities and public outreach events – all which would further 

Service policies and help support the local economy. Increased visitation may cause 

additional disturbance to wildlife and additional law enforcement and facilities maintenance 

issues. 

 Resource Protection – Development and implementation of a law enforcement plan will 

provide better protection of archaeological and historical sites. Increase focus on 

neighboring mainland development and management of wilderness habitat would restrict 

sensitive areas and minimize human disturbances. 
352 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Refuge Administration – Alternative B would increase the Complex budget and staffing 

levels to better meet the obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and 

public use. 

Harris Neck NWR

 Wildlife Population Management – Alternative B’s increased monitoring, management, and 

restoration of habitat would positively impact wildlife populations, more effectively control 

invasive species, and would identify and protect threatened and endangered species, 

particularly wood stork populations. 

 Habitat Management – Alternative B’s expanded forest management activities should 

increase native forest habitat populations and continued evaluation and use of prescribed 

fire as a management tool would provide for more diverse habitats (and reduce hazardous 

fuels). Saltwater intrusion problems would continue to be a problematic issue under 

Alternative B. The development and implementation of a habitat management plan would 

provide guidance for management of habitats for trust species and species of concern as 

well as increase information and research to enable adaptive management to cope with 

long-term climate change and sea level rise. 

 Visitor Services – An enhanced visitor services program would allow more opportunities 

for public participation in wildlife observation and interpretation, as well as expanded 

environmental education activities and public outreach events – all which would further 

help support Service policies and the local economy. However, increased visitation may 

cause additional disturbance to wildlife, as well as additional law enforcement and 

maintenance issues. 

 Resource Protection – Conservation and protection of additional habitat would be 

accomplished through land acquisition, conservation easements, and the private lands 

program. Residential encroachment may have negative impacts on natural resources of 

the refuge. Under Alternative B, land that provides resource and public use values would 

be acquired from willing sellers by fee title purchase, donation, mitigation purchase and 

transfer, or other viable means. This would include an investigation into expanding the 

current acquisition boundary. 

 Refuge Administration – Additional staff will improve both the refuge’s and the Complex’s 

ability to manage wildlife and habitat, maintain equipment and facilities, provide visitor 

services, and ensure public safety. 

Pinckney Island NWR

 Wildlife Population Management – Alternative B’s increased monitoring, management, and 

restoration of habitat would increase wildlife populations and significantly reduce invasive 

species. 

 Habitat Management – Alternative B’s expanded forest management activities should 

increase native forest habitat populations and continued evaluation and use of prescribed 

fire as a management tool would provide for more diverse habitats (and reduce hazardous 

fuels). The development and implementation of a habitat management plan would provide 

guidance for management of habitats for trust species and species of concern as well as 

increase information and research to enable adaptive management to cope with long-term 

climate change and sea level rise. 

 Visitor Services – An enhanced visitor services program and potential development of a 

Visitor Center/concessions operation would allow more opportunities for public 

participation in wildlife observation and interpretation, as well as expanded environmental 

education activities and public outreach events – all which would further help support 

Service policies and the local economy. However, increased visitation may cause 
 

Appendices 353

additional disturbance to wildlife, as well as additional law enforcement and maintenance 

issues. 

 Resource Protection – Highway access to the refuge is a public safety concern (a DOT 

traffic study is underway). Current commercial and residential encroachment may have 

impacts on natural resources. 

 Refuge Administration – Additional staff will improve both the refuge’s and the Complex’s 

ability to manage wildlife and habitat, maintain equipment and facilities, provide visitor 

services, and ensure public safety. 

Savannah NWR

 Wildlife Population Management – Savannah NWR’s Alternative B restored and expanded 

wetland management would positively support wintering waterfowl, migratory birds, and 

other wetland dependent birds. Increased monitoring and adaptive management projects 

would improve habitats and added research and increased surveys would positively affect 

biological foundation and fill data gaps. 

 Habitat Management – An expanded focus on removal and/or control of invasive species 

would improve the overall habitat of native species. The development and implementation 

of a habitat management plan would provide guidance for management of habitats for 

trust species and species of concern, as well as increase information and research to 

enable adaptive management to cope with long-term climate change and sea level rise. 

 Visitor Services – The addition of new facilities, staff, and programs would allow the refuge 

to enhance visitor interpretation, environmental education, and provide additional outreach 

opportunities to the community. The increased public use opportunities would positively 

support the local economy. However, increased visitation may cause additional 

disturbance to wildlife and additional law enforcement and facilities maintenance issues. 

 Resource Protection – Under Alternative B, Savannah NWR would seek to acquire lands 

that provide resource and public use values from willing sellers by any viable means. The 

expansion of refuge lands would positively impact wildlife. Industrial and residential 

encroachment may have an impact on natural and cultural resources; however, increased 

partnerships of Alternative B would positively impact strategic landscape level 

conservation. Ongoing nearby industrial activities introduce unknown impacts to water, 

air, and soil; however, the increased monitoring activities of Alternative B should allow for 

earlier detection of spills and contamination. Highway access to the refuge is a public 

safety concern (a DOT traffic study is underway). Increased law enforcement patrols 

would help to protect populations from illegal take and disturbance. 

 Refuge Administration – Additional staff will improve both the refuge’s and the Complex’s 

ability to manage wildlife and habitat, maintain equipment and facilities, provide visitor 

services, and ensure public safety. 

Tybee NWR

 Wildlife Population Management – Increased monitoring and expanded bird monitoring 

information would allow adaptive management activities to improve habitat and contribute 

to the recovery of any threatened and endangered species. 

 Habitat Management – The development and implementation of a habitat management 

plan would provide guidance for management of habitats for trust species and species of 

concern and provide for the removal of invasive species, resulting in an improvement of 

the overall habitat of native species. An increase in information and research would 

facilitate better adaptive management activities to cope with long-term climate change and 

sea level rise. In partnership with the Corps of Engineers, Alternative B would use dredge 

spoil to increase and support bird habitat. 
354 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

 Visitor Services – Tybee NWR is closed to the public. 

 Resource Protection – Increased law enforcement patrols would help to protect 

populations from illegal take and disturbance (disruption of nesting) and also allow for 

early detection of spills or contaminants – ongoing nearby industrial activities introduce 

unknown impacts to water, air, and soil. 

 Refuge Administration – Additional staff will improve both the refuge’s and the Complex’s 

ability to manage wildlife and habitat and maintain equipment and facilities. 

Wassaw NWR

 Wildlife Population Management – Alternative B’s increased monitoring, management, and 

restoration of habitat would positively impact wildlife populations, more effectively control 

invasive species, and would identify and protect threatened and endangered species, 

particularly the loggerhead sea turtle and piping plover. 

 Habitat Management – Alternative B’s expanded forest management activities should 

allow native forest habitat populations to thrive and continued evaluation and use of 

prescribed fire as a management tool would provide for more diverse habitats (and 

reduces hazardous fuels). Increased monitoring of wetlands and marshes would provide 

information, but would not likely result in a significant effect on marsh “die off.” Alternative 

B would partner with the Corps of Engineers and increase active management activities to 

reduce beach erosion. The development and implementation of a habitat management 

plan would provide guidance for management of habitats for trust species and species of 

concern, as well as increase information and research to facilitate adaptive management 

strategies to cope with long-term climate change and sea level rise. 

 Visitor Services – An enhanced visitor services program would allow more opportunities for 

public participation in wildlife observation and interpretation, as well as expanded environmental 

education activities and public outreach events – all which would further Service policies and 

help support the local economy. Increased visitation may cause additional disturbance to 

wildlife and additional law enforcement and facilities maintenance issues. 

 Resource Protection – Development and implementation of a law enforcement plan will 

provide better protection of archaeological and historical sites. Alternative B would 

expand attention given to the impacts of neighboring mainland development on the natural 

resources of Wassaw NWR. 

 Refuge Administration – Alternative B would increase the Complex budget and staffing levels 

to better meet the obligations of wildlife stewardship, habitat management, and public use. 

Potential Adverse Effects and Mitigation Measures

Water Quality from Soil Disturbance and Use of Herbicides 

Soil disturbance and siltation due to water management activities; road and levee maintenance; and 

the construction of maintenance facilities, boat ramps, a visitor center, etc., is expected to be minor 

and of short duration. To further reduce potential impacts, the Complex would use Best Management 

Practices to minimize the erosion of soils into water bodies. 

Foot traffic on new and extended foot trails is expected to have a negligible impact on soil erosion. 

To minimize the impacts from public use, each refuge would include informational signs that request 

trail users to remain on the trails, in order to avoid causing potential erosion problems. 
 

Appendices 355

Long-term herbicide use for exotic plant control could result in a slight decrease in water quality in 

areas prone to exotic plant infestation. Through the proper application of herbicides, however, this is 

expected to have a minor impact on the environment, with the benefit of reducing or eliminating exotic 

plant infestations. Only approved herbicides would be used. 

Wildlife Disturbance 

Disturbance to wildlife is an unavoidable consequence of any public use program, regardless of the 

activity involved. While some activities such as wildlife observation may be less disturbing than 

others, all of the public use activities proposed under the proposed alternative would be planned to 

avoid unacceptable levels of impact. 

The known and anticipated levels of disturbance from the proposed alternative are not considered to 

be significant. Nevertheless, each refuge would manage public use activities to reduce impacts. 

Providing access for fishing opportunities allows the use of a renewable natural resource without 

adversely impacting other resources. Hunting would also be managed with restrictions that ensure 

minimal impact on other resources. General wildlife observation may result in minimal disturbance to 

wildlife. If refuge staff determines that impacts from the expected additional visitor uses are above 

the levels that are anticipated, those uses would be discontinued, restricted, or rerouted to other less 

sensitive areas. 

Vegetation Disturbance 

Negative impacts could result from the creation, extension, and maintenance of trails that require the 

clearing of non-sensitive vegetation along their length. This is expected to be a minor short-term impact. 

Increased visitor use may increase the potential for the introduction of new exotic species into areas when 

visitors do not comply with boating regulations at the boat ramps and other access points, or with 

requests to stay on trails. Each refuge would minimize this impact by enforcing the regulations for access 

to the refuge’s water bodies, and by installing informational signs that request users to stay on the trails. 

User Group Conflicts 

As public use increases, unanticipated conflicts between different user groups could occur. If this 

should happen, the Complex would adjust its programs, as needed, to eliminate or minimize any 

public use issues. The Complex would use methods that have proven to be effective in reducing or 

eliminating public use conflicts. These methods include establishing separate use areas, different 

use periods, and limits on the numbers of users in order to provide safe, quality, appropriate, and 

compatible wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities. 

Effects on Adjacent Landowners 

Implementation of the proposed alternative is not expected to negatively affect the owners of private lands 

adjacent to the refuges. Positive impacts that would be expected include higher property values, less 

intrusion of invasive exotic plants, and increased opportunities for viewing more diverse wildlife. 

However, some negative impacts that may occur include a higher frequency of trespass onto 

adjacent private lands, and noise associated with increased traffic. To minimize these potential 

impacts, each refuge would provide informational signs that clearly mark refuge boundaries; 

maintain the refuge’s existing parking facilities; use law enforcement; and provide increased 

educational efforts at the visitor center. 
356 Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex 

Land Ownership and Site Development 

Land acquisition efforts by the Service could lead to changes in land use and recreational use 

patterns. However, most of the non-Service-owned lands within a refuge’s approved acquisition 

boundary are currently undeveloped. If these lands are acquired as additions to a refuge, they would 

be maintained in a natural state, managed for native wildlife populations, and opened to wildlifecompatible public uses, where feasible. 

Potential development of a refuge’s buildings, trails, and other improvements could lead to minor 

short-term negative impacts on plants, soils, and some wildlife species. When constructing new 

facilities, efforts would be made to use recycled products and environmentally sensitive treated 

lumber. Buildings would be constructed to be aesthetically pleasing to the community and to avoid 

any additional impacts to native plant communities. All construction activities would comply with the 

requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; the National Historic Preservation Act; Executive 

Order 11988, Floodplain Management; and other applicable regulatory requirements. 

Coordination

The management action has been thoroughly coordinated with all interested and/or affected parties. 

Parties contacted include: 

All affected landowners 

Congressional representatives 

Governor of South Carolina and Georgia 

Georgia and South Carolina Forestry Commission 

U.S. Coast Guard 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Georgia and South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 

Georgia Ports Authority 

Georgia Department of Transportation 

National Park Service—Fort Pulaski National Monument 

Gray’s Reef National Marine Sanctuary 

Armstrong Atlantic State University 

University of Georgia 

Local community officials 

Local Chamber of Commerse 

Interested citizens 

Conservation organizations 

Local business and outfitters 

Findings

It is my determination that the management action does not constitute a major federal action 

significantly affecting the quality of the human environment under the meaning of Section 102(2)(c) of 

the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (as amended). As such, an environmental impact 

statement is not required. This determination is based on the following factors (40 C.F.R. 1508.27), 

as addressed in the Environmental Assessment for Savannah, Tybee, Pinckney Island, Wassaw, 

Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuges: 

1. Both beneficial and adverse effects have been considered and this action will not have a 

significant effect on the human environment. (Environmental Assessment, pages 275-411). 
 

Appendices 357

2. The actions will not have a significant effect on public health and safety. (Environmental 

Assessment, pages 275-411). 

3. The project will not significantly affect any unique characteristics of the geographic area such as 

proximity to historical or cultural resources, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. 

(Environmental Assessment, pages 276-289, 309, 329, 346, 368, 379, 400, 409). 

4. The effects on the quality of the human environment are not likely to be highly controversial. 

(Environmental Assessment, pages 275-411). 

5. The actions do not involve highly uncertain, unique, or unknown environmental risks to the human 

environment. (Environmental Assessment, pages 275-411). 

6. The actions will not establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects nor do they 

represent a decision in principle about a future consideration. 

(Environmental Assessment, pages 275-411). 

7. There will be no cumulatively significant impacts on the environment. Cumulative impacts have 

been analyzed with consideration of other similar activities on adjacent lands, in past action, and 

in foreseeable future actions. (Environmental Assessment, pages 404-411). 

8. The actions will not significantly affect any site listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of 

Historic Places, nor will they cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historic 

resources. (Environmental Assessment, pages 276-289, 309, 329, 346, 368, 379, 400, 409). 

9. The actions are not likely to adversely affect threatened or endangered species, or their 

habitats. (Environmental Assessment, pages 278-289, 292-294, 299, 313, 314, 320, 333, 

351, 384-386, 390, 408). 

10. The actions will not lead to a violation of federal, state, or local laws imposed for the protection of 

the environment. (Environmental Assessment, pages 275-411). 

Supporting References 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental 

Assessment for Savannah Coastal Refuge Complex -- Blackbeard Island, Harris Neck, Pinckney 

Island, Savannah, Tybee and Wassaw National Wildlife Refuges, Located in Chatham, Effingham 

and McIntosh Counties, Georgia and Jasper and Beaufort Counties, South Carolina. U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region. 

Document Availability 

The Environmental Assessment was Section B of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan for 

Savannah, Tybee, Pinckney Island, Wassaw, Harris Neck, and Blackbeard Island National Wildlife 

Refuges and was made available in September and October of 2010. Additional copies are available 

by writing: Savannah Coastal Refuges Complex, 694 Beech Hill Lane, Hardeeville, SC 29927 

 ,Southeast Region