## Biological Evaluation

**for Informal Consultation on New Jersey Aquatic Life Criteria: Analysis Document** 

**– Lead and Total Dissolved Solids**  Prepared for: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Standards and Health Protection Division

Submitted: March 31, 2006 **EPA CONTRACT #68 -**  **C -**  **02 -**  **021 WORK ASSIGNMENT 3**  **- 10**  Prepared b y: Great Lakes Environmental Center 1295 King Ave. Columbus, Ohio. 43212**PREFACE**

This draft analy sis document supports the biologic al evaluation for th e water quality criteria for lead and total dissolved solids adopted by the State of New Jersey in 2002 . It includes the presentation and anal ys is of the toxicity data, risk summary , and the effects determination for lead and total dissolved solids . This analy sis document is used in conjunction with the Draft Methodology for Conducting Biological Evaluations of Aquatic Life Criteria

– Methods Manual , which contains the scientific rational underl yi ng the components of the biological evaluations (i.e., the literature search, toxicity data evaluation, risk anal ys is, and effects determination) and the step

- by

- step procedures that EPA and its contractor follow in conducting the biological evaluations under the national consultations.iii **TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND** 

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 1 **2.0 SCOPE OF STATE ACTION**

................................ ................................ .............................. 1 **2.1 Definition of State Action**

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 1 **2.1.1 New Jersey’s Lead and Total Dissolved Solids A quatic Life Criteria** 

........................ 1 **2.2 Definition of Action Area**

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 **2.3 Species Status and Life History**

................................ ................................ ........................ 3 **2.3.1 Aquatic and Aquatic -** **dependent Species Selected for Biological Ev aluation** 

.......... 47 **2.4 Environmental Baseline**

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 48 **3.0 ASSESSING EFFECTS OF THE NEW JERSEY CRITERIA ON FEDERALLY**  **** **LISTED SPECIES**

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 50 **3.1 Overview**

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 50 **3.2 Data Collection**

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 50 **3.3 Toxic Effects on Aquatic Species**

................................ ................................ .................... 50 **3.3.1 Aquatic Animals**

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 51 **3.3.2 Comparison of New Jersey Lead Criteria with Current EPA Lead Crit eria**  **(Freshwater Only)**

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 71 **3.3.3 Multiple Routes of Exposure**

................................ ................................ ..................... 71 **3.3.4 Aquatic Plants**

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 72 **3.4 Aquatic -**  **Dependent Species**

................................ ................................ ............................. 73 **3.4.1 Overview and Background** 

................................ ................................ .......................... 73 **3.4.2 Freshwater Exposure Assessment**

................................ ................................ ............. 74 **3.4.3 Saltwater Exposure Assessment**

................................ ................................ ................ 75 **3.4.4 Toxicity Assessment -**  **Lead**

................................ ................................ ........................ 76 **3. 4**  **.5 Risk Analysis**

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 78 **3.5 Food Items of Federally -**  **Listed Species**

................................ ................................ ......... 79 **3.6 Effects on Glochidia Host Species**

................................ ................................ .................. 81 **4.0 EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS**

................................ ................................ ....................... 82 **4.1 No Effect**

**– Notes** 
................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 82 **4.2 May Effect**

**– Notes** 
................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 82 **4.2.1 Not Likely to Adversely Affect**

................................ ................................ ................... 83 **4.2.2 Species Requiring Further Evaluation**

................................ ................................ ...... 90 **5.0 ASSESSING EFFECTS OF THE NEW JERSEY PROPOSED LEAD AND TOTAL**  **DISSOLVED SOLIDS CRITERIA ON DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT**

................ 91 **REFERENCES**

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 92iv **TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONTINUED**
APPENDIX A: Interspecies Correlation Estimates (I CE) for Lead **LIST OF TABLES** Table 2.1. New Jersey L ist of Federally

Threatened and Endangered Species ..................3 Table 2.2. New Jersey L isted Species Included in Biological Evaluation .......................47 Table 2.3. New Jersey L isted Species Not Included in Biological Evaluation ..................48 Table 3.1a

. Freshwater Toxicity Data Obtained Through ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead Using the New Jersey Acute

- to
- chronic Ratio (ACR) and Conversion Fac tor. Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All values are dissolved lead in μg/L .........................................................52 Table 3.1b. Freshwater Toxicity Data Obtained Through ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead Using the Current USEPA Hardness Equation, Acute

- to
- chronic Ratio (ACR) and Conversion Factor. Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 24.39 was used. All values are dissolved lead in μg/L ......55 Table 3.1c. Saltwater Toxicity Data Obtained Through ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead Using the New Jersey Acute

- to
- chronic ratio (ACR) and conversion factor. Unless otherwise indicated L C50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via ACR from acute L C50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All values are dissolved lean in μg/L

. ..........................................................................................58 Table 3.2a. Lead Freshwater Toxicity Data b y T axonomic Group for New Jersey Criteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations (EC A s) in Table 4.1 that rel y on surrogate data. All values are given as dissolved lead in μg/L ..........................................................................................61v

Table 3.2b. Lead Freshwater Toxicity Data b y Taxonomic Group for Current EPA Criteria.

The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations (EC A s) in Table 4.1 that rel y on surrogate data. All values are given as dissolved lead in μg/ L........................ ..................................................................65 Table 3.3. Freshwater Toxicity Data for Total Dissolved Solids. All values are in mg TDS/L ........................................................................................68 Table 3.4. Lead Bioconcentration and Bioaccumulation Factors a (BCF/BAFs) for Freshwater

Aquatic Foo d Organisms. BCF/BAFs are Based on Wet Weight. Sources Include EPA’s ECOTOX Database, and the Ambient Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead (GLEC 1998) .....................................................................74 Table 3.5. Lead Bioconcentration Factors a (BCFs) for Saltwater Aquati c Food Organisms.

BCFs are Based on Wet Weight. Sources Include EPA’s ECOTOX Database, the Ambient Water Quality

Criteria Document for Lead (GLEC 1998), and Jarvinen and Ankley

(1999) .........................................................................76 Table 3.6. Chronic Toxicity of Lead to P otential Surrogate Species Based on Wet Weight of Oral Dose. Data are from ECOTOX ....................................................77 Table 4.1a. Results of Effects Analy sis for Freshwater Aquatic L isted Species (all units in

 g/L) (New Jersey

Dissolved Freshwater Lead Criteria: CMC = 38  g/ L, CCC = 5.4  g/L) ....................................................................................84 Table 4.1b. Results of Effects Analy sis for Freshwater Aquatic L isted Species (all units in  g/L)

(USEPA Freshwater Dissolved Lead Criteria based on a hardness of 100 mg/L as CaCO 3 : CMC = 65  g/L, CCC = 2.5  g/ L) ...........................................85 Table 4.2a. Analy sis of Effects to Freshwater Aquatic

- Dependent Species (Concentrations

Based on Wet Weight) (New Jersey Dissolved Freshwater Lead Criteria: CMC = 38  g/L, CCC = 5.4  g/L) ................................................................86 Table 4.2b. Analy sis of Effects to Freshwater Aquatic

- Dependent Species (Concentrations

Based on Wet Weight) (USEPA Freshwater Dissolved Lead Criteria based on a hardness of 100 mg/L as CaCO 3 : CMC = 6 5  g/ L, CCC = 2.5  g/L) ..............87 Table 4.3. Analy s is of Effects to Saltwater Aquatic

- Dependent Species (Concentrations

Based on Wet Weight) (New Jersey Saltwater Dissolved Lead Criteria: CMC = 210  g/L, CCC = 24  g/L) ................................................................881

**1.0 B ACKGROUND**  This is a placeholder section for background on consultation history regarding New Jersey lead and TDS criteria

. **2.0 SCOPE OF STATE ACTION** In order to fulfill the goals of the MO A, whose intent is to provide efficient mechanisms for improved interagency cooperation under Section 7 of the ESA, EPA will consult with the Services (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and United States Fish and Wildlife Service) on proposed and/or revised state aquatic life criteria. The agencies agree that it is prudent to examine the aquatic life criteria for protection of listed species and critical habitat, and realize the importance of conducting the consultations on proposed and/or re vised state criteria in a timely fashion so that any

state
- adopted aquatic life criteria are protective of that state’s listed species and their critical habitat. **2.1 Definition of State Action** EPA approves stat e - proposed aquatic life criteria for waters where state water quality standards specify

a use protecting aquatic life. Federall y- listed aquatic or aquatic

dependent species that have more than limited exposure to these waters are assessed in the bi ological evaluation. Section 2. 3 of this document presents a summary of the life history of the list ed species and identifies those that have only limited exposure to waters where the State of New Jersey water quality standards specify a use protecting aquatic li fe, and accordingl y such species are not addressed in this biological evaluation. EPA is making a “no effect” finding on such species. **2.1.1 New Jersey’s Lead and Total Dissolved Solids Aquatic Life Criteria** This biological evaluation addresses the aquatic life criteria for lead and total dissolved solids adopted by

New Jersey in 2002. Lead The N.J.A.C 7:9B

- 1.14(c)13lxxxii lead criteria for aquatic life in New Jersey are expressed in terms of the dissolved metal in the water column as: Fre shwater Acute Criterion = 38  g/L Freshwater Chronic Criterion = 5.4  g/ L Saltwater Acute Criterion = 210  g/L Saltwater Chronic Criteri on = 24  g/L2

Because kinetic cons iderations, complex formation, and biological interaction influence the achievement of lead reaching equilibrium conditions in natural waters, the precise levels of its species may

not be easily

predicted. Currently , no available analy tical measurement is known to be ideal for expressing aquatic life criteria for lead. Previous aquatic life criteria for lead (U.S. EPA 1980) were expressed as total recoverable lead. U.S. EPA (1984) has also expressed lead criteria as acid

- soluble lead in the past, but now recommends use of dissolved metal concentrations (operationall y defined as the metal in solution that passes through a 0.45  m membrane filter) to set and measure compliance with water quality standards (Prothro 1993; U.S. EPA 1993, 1994). The State of N ew Jersey has adopted EPA’s recommendation to express lead on a dissolved chemical basis into their State water quality standards. Thus, all lead concentrations used to derive the acute and chronic effects assessment concentrations (EC A s) reported herein are expressed in terms of the dissolved metal in the water column. New Jersey ’s lead criteria differ from EPA’s current recommended criteria in that the New Jersey freshwater lead acute and chronic criteria are not hardness

- dependent and the conversion f

actors to the dissolved form are not hardness

- dependent. New Jersey also used a different acute

- to
- chronic ratio to determine their chronic criterion. EPA’s current lead criteria are also evaluated in this document based on the request by the Fish and Wi ldlife Service (August 5, 2003 letter to Robert Hargrove from Clifford Day) to “compare the hardness

- vs. nonhardness

- dependent lead criteria in the BE

. ” See Section 4.3.2 of this document for a description of this comparison. Total Dissolved Solids The N.J.A.C 7:9B

- 1.14(c)8i total dissolved solids (TDS) criteria for aquatic life in New Jersey are: Freshwaters  No increase in background which may adversel y affect the survival, growth or propagation of the aquatic biota. Compliance with water

- quality

- ba sed whole effluent toxicity

(WET) limitations or L C 50 ≥ 50 percent, whichever is more stringent, shall be deemed to meet this requirement.

 No increase in background which would interfere with the designated or existing uses, or 500 mg/L, whichever is more stringent. Saltwater  None which would render the water unsuitable for the designated uses. The biological evaluation will be restricted to New Jersey ’s freshwater numeric criterion of not to exceed 500 mg/L of TDS. The requirement to be in compliance with water

quality based WET limitations or L C 50 ≥ 50 percent, whichever is more stringent i s intended to protect aquatic life b y regulating the release of TDS from permitted point source discharges. Discharges that do not meet the WET limitations or the LC 503

requirement will be required to conduct water quality studies to determine whether the discharge is having an adverse impact and the pollutant(s) causing the adverse impact. The WET requirement will not be evaluated because compliance with this clause results in no toxicity

(after receiving stream dilution) to the species used in the WET tests. Itis assumed no in

- stream toxicity to the WET test species results in a “not likely to adversel y affect” the listed species ruling. **2.2 Definition of Action Area** The State of New Jersey has adopted the lead and TDS criteria for all “ surface waters ” of New Jersey where water quality standards specify

a use protecting aquatic life. “Surface w aters of New Jersey are defined as: "Surface waters" means water at or above the land's surface which is neither groundwater nor contained within the unsaturated zone, including, but not limited to, the ocean and its tributaries, all springs, streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and artificial waterbodies. (N JDEP 2004a) **2 .**  **3 S**  **pecies S**  **tatus and**  **L ife**  **History** The US Fish and Wildlife Service lists 27 federally threatened or endangered species in New Jersey

(Table 2.1). Five of listed taxa do not occur in the state: the American burying beetle, Mit chell’s satyr butterfly, Eskimo curlew , gray wolf, and the eastern prairie fringed orchid. The list includes 20 animal and 7 plant species. Among the listed animals, there are 6 mammals, 4 birds, 5 reptiles, 1 fish, 3 insects and 1 mussel species. This section presents a summary

of each listed species status and life history . This information is used to select aquatic and aquatic

- dependent taxa for the biological evaluation of New Jersey ’s lead and TDS surf

ace aquatic water standards. **Table 2.1. New Jersey L**  **ist of F**  **ederally T**  **hreatened and E**  **ndangered S**  **pecies. Mammals**  Indiana bat Myotis sodalis Endangered Eastern puma Puma concolor couguar Endangered Black right whale Eubalaena glacialis Endangered Fi n whale Balaenoptera physalus Endangered Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Endangered Gray wolf Canis lupus Endangered **Birds** Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened Piping plover Charadrius melodus Threatened Roseate tern Sterna dougallii Endangered Eskimo curlew Numenius borealis Endangered **Reptiles** Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Threatened4

**Table 2.1. New Jersey L**  **ist of F**  **ederally T**  **hreatened and E**  **ndangered S**  **pecies.** Hawksbill sea turtle Eretmochelys imbricata Endangered Leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea Endangered Lo ggerhead sea turtle Caretta care tta Threatened Kemp’s Ridley

sea turtle Lepidochelys kempii Endangered **Fish** Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum Endangered **Mussel** Dwarf wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon Endangered **Insects** American burying beetle Nicrophorus mericanus Endanger ed Northeastern beach tiger beetle Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis Threatened Mitchell’s saty

r Neonympha mitchellii Endangered **Plants** Seabeach amaranth Amaranthus pumilus Threatened Knieskern's beaked

- rush Rhynchospora knieskernii Threatened American cha ffseed Schwalbea americana Endangered Sensitive joint

- vetch Aeschynomene virginica Threatened Swamp pink Helonias bullata Threatened Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides Threatened Eastern prairie fringed orchid Platanthera leucophaea Threatened Unless noted, all information on these species, provided below, comes from links in a US Fish and Wildlife web site, (http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/StateL istingAndOcc urrence.do?state=NJ ).
**INDIANA BAT** Myotis sodalis Family : Vespertilionidae Status: Endangered **Geographic Boundaries and Distribution** The Indiana bat occurs in the Midwest and eastern United States, from the western edge of the Ozark region in Oklahoma, to southern Wisconsin, east to Vermont, and as far south as northern Florida. In summer, it is apparentl y absent south of Tennessee; in winter, it is apparentl y absent from Michigan, Ohio, and northern Indiana where suitable caves and mines are unknown. About 500,000 individuals of this species still exist. **Critical Habitat** The following caves have been designated as Critical Habitat within the Southeast Region: Tennessee: White Oak Blowhole Cave, Blount County Kentucky: Bat Cave, Carter County5 C oach Cave, Edmonson County **Historical Information** Endangered throughout its range, Federal Register, March 11, 1967 **Life History** The Indiana bat is a medium

- sized bat, closely resembling the little brown bay ( Myotis lucifugus ) but differing in coloratio n. Its fur is a dull grayish chestnut rather than bronze, with the basal portion of the hairs of the back dull lead colored. This bat's reproductive organs are pinkish to cinnamon, and its hind feet smaller and more delicate than in M. lucifugus . The calcar (heel of the foot) is strongl y keeled. Little is known of this bat's diet beyond the fact that it consi sts of insects. F emales and juveniles forage in the airspace near the foliage of riparian and floodplain trees. Males forage the densel y wooded area at tree top height. This bat has a definite breeding period that usually occurs during the first 10 days of October. Mating takes place at night on the ceilings of large rooms near cave entrances. Limited mating may

also occur in the spring before the hibernating colonies disperse. Limited observations indicate that birth and development occur in very small, widely scattered colonies consisting of 25 or so females and their young. Birth usually takes place during June with each female bearing a singl e offspring. About 25 to 37 day s are required for development to the flying stage and the beginning of independent feeding. Migration to the wintering caves usuall y begins in August. Fat reserves depleted during migration are replenished largel y durin g the month of September. Feeding continues at a diminishing rate until by

late November the population has entered a definite state of hibernation. Hibernating colonies disperse in late March and most of the bats migrate to more northern habitat for the summer. However, some males remain in the hibernating area during this period and form active bands which wander from cave to cave. The hibernating bats characteristically form large, tight, compact clusters. Each individual hangs b y its feet from the ceiling. Every 8 to 10 day s hibernating individuals awaken to spend an hour or more flyingabout or to join a small cluster of active bats elsewhere in the cave before returning to hibernation. **Habitat** Limestone caves are used for winter hibernation. Th e preferred caves have a temperature averaging 37° to 43° Fahrenheit in midwinter, and a relative humidity averaging 87 percent. Summer records are rather scarce. A few individuals have been found under bridges and in old buildings, and several maternity colonies have been found under loose bark and in the hollows of trees. Summer foraging b y females and juveniles is limited to riparian and floodplain areas. Creeks are apparently not used if riparian trees have been removed. Males forage over floodplain ridges and hillside forests and usually roost in caves. Foraging areas average 11.2 acres per animal in midsummer.6

**Reasons for Current Status** The decline is attributed to commercialization of roosting caves, wanton destruction by vandals, disturbances caused by increased numbers of spelunkers and bat banding programs, use of bats as laboratory experimental animals, and possibly insecticide poisoning. Some winter hibernacula have been rendered unsuitable as a result of blocking or impeding air flow into the caves and thereb y changing the cave's climate. The Indiana bat is nearl y extinct over most of its former range in the northeastern states, and since 1950, the major winter colonies in caves of West Virginia, Indiana, and Illinois have disappeared. A high degree of aggregation during winter makes the species vulnerable. During this period approximately 87 percent of the entire population hibernates in only seven caves.
**BALD EAGLE** Haliaeetus leucocephalus Family : Accipitridae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

- Threatened (Proposed for de

- listing) **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/baldeagle.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/life_histories/B008.html http://www.owy

hee.us/_kbas/00000004.htm **Geographic Boundaries and Distribution** The current range of the bald eagle includes all of the conterminous United States and Alaska. The bald eagle is esp eciall y common in areas with large expanses of aquatic habitat, including Florida, Chesapeake Bay , Maine, and the Maritime Provinces of Canada, the Great Lakes and lake regions of Ontario, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan, northern California, Oregon, Washington , and coastal British Columbia and Alaska. A wintering population survey of the total North American population was completed in 1997 and resulted in 98,648 individuals, with the largest number in Alaska (44,000) and British Columbia (28,507). The bald e agle was recommended for de

- listing in 1999 but it was determined that additional data would be needed before taking this action. **Critical Habitat** No critical habitat has been designated for the bald eagle. **Historical Information** Listed threatened (32 F R 4001, 1967 March 11) in the conterminous United States. The decline of the bald eagle coincided with the introduction of the pesticide DDT in 1947. Eagles contaminated with DDT failed to lay eggs or produced thin eggshells that broke during incubation. Other causes of decline included shooting, trapping, and7

poisoning. Current threats include the loss of nesting habitat due to development along the coast and near inland rivers and waterway s. **Life History** Adult bald eagles are distinguished b y their l arge size (7

- to 8

- foot wingspan), full white heads and tails and dark brown, almost black body . They reach their adult size by

the time they can fl y. Their adult plumage develops in their fifth year. Juvenile appearance varies from year to year. In th eir first year, the wings are slightly broader and entirely

dark brown. The next year they begin to molt their flight feathers and the trailing edge of their wings appears s ymmetrically serrated as shorter adult feathers replace the longer juvenile ones. Their plumage is usually mottled, brown and white, and is widely variable with a considerable amount of white on the breast and belly . Bald eagles are even more mottled in their third year and begin to show signs of changes in bill color, from dark brown to light yellow. At this stage of development, some lighter plumage may appear on their heads and tails. During their fourth ye ar, bald eagles begin to look as adults. This is the time when they

are transitioning from juvenile to adult and appear for the first time with a white head and tail. At this age, they retain some brown in the white plumage, giving them a dirty

appearance. They

may also retain some white flecking in the brown regions of their bodies. In their next molt, they attain the clean white head and tail and solid brown body plumage of a full adult bald eagle. **Habitat** Bald eagles live in forest areas near a water body. Fish is their primary diet. Thus, the bald eagle is here classified as an aquatic

- dependent taxon. In New Jersey , th ey have historically

been associated with forests near the Delaware River and Bay , as well as many other rivers that flow into the Atlantic Ocean and Delaware Bay . In northern and central New Jersey , bald eagles are resident on inland reservoirs and on th e Delaware River. Throughout the state, these large birds require a nesting location that is safe from the threat of human disturbance and usually choose their nest tree accordingl y. They typicall y choose an emergent tree for building their large nests. Itrises above the trees that immediately

surround it. By

nesting in such a tree, eagles can place their nest within the shelter of the crown and still be above the surrounding trees, enabling them to arrive and depart from the nest with ease. In the no rthern part of the state, where the topography is hilly or mountainous, eagles can nest in trees that are on a slope and therefore have one side that is higher than its neighboring trees on the slope below it. Occasionally , bald eagles will choose a lone tree in an open field. In addition to nesting habitat, eagles also have habitat requirements for foraging and wintering, which might overlap their nesting habitat, but not necessarily

. Foraging habitat for bald eagles consists of large perch trees near a body of water. Both of these elements are critical due to the “sit and watch” foraging behavior of eagles. Wintering habitat consists of the same, with the added condition of open, ice

- free water. Parts of the Delaware River, such as the Delaware Water Gap, where the current is swift and the river remains open, as well as deep reservoirs with enough current or a dam to8

keep part of the water ice

- free, serve as good wintering habitat for eagles. The tidal areas of southern New Jersey

marshes are also id eal locations for winter foraging. **Status and Conservation** Long before the introduction of the pesticide DDT after World War II, habitat destruction, shootings and poisonings had greatl y reduced the population of bald eagles in the lower 48 contiguous states. But the widespread use of DDT, which caused eagles to lay thin

- shelled eggs that were often crushed during incubation, pushed the bird to the brink of extinction. New Jersey , where DDT was heavil y used, in part for mosquito control, was no exception

. By 1970, onl y one eagle nest remained in the State. Consequently, the bald eagle was listed as endangered under New Jersey ’s new Endangered Species Act in 1974 and listed as federall y endangered throughout the lower 48 states in 1978. Management of th e state’s only nest began in 1982, when biologists began climbing the nest tree to retrieve the thin

shelled eggs. They

were then incubated in the lab underneath chickens before being returned to the nest as 10

- day

- old chicks, which were quickl y cared for by the nest's adults. Shortly thereafter, the state launched a “hacking” program through which 60 eaglets, primarily from Canada, were released into the heart of New Jersey ’s bald eagle habitat between 1983 and 1989. Those efforts, combined with the 197 2 federal ban on DDT, paid off rather quickl y, with the appearance of the state's second eagle nest in 1988. Since then, biologists also have been successful in encouraging eagles to nest in certain areas b y building “starter nests,” which eagles add to o nce they adopt them for nesting. Building nests for eagles works best when a pair has already claimed a territory , and the birds may be drawn to a sturdy nest in an emergent tree. The number of eagle nests has increased steadily ever since the second nes t appeared,. In 2001, a record 27 bald eagle nests were active statewide, mostl y in southern New Jersey. A record 34 young fledged that year.
**PI PING PLOVER**  Charadrius melodus Family : Charadriidae Status: State

- Endangered, Federal

- Threatened (Atlantic Coast population) **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/plover.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.SpeciesProfile? spcode=B079 http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607 ,7
- 153

- 10370_12145_12202

- 32581

-- ,00.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** The Atlantic Coast Population of piping plovers nest along beaches in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Quebec, southern Maine, Rhode Island, Massachu setts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey , Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. These birds winter primaril y on the Atlantic Coast from North Carolina to Florida, although some migrate to the Bahamas and West Indies. Survey s completed in9

1991 found fewer than 2,500 breeding pairs remained in the United States and Canada. Survey s completed in 1999 estimated the Atlantic population at less than 1400 pairs. The historic breeding range of the Great Lakes population of piping plover encompasses the Great Lakes' shorelines in I llinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New York and Ontario. Great Lakes breeding sites are currently restricted to several beaches along Lake Superior and Lake Michigan in northern Michigan. These birds winter primaril y on the Gulf Coast, in Texas, L ouisiana, Alabama and Florida. Survey s completed in 2001 reported 32 breeding pairs in the United States. The current breeding range of the Northern Great Plains population of piping plover ext ends from alkali wetlands in southeastern Alberta through southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba to Lake of the Woods in southwestern Ontario and northwestern Minnesota, south along major prairie rivers (Yellowstone, Missouri, Niobrara, Platte, and L oup), the Prewitt Reservoir in northeastern Colorado, northwestern Oklahoma, and alkali wetlands in northeastern Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa. These birds winter primaril y on the Gulf Coast, in Texas, L ouisiana, Alabama and Florida. Critical habitat for the Northern Great Plains piping plover has been designated in areas of Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Florida for their wintering habitat along the gulf coats; and areas of Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska for b reeding habitat. Survey s completed in 2001 estimated 5,938 individuals remained in the United States and Canada. **Critical Habitat** Critical breeding habitat for the Piping plover has been designated along the shorelines of the Great Lakes in New York, Mi nnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Critical habitat for wintering piping plovers has been designated along the Gulf Coast in Texas, L ouisiana, Alabama and Florida. The Fish and Wildlife Service designated 137 areas along the coasts of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas as critical habitat for the wintering population of the piping plover. This includes approximately 2,891.7 kilometers of mapped shoreline and a pproximately

66,881 hectares of mapped area along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts and along margins of interior bay s, inlets, and lagoons. **Historical Information** On December 11, 1985, the Piping plover was listed Threatened (50 FR 50726

- 50734, 1985, December 11) in its entire range except in the Great Lakes watershed where it was listed endangered. The piping plover was listed endangered (50 FR 50726

- 50734) in the States of I llinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin a s well as in Ontario, Canada. The Revised Recovery Plan for the Atlantic Coast Population was completed on May 2, 1996. Critical Habitat for the Great Lakes Breeding Population was designated on May 7, 2001 (66 FR 22938

- 22969). Critical Habitat for the Northern Great Plains Breeding Population was designated on September 11, 200210

Although common during the 1800s, the piping plover was on the verge of extirpation by the 1890s and early

1900s due to market hunting and egg collecting. Protection afforded by the Migratory

Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and changing fashion trends allowed plover populations to gradually

recover during the 1920s and 1930s. However, since the late 1940s, coastal development and the elevated recreational use of beaches have caused pl over population declines. Human habitation along the shore has also resulted in elevated populations of many

mammalian and avian predators. In 1984, the piping plover was listed as an endangered species in New Jersey . The New Jersey Natural Heritage Pro gram considers the piping plover to be globally “very rare and local throughout its range,” and “criticall y imperiled in New Jersey because of extreme rarity”. In 1986, the Atlantic Coast piping plover population was listed as Threatened in the United States. A recovery goal of 2,000 pairs was set for the Atlantic Coast population, including 575 pairs in New Jersey and New York region. Another goal set b y the recovery

plan is to achieve a five

- ye ar average productivity of 1.5 fledged young per pair. Active monitoring and management of the birds by the ENSP are integral parts of federal recovery

efforts. Since its date of listing, the Atlantic Coast piping plover population has increased, growing from 790 pairs in 1986 to 1,386 pairs in 1999. As numbers have increased in New England during the 1980s and 1990s, the number of plovers nesting in New Jersey has remained essentially

stable at around 120 pairs. Due to its precarious existence, the piping plover remains one of New Jersey's most endangered spec ies. The threats that it faces, including increased beach recreation and predation, continue to act as serious impediments to the recovery

of this species. Without intense protection and management, it is unlikely that the piping plover would survive in New Jersey
. **Life History** Piping plovers begin returning to their Atlantic Coast nesting beaches in mid

- March. Males establish and defend territories and court females. Eggs may be present on the beach from mid

- April through late July . Clutch size is generall y four eggs, and the incubation period usuall y lasts for 27

- 28 day s. Piping plovers fledge onl y a single brood per season, but may

re - nest several times if previous nests are lost. Chicks develop fast. They may move hundreds of yards from the nest site during their first week of life. Chicks remain together with one or both parents until they fledge (able to fl y) at 25 to 35 days of age. Depending on date of hatching, flightless chicks may be present from mid

- May until late August, although most fledge b y the end of July. **Habitat** Piping plovers inhabit oceanfront beaches and barrier islands, ty picall y nesting on the stretch of beach between the dunes and the high

- tide line. Nests are often located in flat areas with shell fragments and sparse v egetation. The coloration of piping plovers and their eggs blend in remarkably with sand and broken pieces of shell. Sparse vegetation, such as American beach grass ( Ammophila breviligulata ) or sea rocket ( Cakile endentula ), is favored, as it provides cov er against predators and the elements. However, areas with11

dense vegetation, such as dunes, are avoided b y nesting plovers, since these sites provide cover for predators. During the nonbreeding season, piping plovers inhabit coastal beaches, barrier islands, inlets, sandflats, mudflats, and dredged material islands. Piping plovers forage on intertidal beaches, wash over areas, exposed mudflats and sandflats, wracklines, and shorelines. In the winter, all three populations inhabit beaches, mudflats, and sandflats along the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coasts. Birds from the Gulf Intercoastal Waterway also occupy barrier island beaches and spoil islands. **ROSEATE TERN (northeast U.S. pop.)** Sterna dougallii dougallii Family : Laridae Status: State

- Endange red, Federal

- Endangered (North Atlantic breeding population) **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/roseatetern.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.SpeciesProfile? spcode=B070 http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/rotefs.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** In North America, the roseate tern breeds in two discrete areas: from Nova Scotia to L ong Island, New York (northeastern pop ulation) and around the Caribbean Sea (including the Florida Keys). It is believed to winter in northern South America and along the Brazilian coast. The total world population was estimated in 1998 at approximately 40,000 pairs. Total northeastern population has recently fluctuated around 3,500 pairs, with a low of 3,125 in 1992, and a high of 3,775 in 1996; including 125 pairs in Canada. Various estimates placed Caribbean population at between 5,000 and 8,500 pairs in 1993 and the Florida breeding pop ulation at about 350 pairs in 1995. **Historical Information** The Roseate tern was first listed on November 02, 1987. It is currentl y designated as endangered in the U.S.A. (Atlantic Coast south to NC), Canada (Newf., N.S, Que.), and Bermuda. Within the area covered b y this listing, this species is known to occur in: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Virginia; and Canada (Newfoundland, N.S, Quebec). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region (R egion 5) is the lead region promoting conservation of this species. **Life History** The roseate tern is a medium

- sized, light colored tern with a dark cap and long tail. In breeding plumage, the adult has a black cap and nape, and a pale gray back and lowe r wing surface. Black tips on the outer primaries contrast with the otherwise pale upper surface of12

the wing. The tail is white and deepl y forked with long streamers. On perched birds, the tail extends beyond the wingtips. The bill is black with a dark red base. The legs and feet are dark red and the iris is brownish

- black. Sexes are alike in plumage. The non

- breeding adult has brown legs, a black bill, and a white forehead with a black mask extending from the eye to the nape. Roseate terns arrive o n the breeding grounds in late April or earl y May and begin nesting one month later. In New York, roseate terns are alway s found nesting with common terns. The nest may

be onl y a depression in sand, shell or gravel, and may be lined with bits of grass an d other debris. It is usually placed in dense grass clumps, or even under boulders or rip

- rap. Both adults incubate the eggs for about 23 day s, and the young fledge in 22

- 29 day s. One brood per season is ty pical, although two broods are sometimes produ ced. Migration begins in late summer. One banded individual from Great Gull I sland, New York was 9 ye ars old when recovered. **Habitat** The roseate tern is a coastal species that nests on barrier islands and salt marshes and forages over shallow coastal wat ers, inlets, and offshore seas. Nesting colonies are located above the high

- tide line, often within vegetated dunes where dense concentrations of beach grasses and seaside goldenrod (Solidago sempervirens ) provide cover. In comparison to other terns, ros eates nest at sites with more vegetative cover. Infrequentl y, they may nest in open areas, especially

when they

are displaced from optimal sites by gulls. **Reason for current status** Prior to 1890, the roseate tern nested along the New Jersey coast, althou gh it was not common. From the late 1800s to the earl y 1900s, roseate tern populations along the Atlantic Coast were greatly reduced as a result of the millinery trade, in which birds were killed to acquire plumes for women’s hats. The Migratory Bird Tre aty

Act of 1918, which afforded legal protection to all migratory birds, coupled with a change in fashion styles, reduced the pressure on roseate terns, enabling populations to reestablish and increase. Nesting roseate terns were observed at Hereford Inle t and Five Mile Beach in the 1930s and at Brigantine in the 1940s. However, b y the 1950s, populations again began to decline and continued to do so for several decades. Breeding roseate terns were documented in New Jersey

in the 1970s, when nesting pairs occurred at Little Egg Inlet, Brigantine, Sandy Hook, Holgate, and Barnegat Bay . The last nesting pair in the State was recorded in 1980. The decline of this species is attributed to unchecked development and high levels of recreational activity

along the barrier islands, which have resulted in habitat loss and disturbance to beach

- nesting birds. Due to severe population declines in the State, the roseate tern was listed as a threatened species in New Jersey

in 1979. Because of a drastic worldwide decl ine in its population, the roseate tern was reclassified as an endangered species in New Jersey in 1984. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service included the North Atlantic breeding population on its list of federally endangered species in 1987 because of decl ines resulting from human activity , gull competition, and predation. The New Jersey Natural Heritage Program considers the13

roseate tern to be a non

- breeding species in the state and globally “very rare and local throughout its range”. The National Audubo n Society included the roseate tern on its Blue List of Imperiled Species in 1972 and from 1979 to 1986, the final year of the list. Depressed roseate tern populations are evident throughout other northeastern states, where the species is listed as endang ered (Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Virginia), or threatened (Maine, New Hampshire).
**SHORTNOSE STURGEON** Acipenser brevirostrum Family : Acipenseridae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

– Endangered Sources http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/shnostur.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Within the area covered by this listing, this species is known to occur in: Connectic ut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, North Carolina, New Jersey , New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is the lead region f or this entity

. **Historical Information** The Shortnose sturgeon was first listed on March 11, 1967. It is currentl y designated as endangered in the entire range. **Life History** The shortnose sturgeon has a short and bluntly rounded snout, wide mouth, bar bels, numerous dorsal, lateral and ventral scutes (bony or horny plates), and a heterocercal tail (the upper lobe of the tail fin is larger and contains the upturned end of the spinal column). Ty pically , the body is yel lowish brown to nearl y black on the head, back and sides level to lateral plates, and whitish to yellowish below. Length at initial maturity for this species occurs between 45

- 55 cm fork length, from the snout to the middle of the tail (18

- 22 in.) for males and females. Maximum known fork lengths are nearl y 49 in. for a female and nearl y 39 in. for a male. In New Jersey, 28 tagged males ranged between 21 in. to nearly 35 in. fork length. The shortnose sturgeon's life history is complex. Much of its spawning behavior and earl y life stages are still not fully understood. The shortnose sturgeon is anadramous, migrating from salt water to spawn in freshwater. In the Hudson River, it spawns from April

- May
. Adult sturgeons migrate upriver from their mid

- Hudson overwintering areas to freshwat er spawning sites north of Coxsackie. Unlike most fish species, spawning is not a yearl y event for most shortnose sturgeon. Males spawn every other ye ar and females every third ye ar. Females lay

between 40,000

- 200,000 eggs which hatch in approximately 1 3 day s.14

Newl y- hatched fry

are poor swimmers and drift with the currents along the bottom. As they grow and mature, the fish move down

- river into the most brackish parts of the lower Hudson. Shortnose sturgeon are long

- lived. The oldest known female reac hed 67 ye ars of age and the oldest known male was 32. Shortnose sturgeons are bottom feeders, they eat sludge worms, aquatic insect larvae, plants, snails, shrimp, and crayfish using their barbels to locate food and their extendable mouths to vacuum it up

. **Habitat** River mouths, tidal rivers, estuaries, and bay s serve as prime habitat for the shortnose sturgeon. In addition, individuals occasionall y enter the open ocean. A significant portion of New Jersey's shortnose sturgeon occurs in the upper tidal D elaware River (Dadswell et al 1984). **Reason for current status** The shortnose sturgeon has been federally listed as endangered since the inception of the Endangered Species Act in 1973, when it was also considered endangered in New Jersey

. The Office of N atural Land's Management ranks the species as "rare in NJ” and "either very rare and local throughout its range or found locally in a restricted range or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extinction throughout its range." This species is af forded protection under both federal and state Endangered Species acts, Clean Water acts, fishing regulations, and environmental review of proposed development projects.
**NORTHEASTERN BEACH TIGER BEETLE** Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis Family : Cicindelidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

- Threatened **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/nebchtgrbeetle.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.SpeciesProfile? spcode=I02C http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/nbtbfs.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** This species is known to occur in: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey , Rhode I sland, and Virginia. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region (Region 5) is the lead region for this entity

. **Historical Information** The Northeastern beach tiger beetle was first listed on August 07, 1990. It is currentl y designated as threatened in the entire range.15

**Life Hist ory**  Northeastern beach tiger beetles have a full, two

- year life cycle. Adults emerge in late June, reach peak abundance b y mid

- July , and decline through earl y September. They feed, mate and bask at the water's edge on warm, sunny days. Some adults are also active on warm, calm evenings. High body heat is necessary for maximum predatory activity. Foraging occurs in the damp sand of the intertidal zone; prey species include lice, fleas, and flies. Adults also regularly scavenge dead crabs and fish. Mat ing and egg

- laying occur from late

- June through August. Females deposit their eggs in the sand after mating, higher up the beach in the dunes. Eggs hatch and larvae appear in late July and August. Larvae experience three developmental stages or "instars ." Most larvae reach the second instar by September and a few reach the third instar well into November, when larvae are still active. Most larvae overwinter as second instars. In the following ye ar, they

overwinter again as third instars. Overwinterin g occurs high up the beach, avoiding storms and wave activity . Both second and third instars emerge from winter inactivity

in mid

- March. Third instar larvae emerge, pupate in the bottom of their burrows, and re

- emerge as winged adults in June, two full years after the eggs were laid. Larvae live in vertical burrows located in the upper intertidal to high drift zone, where prey is most abundant. L arvae forage from their burrows, preying on passing insects. Their primary food sources are beach fleas, lice , flies and ants. Larvae are regularly covered during high tide; sand moisture is important. L arvae lack a hard shell and are subject to desiccation. They

avoid hot, dry

conditions. During the summer months they are inactive, going through a period of aestivation. With each successive stage of development, larvae grow in size and burrow deeper, going from 4 to 6

- 7 to 9

- 14 inches into the sand. Populations of tiger beetles normally experience very

high larval mortality and dramatic, two to three fold, ye ar - to
- ye ar fluctuations in abundance that sometimes result in local extinction. Weather factors such as flood tides, hurricanes, erosion and winter storms, mortality due to predators and parasites, and recreational beach use all contribute to the population declines. Natural enemies of adults include robber flies (Asilidae), birds and spiders. Larvae are preyed upon by parasitic, wingless wasps ( Methocha ), which lay

their eggs on the tiger beetle larvae. The larval wasps develop b y eating the larval tiger beetles. **Habitat** Although there are no definable indicators of northeastern beach tiger beetle habitat, this species is found on long, wide, dy namic, relatively undisturbed sandy beaches of the Atlantic Coast or Chesapeake Bay

. **Reasons For Current S tatus**  Listed as federall y threatened in 1990 and state endangered in 1991, the northeastern beach tiger beetle receives regulatory protection from both federal and state Endangered Species Acts. In addition, habitat protection is afforded through the Coas tal Areas Facilities Review Act and other coastal regulations. The Natural Heritage Program ranks the species as “critically

imperiled in New Jersey

because of extreme rarity ".16

Since 1994, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has supported studies designed to re
establish populations of the northeastern beach tiger beetle in the Northeast. Experiments to establish translocation techniques were conducted at the Gateway National Recreation Area, Sandy Hook b y researchers from Randolph

- Macon College in Virgin ia. During these studies, tiger beetle larvae from the Chesapeake Bay area were translocated to several beach sites within the recreation area and routinely monitored. Initial results from the experiments indicated that the translocation techniques empl oyed could be used to establish a population of northeastern beach tiger beetles at Sandy Hook and possibly at other sites in the Northeast. A program to reintroduce the species at Gateway National Recreation Area has been underway since 1997.
**DWARF WED GE**  **MUSSEL** Alasmidonta heterodon Family : Unionidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

– Endangered **Sources** http://www.fws.gov/endangered/i/f/saf12.html http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/mussels.pdf http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/dwmufs.html **Geo graphic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution**  Once known from about 70 Atlantic Slope river sy stems, the dwarf wedge mussel is now known from only

12 sites. Two of these populations have recentl y been discovered

- one in Nottoway

River, Virginia, and one on Neversink Creek (Delaware River drainage), New York. Four of the existing populations are located in North Carolina, one in L ittle River (Johnston County); another on the Tar River (Granville County); and two in tributaries of the Tar River (Franklin County). The remaining populations occur in Maryland, New Hanpshire, and Vermont. These locations are the Ashuelot River, Chesire County , New Hampshire; two Connecticut River reaches in Sullivan County , New Hampshire, and Windsor County , Vermont; McIntosh R un in St. Mary's County , Maryland; and two Tuckahoe Creek tributaries in Talbot, Queen Annes, and Caroline Counties, Maryland. Historically , this mussel occurred in 11 States and one Canadian province. It ranged from the Petitcodiac River s ys tem in New Brunswick, Canada south to the Neuse River Sy stem in North Carolina. Now, the dwarf wedge mussel is extirpated from both river s ys tems. Other former Southeastern river s ys tem sites include the Choptank River; the Rappahannock River; and the James River. Inthe Middle Atlantic States, the dwarf wedge inhabited the Hackensack River; the Delaware River; and the Susquehanna River s ys tems. New England habitat sites included the Taunton River, the Agawam River, the Merrimac River, the Connecticut River, and the Quinnipiac River sy stems. One other population from the Fort River in Hampshire County , Massachussetts, also appears extinct.17

**Historical Information** The dwarf wedge mussel was first listed on March 14, 1990. It is currentl y designated as endangered in the entire range. Within the area covered by this listing, this species is known to occur in: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey , New York, Penns yl vania, Virginia, Vermont; Canada (N.B.). **Life History** The dwarf wedge mussel is a rare freshwater mussel with a trapezoid

- to
- ovate or "humpbacked" shell rarely exceeding 1.5 in. in length. It is characterized by having two lateral teeth on the right valve of the shell, but only one on the left (thus the species name heterodon ). The ventral margin is mostly straight. The beaks are low and rounded, projecting onl y slightly above the hinge line. The periostracum, or outer shell, is dark brown or yellowish brown and often exhibits greenish rays in young mussels. Th e nacre, or inner shell, is bluish or silvery white. The dwarf wedge mussel once existed in 70 localities within 15 major Atlantic slope drainage basins from New Brunswick, Canada to North Carolina. Today

however, this species is thought to be extirpated from all but approximately

30 small sites in New Hampshire, Vermont, Maryland, North Carolina, New York, Connecticut, Virginia, and New Jersey. In New Jersey , the dwarf wedgemussel historicall y inhabited areas of the Delaware, Hackensack, and Passaic riv ers. These populations, however, are thought to be extirpated because of water quality degradation and other factors. There are onl y three known active state occurrences of this elusive species; the Paulins Kill, Pequest River, and a portion of the upper Delaware River. The dwarf wedge mussel is sexually dimorphic, with separate sexes, unlike some mussels that are hermaphroditic, with individuals having both male and female reproductive organs. Even so, the dimorphism is very subtle; routine determinati on of sex in dwarf wedge mussels is at best difficult. Male dwarf wedge mussels release sperm into the water column during the mid

- summer or fall. Females collect the sperm while siphoning water for food; the eggs are then fertilized and kept within the female until they are released the following spring. By

then, each egg has developed into a parasitic larva called a glochidium. After release from the female, the glochidium attaches itself to a fish with the aid of a small hook

- like appendage. Mussel glochidia are generally species

- specific and will only live if they

find the correct host. With dwarf wedge mussels, the right hosts are small bottom

- dwelling fish, the tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi) and the mottled sculpin ( Cottus bairdi). It appears that the glochidium receives little nutrition from the fish, but uses it only

as a means of dispersal. After several weeks, the glochidium detaches itself from the unharmed fish and drops to the river bottom. It is then a juvenile mussel. Many mussels have lifespans that range upwards of 20, 30 or even 100 ye ars. The dwarf wedge mussel is considerably different in this regard, though, as it appears to only live about 10 years. Adults must therefore be constantly replaced to maintain a viable po pulation.18

**Habitat** The dwarf wedge mussel inhabits creek and river areas with a slow to moderate current and a sand, gravel, or muddy bottom. Preferred habitat of the dwarf wedge mussel ranges from muddy

sand to sand and gravel/pebble bottoms in rivers and creeks with slow to moderate current. Favoring clean and relativel y shallow water with little silt deposition, this species is known to co

- occur with other freshwater mussels such as the eastern elliptio ( Elliptio complanata ), triangle floater ( Alasmid onta undulata ), creeper (Strophitus undulatus ), eastern floater ( Pyganodon cataracta ) and eastern lamp mussel ( Lampsilis radiata ). **Reasons For Current Status** Water pollution and the construction of impoundments are the primary threats to this mussel's survival. Increased acidity , caused by the mobilization of toxic metals by acid rain, is thought to be one of the chief causes of the species' extirpation from the Fort River in Massachussetts. One of the largest remaining populations has declined dramatically in the Ashuelot River, downstream of a golf course. This population probably has been affected b y fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers that have been applied to the golf course. Agricultural runoff from adjacent corn fields and pastu res also is contributing to this population's decline. Freshwater mussels, including the dwarf wedge, are sensitive to potassium, zinc, copper, cadmium, and other elements associated with industrial pollution. Industrial, agricultural, and domestic pollution is responsible for the dwarf wedge's disappearance from much of its historic range. To survive, the dwarf wedge needs an almost silt free environment with a slow to moderate current. The construction of dams alters these conditions. For example, mo st of the Connecticut River's main stem is now a series of impoundments. Upstream from each dam, heav y silt disposition, combined with low oxygen levels, has made the area unsuitable for mussels. Downstream of the dams, water level and temperature fluctu ations, caused by hy polimnetic discharges and intermittent power generation, have been stressful to the mussels. In some areas below the dams, the river banks have stabilized and the dwarf wedge's required substrate (sandy, gravel, or muddy) no longer exi sts. Another reason the species is declining is because its anadromous fish host has been blocked from some habitat areas. For example, the Petitcodiac River s ys tem in Canada still hosts several rare mussels, but the dwarf wedge has disappeared. Apparently a downstream water causeway , constructed since the species was last seen, has denied access to the fish host. Populations in the species' remaining range are suffering a decline in reproductive capacity

because of its low numbers and isolated populat ion distribution. **EASTERN PUMA (=COUGAR)** Felis concolor cougar Family : Felidae Status: Endangered19

**Source** http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/e acofs.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Historic records indicate that the eastern cougar once occurred from eastern Canada southward into Tennessee and South Carolina, where its range merged with that of the Florida panther (

F. c. cor yi). Present United States distribution is limited to only a few scattered areas at best. Recentl y there have been some sightings reported in Minnesota and Michigan. These individuals are believed to have originated from around New Brunswick or Manatoba, C anada. In the Southeast Region, there have been a number of sightings, but the best evidence for a small permanent population has come from the Great Smoky Mountain National Park Region. Based on a National Park Service study that included both sighting reports and field observations, there were an estimated three to six cougars living in the park in 1975. Sightings have also be reported in three other North Carolina areas including the Nantahala National Forest, the northern portion of the Uwharrie National Forest, and the State's southeastern counties. The remaining population of this species is extremely

small; exact numbers are unknown. **Historical Information** The Eastern puma (=cougar) was first listed on June 4, 1973. It is currently designated as e ndangered in the entire range. Within the area covered by this listing, this species is known to occur in: Connecticut, District of Columbia, Delaware, Il linois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina, New Hampshire, N ew Jersey , New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, and West Virginia. It is presumed to be extinct in wild **Life History** Females mate every

two to three years and produce a litter of two to three cubs. Th ere is no set breeding season, however most births are in the spring. At six months of age, the cubs weigh 30

- 40 pounds. They leave the den at this time, accompanying the female to her kills and occasionally hunting with her individually . A young male m ay leave at one ye ar of age, but most cubs remain until they are nearly

two. The average life span for pumas is about eight ye ars. Adult pumas have no natural enemies, onl y man with his hunting dogs. Prey species include deer, elk, occasionall y domestic l ivestock, and any smaller mammals which opportunity

makes available. The preferred meat is deer. Pumas kill about a deer a week. Like wolves, cougars often kill old, weak or sick individuals, leaving the prey population in a healthier overall condition. Pumas are solitary , territorial hunters. **Habitat** No preference for specific habitat ty pes has been noted. The primary need is apparentl y for a large wilderness area with an adequate food supply . Male cougars of other subspecies have been observed to occupy a range of 25 or more square miles, and females from 5 to 20 square miles.20

**Reasons For Current Status** The eastern cougar has been hunted and trapped relentlessly as a pest. Much of its habitat has been eliminated through extensive deforestation, and its primary prey , the white

- tailed deer, has suffered significant population and range reductions.
**FIN WHALE**  Balaenoptera physalus Family : Balaenopteridae Status: Federal

– Endangered **Sources** http://animaldiversity .ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Balaenoptera_phy salus. html http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/whales.pdf http://www.arkive.org/species/GES/mammals/Balaenoptera_phys alus/more_info.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** The finb wh ale is global in distribution but is not common in tropical seas and polar seas with ice. **Historical Information** The Fin whale was first listed on June 02, 1970. It is currentl y designated as endangered in the entire range. Within the area covered b y thi s listing, this species is known to occur in: Alaska, Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey , New York, Puerto Rico, Rhode I sland, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and the Virgin Islands. **Life History** Fin whales tend to occur in pairs or in groups known as pods that usually contain around 6 or 7 individuals; although large groups of about 300 individuals have been observed. This species spends spring and earl y summer in cold feeding grounds at high latitudes, migrating to more southerly areas for winter and the breeding season. Northern and southern populations never meet because the seasonal patterns are reversed in the two hemispheres , and so they migrate to the equator at different times of ye ar. Mating takes place in winter, and as gestation takes about 12 months, births occur in the winter breeding grounds where conception took place. A single calf is produced, which is suckled fo r 6 to 7 months; when weaned, calves travel with their mother to the feeding grounds. Females produce calves every

couple of years after reaching sexual maturity at 3 to 12 years of age. Full maturity

is usuall y attained at 25 to 30 years of age. Fin wh ales feed b y filtering planktonic crustaceans, fish and squid through their baleen plates. Individuals can dive to depths of 230 m and can stay submerged for about 15 minutes. The blow of a fin whale reaches 6 m in height and is a slim cone shape.21

**Habitat** The fin whale is global in distribution but is not common in tropical seas and polar seas with ice.
**RIGHT WHALE** Eubalaena glacialis Family : Balaenopteridae Status: Federal

– Endangered **Sources** http://animaldiversity .ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Eubalaena_glacialis.htm l http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/whales.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/frdocs/1994/94

- 13500.html http://www.whalecenter.org/species.htm#right **Geographic Boundaries a nd Spatial Distribution**  Northern right whales were once found throughout the Northern Hemisphere. These whales inhabit the temperate and subpolar waters of the North Atlantic and north Pacific oceans. In the North Pacific they are found from about 25 to 60 degrees north and in the North Atlantic from about 30 to 75 degrees north. Northwest Atlantic populations occur from Iceland to the Gulf of Mexico, with largest concentrations occurring between Nova Scotia, Canada, and Florida. Winter calving grounds occur off the coasts of Florida and Georgia. Right whales move from subpolar regions with the onset of winter to lower latitudes, staying near landmasses. Some good areas to see them are from Cape Cod north to the Bay of Fundy, Nova Scotia and Grand Manan I sland, New Brunswick. Northern Pacific populations are isolated from Northern Atlantic populations and are geneticall y distinct. These populations are sometimes referred to as Eubalaena japonica , Northern Pacific right whales, and occur from the south eastern Bering Sea to the Okhotsk Sea off western Russia. Northern Pacific populations may be more closel y related to southern right whales, Eubalaena australis , than to Northern Atlantic populations of northern right whales (Northern Atlantic right whale s). **Critical Habitat** The designated habitat includes portions of Cape Cod Bay and Stellwagen Bank, the Great South Channel (off the coast of Massachusetts), and waters adjacent to the coasts of Georgia and the east coast of Florida.22

**Historical Informati on**  The right whale was first listed on June 2, 1970. It is currently designated as endangered in the entire range. Within the area covered b y this listing, this species is known to occur in: Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Marylan d, Maine, North Carolina, New Jersey , New York, Rhode Is land, South Carolina, Virginia; and Oceanic. **Life History** As long as 16.2 m (53 ft.), the right whale is large and rotund, with mottled brown to nearl y black coloring. Both chin and belly show some white, while the dark brownish to dark gray or black baleen plates are long (up to 8 feet) and black

- although they might look pale yellowish gray

far offshore. The highly arched jaw curves upward. The head and sometimes the lips are characterized by a series of bumps called callosities; these are naturally gray but appear yellow or white because of massive infestation by whale

- lice (cyamids). The pattern of callosities can be used to identify individuals; the bonnet, the biggest of these bumps, is located just in front of two large blowholes. The right whale has no dorsal ridge or fin. Broad flukes, which are dark underneath, have pointed tips that are very concave toward a deep notch. Its blow is V

- shaped when seen from ahead or behind (Audubon 1983 ). Like humpback whales, there appears to be a seasonal migration for at least a portion of the population from cold water summer feeding grounds to warmer water winter breeding grounds. However, there may also be a substantial portion of the population that does not migrate as extensively , and may spend the full year in colder waters. In the North Atlantic, whales summer in the Bay of Fundy and Nova Scotian shelf; pregnant females and juveniles then move to coastal Georgia and Florida for calving. Some right whales spend the late winter and earl y spring feeding in Cape Cod Bay and the Great South Channel on George's Bank. Distribution in the North Pacific is largel y unknown, and sightings are uncommon. In the southern hemisphere, whales probably feed below the Antarctic convergence, and move to coastal breeding grounds off Australia, South Africa, and South America. **Habitat** Depending on the time of year and which hemisphere they're found, right whales will spend much of their time near bay s and penins ulas and in shallow, coastal waters. This can provide shelter, food abundance, and security for females rearing young or avoiding the mating efforts of males. Four critical habitats for northern right whales are the Browns
- Baccaro Bank, Bay of Fundy , Gre at South Channel, and the Cape Cod Bay . High densities of copepod populations occur in all of these habitats. The first three have deep basins (150 m) flanked by relativel y shallow water. Copepods are concentrated here because of convergences and upwell ings driven b y tidal currents. This also occurs in the Cape Cod Bay

even though a deep basin is not present. **Reasons For Current Status** Northern right whales tend to move through the ocean at a fairly slow pace for an animal of their size, they

feed near the surface, and they float when killed; thus they were23

considered the "right" catch for whalers. Hunting of right whales began as earl y as the 10th century . These whales were hunted extensively during the 19th century , with as many as 100,000 whales sl aughtered during this time. Right whales were driven close to extinction early

in the 20th century

and were one of the first whales to be given international protection in 1935. At the first international Convention for the Regulation of Whaling in 1935, a total ban on hunting right whales was established. The protection of this species was broadened in 1972 with the passing of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. A major issue revolving around the conservation of the right whale is habitat modification. Especiall y since they use shallow coastal lagoons and bay s for breeding. Their numbers are stable and may even be increasing slightly in the Northwest Atlantic and off South Africa. The most current population estimate of 295 whales may represent the app roximate carrying capacity . The carrying capacity could be increased though if collisions with ships and entanglement in fishing gear were decreased. It may be decades before the health of the right whale population is recovered. A recovery plan has been established with the difficult duty of managing a species that is hard to track. Luckil y, activity modifications are taking place by people like the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Navy , ship traffic controllers in major shipping lanes, and others. Funding is alway s a major obstacle but support is being sought by individual institutions, states, and relevant sectors of the federal government.
**HUMPBACK WHALE** Megaptera novaeangliae Family : Balaenopteridae Status: Federal

– Endangered **Sources** http://animaldiversity .ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Megaptera_novaeanglia e.html http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/whales.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.S peciesProfile? spcode=A02Q http://www.whalecenter.org/species.htm **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Humpback whales live in polar and tropical waters, particularl y those of the Atlantic, Arctic, and Pacific Oceans. Their range also includes the waters of the Bering Sea and the waters surrounding Antarctica. **Historical Information** The Humpback whale was first listed on June 2, 1970. It is currentl y designated as endangered in the entire r ange. Within the area covered b y this listing, this species is known to occur in Alaska, Alabama, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Jersey , New York, Oregon, Rhode I sland, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.24

**Life History** These whales, which reach lengths of 16.2 m (53 ft.), have broad, rapidly tapering bodies that are primarily

black. Their bellies are sometimes white, and in the North Atlantic the flip pers are usually

white both ventrally

and dorsally

(or top and bottom). Their baleen plates are black, with black or olive

- black bristles. Both the top of their heads and lower jaws are dotted with randomly placed flesh y knobs. The lower jaw also has a rounded projection on its tip. The long flippers are the most distinctive feature of this whale, since at one
- third the body

length they

exceed those of any

other species; they

have scalloped leading edges. The dorsal fin is highly variable in shape and size, from almost absent to high and falcate; it is located on a small hump a little more than two thirds of the way back. Finally , their concave, deeply notched flukes have scalloped rear edges. The pattern on the underside of the tail varies from all white to all black; each pattern is individually distinctive, allowing researchers to identify and track individual whales. The humpback's blow is often wide and balloon

- shaped, although it can be tall and columnar in larger animals. Humpback whales are b orn during the winter, at approximately 10

- 12 feet in length and 2,000 pounds in weight, after an 11

- month gestation. They are ty picall y weaned in the northern hemisphere during the following December or January . During its first year of life the mother seems to lead her calf through a series of locations where it learns to find food. While the calf also learns how to feed on fish during its first year (both through observing the mother, other animals, and practicing), it nurses on rich milk, gaining up to 60 pounds per day . The father play s no role in parental care. After leaving its mother, the now - juvenile whale generally

stay s in habitats of medium quality (with limited food supplies) for the next several ye ars. Growth seems to occur in two major p eriods, one during the first year and one at 3

- 4 years of age. Females may have their first calf as earl y as five, and as late as ten years of age; six to eight is most common. Females typically have one calf every

two to four years. Males appear to be phy sicall y mature at close to the same age, they

probabl y do not get to breed until much later in life. Expected life span is 40

- 50 years. **Habitat** The habitat of humpback whales consists of polar to tropical waters, including the waters of the Artic, Atl antic, and Pacific Oceans, as well as the waters surrounding Antarctica and the Bering Strait. During migration, they are found in coastal and deep oceanic waters. Generally , they

do not come into coastal waters until they reach the latitudes of L ong Isl and, New York, and Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Humpbacks are divided into several populations. These are for the most part isolated, but with a little interchange in some cases. There are two stocks in the North Atlantic Ocean and two in the North Pacific. There are also seven isolated stocks in the southern hemisphere.25

**Reasons For Current Status** Widespread in Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, and Southern oceans; populations were greatl y reduced b y historical commercial whaling; approximately 102,000

- 122,000 remain from pre - exploitation levels of over 450,000. They are also threatened by

general deterioration of the marine ecos ys tem.
**HAWKSBILL SEA TURTLE** Eretmochelys imbricata Family : Cheloniidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

- Endangered **Sources** http://animaldiversity .ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Eretmochely s_imbricata .html http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.SpeciesProfile? spcode=C00E http://www.fws.gov/northflorida/SeaTurtles/Turtle%20Factsheets/hawksbill

- sea - turtle.htm **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** The hawksbill is found in tropical and subtropical regions of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. The species is widely distributed in the Caribbean Sea and western Atlantic Ocean. In contrast to all other sea turtle species, hawksbills nest in low densities on scattered small beaches. The Gulf and Caribbean coasts of the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico, where hawksbills nest on long expanses of beach in densities of 20 to 30 nests/km, are exceptions. The hawksbill sea turtle has experienced global population declines of 80 percent or more during the past century and continued declines are projected. Most populations are declining, depleted, or remnants of larger aggregations. Only five regional populations remain with more than 1,000 females nesting annually (Seychelles, Mexico, Indonesia, and two in Australia). About 15,000 females are estimated to nes t each ye ar throughout the world with the Caribbean accounting for 20 to 30 percent of the world’s hawksbill population. Panama, which used to support the single most important nesting population in the Caribbean, is only a remnant population. Mexico is now the most important region for hawksbills in the Caribbean with 3,000 to 4,500 nests/year. Other significant but smaller populations in the Caribbean still occur in Martinique, Jamaica, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Grenada, Dominican Republic, Turks and Caico s I slands, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin I slands. In the U.S. Caribbean, about 100 to 350 nests/year are laid on Mona Island, Puerto Rico, and 60 to 120 nests/year on Buck Island Reef National Monument, U.S. Virgin I slands. In the U.S. Pacific, hawk sbills nest only on main island beaches in Hawaii, primarily along the east coast of the island of Hawaii. Hawksbill nesting has also been documented in American Samoa and Guam. **Critical Habitat** 50 CFR 17.95 Puerto Rico: Critical habitat includes (1) Isl a Mona, all areas of beachfront on the west, south, and east sides of the island from mean high tide inland to a point 15026

meters from shore; (2) Culebra Island, the following areas of beachfront on the north shore of the island from mean high tide to a po int 150 meters from shore: Playa Resaca, Playa Brava, and Playa Larga; (3) Cayo Norte, south beach, from mean high tide inland to a point 150 meters from shore; (4) Island Culebrita, all beachfront areas on the southwest facing shore, east facing shore, an d northwest facing shore of the island from mean high tide inland to a point 150 meters from shore. 50 CFR 226.209 Mona and Monito I slands, Puerto Rico

– critical habitat includes waters surrounding the islands of Mona and Monito, from the mean high water line seaward to 3 nautical miles (5.6 km). **Historical Information** The hawksbill sea turtle was first listed on June 2, 1970. It is currentl y designated as endangered in the entire range. Within the area covered b y this listing, this species is known to occur in: Alabama, American Samoa, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, L ouisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Northern Mariana Is lands, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Jersey , New York, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vi rginia, Virgin Islands; and Palau,tropical seas. **Life History** The hawksbill is a small to medium

- sized marine turtle having an elongated oval shell with overlapping scutes on the carapace, a relativel y small head with a distinctive hawk

- like beak, and flippers with two claws. General coloration is brown with numerous splashes of ye llow, orange, or reddish

- brown on carapace. The plastron is yellowish with black spots on the intergular and postanal scutes. Juveniles are black or very dark brown with light brown or yellow coloration on the edge of the shell, limbs, and raised ridges of the carapace. As an adult, the hawksbill may reach up to 3 feet in length and weigh up to 300 pounds, although adults more commonly average about 21⁄2 feet in length and weigh between 95 to 165 pounds. It is the onl y sea turtle with a combination of two pairs of prefrontal scales on the head and four pairs of costal scutes on the carapace. The hawksbill feeds primarily

on sponges and is most often associated with the coral re ef community

. The nesting season varies with locality , but in most locations nesting occurs sometime between April and November. Hawksbills nest at night and, on average, about 4.5 times per season at intervals of approximately 14 day s. In Florida and the U.S. Caribbean, clutch size is approximately

140 eggs, although several records exist of over 200 eggs per nest. Remigration intervals of 2 to 3 years predominate. The incubation period averages 60 day s. Hawksbills are recruited into the reef environment at about 35 cm in length and are believed to begin breeding about 30 ye ars later. However, the time required to reach 35 cm in length is unknown and growth rates vary geographicall y. As a result, actual age at sexual maturity

is not known. **Habitat** Hawksbills frequent rocky areas, coral reefs, shallow coastal areas, lagoons or oceanic islands, and narrow creeks and passes. They are seldom seen in water deeper than 65 feet. Hatchlings are often found floating in masses of sea plants, and nesting may occur on27

almost any

undisturbed deep

- sand beach in the tropics. Adult females are able to climb over reefs and rocks to nest in beach vegetation. **Reasons For Current Status** The decline of this species is primarily due to human exploitation for tortoises hell. While the legal hawksbill shell trade ended when Japan agreed to stop importing shell in 1993, a significant illegal trade continues. In addition, there are serious attempts by Cuba, with support from other countries, to downlist hawksbills in Cuba to Appendix 2 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora in order to make it possible to reopen trade with Japan and possibly other countries. Other threats include loss or degradation of nesting habitat from c oastal development and beach armoring; disorientation of hatchlings b y beachfront lighting; excessive nest predation by native and non

- native predators; degradation of foraging habitat; marine pollution and debris; watercraft strikes; and incidental take f rom commercial fishing operations.
**KEMP’S RIDLEY SEA TURTLE** Lepidochelys kempi Family : Cheloniidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

- Endangered **Sources** http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.SpeciesProfile? spcode=C00O http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/marinetrtls.pdf http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/species/turtles/kemps.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** The major nesting beach for Kemp's ridley s is on the northeastern coast of Mexico. This location is near Rancho Nuevo in southern Tamaulipas. The species occurs mainly in coastal areas of the Gulf of Mexico and the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean. **Critical Habitat** None designated **Historical Information** The Kemp's ridley

sea turtle was first listed on December 2, 1970. It is currently designated as endangered in the entire range. Within the area covered b y this listing, this species is known to occur in: Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Lo uisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Jersey , New York, Rhode I sland, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia; Mexico

- Atlantic Coast, and tropical and temperate waters in Atlantic Basin.28

**Life History** The Kemp's ridley

and olive ridle y s ea turtles are the smallest of all extant sea turtles, with the weight of an adult generall y being less than 45 kg and the straight carapace length around 65 cm. Adult Kemp's ridley s' shells are almost as wide as long. Coloration changes significantl y during development from the grey

- black carapace and plastron of hatchlings to the lighter grey

- olive carapace and cream

- white or yellowish plastron of adults. There are two pairs of prefrontal scales on the head, five vertebral scutes, five pairs of coast al scutes and generall y twelve pairs of marginals on the carapace. In each bridge adjoining the plastron to the carapace, there are four scutes, each of which is perforated by a pore. This is the external opening of Rathke's gland which secretes a substa nce of unknown (possibly a pheromone) function. Males resemble the females in size and coloration. Secondary

sexual characteristics of male sea turtles include a longer tail, more distal vent, recurved claws and, during breeding, a softened mid

- plastron. Eggs are 34

- 45 mm in diameter and 24

- 40 g in weight. Hatchlings range from 42

- 48 mm in straight line carapace length, 32

- 44 mm in width and 15

- 20 g in weight. Neonatal Kemp's ridley s feed on the available sargassum and associated infauna or other epip elagic species found in the Gulf of Mexico. In post

- pelagic stages, the ridley is largel y a crab

- eater, with a preference for portunid crabs. Age at sexual maturity is not known, but is believed to be approximately 7
- 15 years, although other estimates of age at maturity range as high as 35 years. **Habitat** Unlike land turtles from which they evolved more than 150 million years ago, sea turtles spend almost their entire lives in the sea. When active, they often come to the surface to breathe, but can remain underwater for several hours at a time while resting. Preferred estuarine habitat of sea turtles

-- deeper or shallower water

-- directly relates to their preferred diet. Adult green turtles are herbivores, or plant eaters. All the other sea turtles are either carnivores (meat

- eaters) or omnivores that eat both plant matter and meat. **Reasons For Current Status** It is estimated that before the implementation of TEDs, the commercial shrimp fleet killed 500

- 5000 Kemp's ridley s each ye ar. Besides shrimp traw ls, Kemp's ridleys have been taken in pound nets, trawls, gill nets, hook and line, crab traps, and longlines. Beginning in 1976, the U.S. and Mexican governments agreed to phase out U.S. shrimping in Mexican waters b y 1979. U.S. shrimp vessels continued to illegally operate off Mexico through the mid 1980s. The Mexican shrimp fleet has declined and consists of only approximately

600 vessels, many

of which do not operate. Also since 1978, Mexico has closed the nearshore waters off Rancho Nuevo to fishin g during the nesting season. However, this closure has not been strictly enforced. The Gulf of Mexico is an area of high density offshore oil extraction with chronic low

level spills and occasional massive spills. The two primary feeding grounds for ad

ult Kemp's ridley

turtles in the northern and southern Gulf of Mexico are both near major areas of near shore and offshore oil exploration and production. The nesting beach at29

Rancho Nuevo is also vulnerable and has been affected b y oil spills. The vast amount of floating debris in the Gulf of Mexico constitutes an increasingl y serious threat to Kemp's ridley turtles of all ages. Plastics, monofilament, discarded netting and many other waste items are either eaten b y Kemp's ridley s or become death traps when the turtles become entangled. Injestion of plastic, rubber, fishing line and hooks, tar, cellophane, rope amd string, wax, sty

rofoam, charcoal, aluminum cans and cigarette filters has occurred in sea turtles. NMFS is currently analyzing stranding dat a and available necrops y information to determine the magnitude of debris ingestion and entanglement. Dredging operations affect Kemp's ridley turtles through incidental take and by degrading the habitat. Incidental take of ridley s has been documented with hopper dredges. In addition to direct take, channelization of the inshore and nearshore areas can degrade foraging and migratory

habitat through spoil dumping, degraded water quality /clarity and altered current flow.
**LEATHERBACK SEA TURTLE** Dermoch elys coriacea Family : Cheloniidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

– Endangered **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/marinetrtls.pdf http://www.fws.gov/northflorida/SeaTurtles/Turtle%20Factsheets/leatherback

- sea turtle.htm http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/species/turtles/leatherback.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** The leatherback turtle is distributed worldwide in tropical and temperate waters of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. It is al so found in small numbers as far north as British Columbia, Newfoundland, and the British Isles, and as far south as Australia, Cape of Good Hope, and Argentina. Recent estimates of global nesting populations indicate 26,000 to 43,000 nesting females annu ally , which is a dramatic decline from the 115,000 estimated in 1980. This is due to exponential declines in leatherback nesting that have occurred over the last two decades along the Pacific coasts of Mexico and Costa Rica. The Mexico leatherback nestin g population, once considered to be the world’s largest leatherback nesting population (65 percent of worldwide population), is now less than one percent of its estimated size in 1980. The largest nesting populations now occur in the western Atlantic in F rench Guiana (4,500 to 7,500 females nesting/year) and Colombia (estimated several thousand nests annually), and in the western Pacific in West Papua (formerl y Irian Jaya) and Indonesia (about 600 to 650 females nesting/year). In the United States, small nesting populations occur on the Florida east coast (35 females/year), Sandy Point, U.S. Virgin I slands (50 to 100 females/ye ar), and Puerto Rico (30 to 90 females/ye ar).30

**Critical Habitat** 50 CFR 17.95 U.S. Virgin I slands

- critical habitat includes a strip of land 0.2 miles wide (from mean high tide inland) at Sandy Point Beach on the western end of the island of St. Croix beginning at the southwest cape to the south and running 1.2 miles northwest and then northeast along the western and northern shorelin e, and from the southwest cape 0.7 miles east along the southern shoreline. 50 CFR 226.207

- critical habitat includes the waters adjacent to Sandy Point, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin islands, up to and inclusive of the waters from the hundred fathom curve shoreward to the level of mean high tide with boundaries at 17°42’12" North and 64°50’00" West. **Historical Information** Endangered throughout its range ( Federal Register , June 2, 1970). **Life History** The leatherback is the largest, deepest diving, and most migratory and wide ranging of all sea turtles. The adult leatherback can reach 4 to 8 feet in length and 500 to 2000 pounds in weight. Its shell is composed of a mosaic of small bones covered b y firm, rubbery skin with seven longitudinal ridges or keels. The skin is predominantly black with varying degrees of pale spotting; including a notable pink spot on the dorsal surface of the head in adults. A toothlike cusp is located on each side of the gray upper jaw; the lower jaw is hooked anteriorl y. The paddl e - like clawless limbs are black with white margins and pale spotting. Hatchlings are predominantly black with white flipper margins and keels on the carapace. Jellyfish are the main staple of its diet, but it is also known to feed on sea urchins, squid, crustaceans, tunicates, fish, blue

- green algae, and floating seaweed. In the United States, nesting occurs from about March to July . Female leatherbacks nest an average of 5 to 7 times within a nesting season, with an observed maximum of 11 nests. The average internesting interval is about 9 to 10 day s. The nests are constructed at night in clutches of about 70 to 80 yolked eggs. The white spherical eggs are approximately 2 inches in diameter. Ty

pically incubation takes from 55 to 75 day s, and emergen ce of the hatchlings occurs at night. Most leatherbacks remigrate to their nesting beaches at 2 to 3

- ye ar intervals. Leatherbacks are believed to reach sexual maturity in 6 to 10 years. **Habitat** The leatherback is the most pelagic of the sea turtles. Ad ult females require sandy nesting beaches backed with vegetation and sloped sufficiently so the crawl to dry

sand is not too far. The preferred beaches have proximity to deep water and generall y rough seas. Leatherbacks can dive to more than 3,000 feet b elow sea level (US FWS sea turtles). Preferred estuarine habitat of sea turtles

-- deeper or shallower water

-- directly relates to their preferred diet. Adult green turtles are herbivores, or plant eaters. All the other sea turtles are either carnivores or omnivores that eat both plant matter and meat.31

**Reasons For Current Status** The crash of the Pacific leatherback population, once the world’s largest population, is believed primaril y to be the result of exploitation by humans for the eggs and meat, as wel l as incidental take in numerous commercial fisheries of the Pacific. Other factors threatening leatherbacks globall y include loss or degradation of nesting habitat from coastal development; disorientation of hatchlings by beachfront lighting; excessive n est predation b y native and non

- native predators; degradation of foraging habitat; marine pollution and debris; and watercraft strikes.
**LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLE** Caretta caretta Family : Cheloniidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

– Threatened **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/marinetrtls.pdf http://www.fws.gov/northflorida/SeaTurtles/Turtle%20Factsheets/loggerhead

- sea turtle.htm **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** The loggerhead sea turtle occurs throughout the temperate and tropical regions of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. However, the majority of loggerhead nesting is at the western rims of the Atlantic and Indian oceans. The most recent reviews show that only two loggerhead nesting beaches have greater than 10,000 females nesting per year: South Florida (U.S.) and Masirah (Oman). Those beaches with 1,000 to 9,999 females nesting each ye ar are North Florida through North Carolina (U.S.), Cape Verde Islands (Spain, eastern Atlantic off Africa), and Western Australia (Australia). Smaller nesting aggregations with 100 to 99 9 nesting females annually occur in Northwest Florida (U.S.), Cay Sal Bank (Bahamas), Quintana Roo and Yucatán (Mexico), Sergipe and Northern Bahia (Brazil), Southern Bahia to Rio de Janerio (Brazil), Tongaland (South Africa), Mozambique, Arabian Sea Coast (Oman), Halaniyat Islands (Oman), Cy prus, Peloponnesus (Greece), Island of Zakynthos (Greece), Turkey, and Queensland (Australia). Although the major nesting concentrations in the United States are found in South Florida, loggerheads nest from Texas to V irginia. Total estimated nesting in the U.S. is approximately

68,000 to 90,000 nests/year. About 80 percent of loggerhead nesting in the southeastern U.S. occurs in six Florida counties (Brevard, Indian River, St. Lucie, Martin, Palm Beach, and Broward C ounties). Adult loggerheads are known to make considerable migrations between foraging areas and nesting beaches. During non

nesting ye ars, adult females from U.S. beaches are distributed in waters off the eastern U.S. and throughout the Gulf of Mexico, Bahamas, Greater Antilles, and Yucatán. Genetic research involving anal ys is of mitochondrial DNA has identified five different loggerhead nesting subpopulations in the western North Atlantic: (1) the Northern Subpopulation occurring from North Carolina through Northeast Florida; (2) South Florida32

Subpopulation occurring from just north of Cape Canaveral on Florida’s east coast and extending up to around Sarasota on Florida’s west coast; (3) Dry Tortugas, Florida, Subpopulation, (4) Northwest Florida Subpop ulation occurring on Florida’s Panhandle beaches; and (5) Yucatán Subpopulation occurring on the eastern Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico. These data indicate that gene flow between these five regions is very low. If nesting females are extirpated from one of th ese regions, regional dispersal will not be sufficient to replenish the depleted nesting subpopulation. The South Florida Subpopulation has shown significant increases over the last 25 years, indicating that the population has progressed toward recovery

. However, an anal ys is of nesting data for the ye ars 1989

- 2002, a period encompassing index survey s that are more consistent than survey s in previous ye ars, has shown no detectable trend. Past increases in South Florida loggerhead nesting are likely to hav e slowed. No long

- term trends are available for the Northern Subpopulation, although researchers have documented substantial declines in nesting on some beaches since the earl y 1970s. From 1989

- 1998, no nesting trends were detectable for North Carolina, South Carolina, or Georgia. However, nests in Northeast Florida may

be increasing, although data were too variable to detect a significant trend. Nesting survey s in the Dry Tortugas, Northwest Florida, and Yucatán subpopulations have been too irregular t o date to allow for a meaningful trend anal ys is. **Critical Habitat** None designated. **Historical Information** Threatened throughout its range ( Federal Register , July

28, 1978). **Life History** The loggerhead is characterized by a large head with blunt jaws. The carapace and flippers are a reddish

- brown color; the plastron is yellow. The carapace has five pairs of costal scutes with the first touching the nuchal scute. There are three large inframarginal scutes on each of the bridges between the plastron and carapace. Adults grow to an average weight of about 200 pounds. The species feeds on mollusks, crustaceans, fish, and other marine animals. The United States nesting season extends from about May through August with nesting occurring primarily

at night . Loggerheads are known to nest from one to seven times within a nesting season (mean is about 4.1 nests per season) at intervals of approximately 14 day s. Mean clutch size varies from about 100 to 126 along the southeastern United States coast. Incubation ranges from about 45 to 95 day s, depending on incubation temperatures, but averages 55 to 60 days for most clutches in Florida. Hatchlings generall y em erge at night. Remigration intervals of 2 to 3 years are most common in nesting loggerheads, but remigration can vary from 1 to 7 years. Age at sexual maturity is believed to be about 20 to 30 years.33

**Habitat** The loggerhead is widel y distributed within its range. Itmay be found hundreds of miles out to sea, as well as in inshore areas such as bay s, lagoons, salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and the mouths of large rivers. Coral reefs, rocky places, and ship wrecks are often used as feeding areas. L oggerheads nest on ocean beaches and occasionally on estuarine shorelines with suitable sand. Nest s are ty pically made between the high tide line and the dune front. Most loggerhead hatchlings originating from U.S. beaches are believed to lead a pelagic existence in the North Atlantic gy re for an extended period of time, perhaps as long as 10 to 12 ye ars, and are best known from the eastern Atlantic near the Azores and Madeira. Post

- hatchlings have been found floating at sea in association with Sargassum rafts. Once they reach a certain size, these juvenile loggerheads begin recruiting to coastal are as in the western Atlantic where they become benthic feeders in lagoons, estuaries, bay s, river mouths, and shallow coastal waters. These juveniles occupy coastal feeding grounds for a decade or more before maturing and making their first reproductive migration, the females returning to their natal beach to nest. **Reasons For Current Status** Threats include loss or degradation of nesting habitat from coastal development and beach armoring; disorientation of hatchlings b y beachfront lighting; excessive nest predation by native and non

- native predators; degradation of foraging habitat; marine pollution and debris; watercraft strikes; disease; and incidental take from channel dredging and commercial trawling, longline, and gill net fisheries. There is particula r concern about the extensive incidental take of juvenile loggerheads in the eastern Atlantic b y longline fishing vessels from several countries.
**BOG TURTLE** Clemmys muhlenbergii Family : Em ydidae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

– Threatened **Sources** http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/ensp/pdf/end

- thrtened/bogtrtl.pdf http://animaldiversity .ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Clemmy s_muhlenbergii. html http://ecos.fws.gov/species_profile/servlet/gov.doi.species_profile.servlets.SpeciesProfile? spcode=C048 http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Clemmy s+muhlen bergii http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/botufs.html **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Bog turtles occup y a highly discontinuous and fragmented range in th e eastern United States of America; within this range they tend occur in small, often widely separated colonies. For management purposes two general "populations" are often recognized

- a34

northern population from eastern New York and western Massachusett s south through southeastern Penns yl vania and New Jersey to northern Maryland and Delaware (with outliers in north

- central New York and western Pennsylvania), and a southern population (generally at higher elevations, up to 4000 feet) from southern Virgini a, western North Carolina, and eastern Tennessee to extreme northeastern Georgia. There are no reliable morphological differences between bog turtles in these designated populations. The bog turtle is one of the most endangered turtle species in North Am erica.. **Historical Information** Due to population declines, restricted habitat preference, habitat loss, and collecting, the bog turtle was listed as an endangered species in New Jersey in 1974. Declining throughout its range, this turtle is also listed as threatened in Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia and endangered in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Virginia. In 1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service included the bog turtle on its list of federal ly threatened species. The New Jersey Natural Heritage Program considers the bog turtle to be, “globall y, either very rare and local throughout its range or found locally in a restricted range or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extinction throughout its range,” and, “imperiled in New Jersey because of rarity”. **Life History** The bog turtle is a tiny , dark turtle with a distinct orange patch behind the ty mpanum (earmembrane) on either side of the head. The scutes (scale

- like horny laye rs) o f the carapace (upper shell) are brown or black and may have yellow or reddish centers. Likewise, the plastron (underneath shell) is brownishblack with a light yellow or mahogany center. The limbs are brown and may be mottled with variable amounts of dar k ye llow, orange, or red blotching. Bog turtles, one of the smallest and most secretive of North America’s turtles, measure onl y 7.6 to 10 cm (3.0 to 3.9 in.) long as adults. The male bog turtle has a concave plastron while that of the female is flat or slightl y convex. In addition, the male has a long, thick tail and long foreclaws. In New York, the bog turtle emerges from hibernation, often spent in an abandoned muskrat lodge or other burrow, b y mid

- April. Bog turtles often hibernate communally with other bog turtles and with spotted turtles ( Clemmys guttata ). Generally both the air and water temperature must exceed 50 degrees F for the turtle to become active. Mating occurs primarily

in the spring but may

also occur in the fall and may be focused i n or near the hibernaculum (winter shelter). In earl y to mid

- June, a clutch of two to four eggs is laid in a nest which is generally located inside the upper part of an unshaded tussock. The eggs hatch around mid

- September. Some young turtles spend the winter in the nest, emerging the following spring. The adults enter hibernation in late October. Sexual maturity may be reached at eight years or as late as eleven. A bog turtle may live for more than 30 years. Although generall y very secretive, the bo g turtle can be seen basking in the open, especiall y in the earl y spring just after emerging from hibernation. It is an opportunistic35

feeder, eating what it can get, although it prefers invertebrates such as slugs, worms, and insects. Seeds, plant leaves , and carrion are also included in its diet. **Habitat** Bog turtles inhabit calcareous (limestone) fens, sphagnum bogs, and wet, grass y pastures that are characterized b y soft, muddy substrates (bottoms) and perennial groundwater seepage. Bog turtle habitat s are well

- drained and water depth rarely exceeds 10 cm (four in.) above the surface. Flora associated with bog turtle habitats include sedges ( Carex spp .), rushes (

Juncus spp .), mosses, and grasses. These habitats may also contain red maple ( Acer rubrum ), alder (

Alnus spp .), skunk cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus ), cattail ( Typha spp .), willow (Salix spp .), highbush blueberry ( Vaccinium corymbosum .), jewelweed (

Impatiens capensis ), swamp rose ( Hibiscus palustris ), dogwoods ( Cornus spp .), shrubby

cinquefoil (

Potentilla fruticosa ), buttonbush ( Cephalanthus occidentalis ), rice

- cut grass (

Leersia oryzoides ), wool

- grass (Scirpuscyperinus ), arrowhead (Sagittaria spp .), watercress (

Nasturtium officinale ), St. Johnswort ( Hypericum spp .), blue vervain ( Verbena hastata ), sundew ( Drosera spp .), pitcher plant (Sarracenia purpurea ), cinnamon fern ( Osmunda cinnamomea ), and sensitive fern ( Onoclea sensibilis ). Because open areas are favored for basking and nesting, vegetative succession may cause the dispersal or loss of bog turtle colonies. Many of the emergent wetlands inhabited by bog turtles have served as pastures during historic or current times. Grazing b y livestock maintains the successional stage and softens the ground, creating favorable conditions for these t urtles. Although controlled grazing is beneficial, overgrazing can result in excessive fecal runoff that may degrade water quality or encourage the growth of undesirable plant species. Linear drainage ditches provide an alternative habitat for bog turtle s in some areas of the state. These ditches, which have healed over time, may support remarkabl y high bog turtle densities. **Reasons For Current Status** Spotty distribution and specialized habitat requirements make this species vulnerable to local extirpation. Decline is due primaril y to loss, degradation, and fragmentation of habitat (the factor ranked here) and excessive (and illegal) collecting for the pet trade. These continue to be major threats. Laws against collecting have been largely ineffective in reducing that threat. Habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation have resulted from urban/suburban development; filling, draining, and dredging of wetlands; and water impoundment, water diversion into habitat, and other hydrological alterations. In some areas, successional changes (e.g., reforestation) and exotic plant species have reduced habitat quality . Heavy grazing is detrimental, especiall y when nesting females are disturbed or eggs are trampled (light grazing may

be beneficial in some cases if it maintains an open canopy and avoid the problems just mentioned). Habitat fragmentation has made it difficult for turtles to cope with successional changes and ecos ys tem changes caused b y humans or beavers (simply moving to another area is now often not an option). Though flooding caused by beavers may be a threat in particular sites at a particular time, over the long term and on a broad36

geographic scale, beaver activities (i.e., cutting of woody plants and periodic flooding) can be an important fa ctors in the creation or maintenance of suitable habitat for bog turtles. Mosquito control via pesticide application is a potential threat is some areas; this may impact turtles directl y or affect food suppl y. Abnormally high raccoon populations, associated with human impacts, may result in excessive predation on turtles and eggs. Eggs are susceptible to trampling b y humans walking through the habitat. Frequent human visits to single sites conceivably could interfere with the turtles' basking behavior an d may disturb females attempting to nest. The species is vulnerable to the usual problems associated with small population size.
**SEABEACH AMARANTH** Amaranthus pumilus Family : Amaranthaceae Status: State

– Threatened, Federal

– Threatened **Sources** http://nc

- es.fws.gov/plant/seabamaranth.html http://www.fws.gov/northeast/nyfo/es/amaranthweb/fact_sheets/NJ.pdf **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Historically , the seabeach amaranth occurred in 31 counties in nine States from Massachusetts to South Carolina. The species has now been completely eliminated from six of the States in its original range. As of 1990 (a complete range wide census was recentl y done), there were 55 remaining populations. Of these, 34 were in North Carolina, 8 were in South Carolina, and 13 were in New York. **Historical Information** Although originall y described as abundant, the number of populations of A. pumilus declined precipitously

throughout the Twentieth Century and, following a collection from Ocean County in 1913, vanished from the flora of New Jersey . Habitat destruction and alteration, incompatible beach grooming practic es and recreational activities have all contributed to the decline of this species. By 1989, the species was restricted to a few populations in North and South Carolina. In 1991 New Jersey included A. pumilus in its first official Endangered Plant Species Li st, and in 1993 the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, determined A. pumilus to be a federall y threatened species under the authority of the Endangered Species Act. In 2000 the plant returned to newly created beaches in Monmouth County and adjacent habitat in Sandy Hook. Intensive survey s performed in 2001 revealed populations or individuals in all four coastal New Jersey

counties. Despite its reappearance, the plant remains highl y vulnerable to the uses and practices that caused its extirpation throughout most of the previous century

. **Life History** Seabeach amaranth, as the name implies, is an annual plant found on beaches along the western coast of the Atlantic Ocean (North America). The stems are fleshy and pink

- red or37

reddish, with small rounded leaves that are 1.3 to 2.5 centimeters in diameter. The leaves are clustered toward the tip of the stem; they are usually

spinach

- green, and have small notches at the rounded tips. Flowers and fruits are relativel y inconspicuous, borne in clusters along the stems. Germination occurs over a relativel y long period of time, generall y from April to July. Upon germinating, this plant initially forms a small sprig with no branches, but soon begins to branch profusely into a clump. This clump o ften reaches a foot in diameter and consists of 5 to 2O branches. Occasionally , a clump may get as large as a yard or more across, with 1OO or more branches. Flowering begins as soon as plants have reached sufficient size, sometimes as earl y as June, but more ty

picall y commencing in July and continuing until the death of the plant in late fall. Seed production begins in July or August; it reaches a peak in September during most years, but continues until the death of the plant. Weather events, including rainfall, hurricanes, and temperature extremes, and predation by webworms have strong effects on the length of seabeach amaranth's reproductive season. As a result of one or more of these influences, the flowering and fruiting period can be terminated as ea rl y as June or July

. Under favorable circumstances, however, the reproductive season may extend until January or sometimes later **Habitat** Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches, where its primary habitat consists of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands and lower foredunes and upper strands of noneroding beaches. It occasionall y establishes small temporary populations in other habitats, including sound

- side beaches, blowouts in foredunes, and sand and shell material placed as beach repleni shment or dredged spoil. Seabeach amaranth appears to be intolerant of competition and does not occur on well

- vegetated sites. The species appears to need extensive areas of barrier island beaches and inlets, functioning in a relativel y natural and dynamic manner. These characteristics allow it to move around in the landscape as a fugitive species, occup yi ng suitable habitat as it becomes available. **Reasons for Current Status** Seabeach amaranth has been eliminated from two

- thirds of its historic range. The most serious threats to its continued existence are construction of beach stabilization structures, beach erosion and tidal inundation, beach grooming, herbivory by insects and feral animals, and, in certian circumstances, b y off

- road vehicles.
**KNIESKERN 'S BEAKED**  **- RUSH**  Rhynchospora knieskernii Family : C yperaceae Status: State

– Threatened, Federal

– Threatened **Sources** http://www.fws.gov/northeast/njfieldof fice/Endangered/Knieskern's_beaked

- rush.htm#238

http://www.centerforplantconservation.org/ASP/CPC_ViewProfile.asp?CPCNum=3751#D istribution **Geographi c Boundaries and Spatial Distribution**  Knieskern's beaked

- rush has alway s been considered rare. Currentl y, the species is only known to occur in New Jersey (Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties). Historically , two documented occurren ces were found in Sussex County , Delaware. The Delaware Natural Heritage Program has been conducting yearl y surveys for Knieskern's beaked

- rush over the past 10 ye ars without finding a single new occurrence. The total number of documented occurrences in New Jersey is 52, which includes 14 historical and 38 extant populations. Six of the extant populations occur on sites that are considered to be naturall y maintained in an earl y successional vegetative stage and therefore, should not require active manage ment. The remaining 32 known extant populations occur on earl y successional sites created as a result of sand, clay , and gravel mining; borrow pit excavation; cranberry bog construction; and road, powerline, and ditch construction through wetland areas. Of the 32 extant populations occurring on human

- disturbed sites, three are on federal property , four are on State property , and 25 are on private property

or rights

- of

- way . **Historical Information** The Knieskern's Beaked

- rush was first listed on July 18, 19 91. It is currently

designated as Threatened in the entire range. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region (Region 5) is the lead region for this entity

. **Life History** Knieskern's beaked

- rush is a plant of the sedge family endemic to the Pinelan ds region of New Jersey . The genus name Rhynchospora is from the Greek rhynchos , meaning beak and spora , meaning seed, which refers to the beaked seed or fruit that is characteristic of the genus. This grass

- like plant was generall y considered to be an annual species (i.e., living for onl y one season); however, it is currently suspected to be a short

- lived perennial in locations where habitat conditions are stable enough to allow uninterrupted growth year after ye ar. Knieskern's beaked

- rush grows from 1.5 t o 60 centimeters high (0.6 to 24 inches), has slender culms (stis) branching from the base, and short, narrowly linear leaves. Small spiklets (flower clusters) are numerous and occur at distant intervals along the entire length of the culm. The achene (fruit) is obovate, narrow at the base, 1.1 to 1.3 millimeters long (0.04 to 0.05 inches), and equal in length to the six downwardly

- barbed, or rarely , upwardl y- barbed attached bristles. A tubercle (beak), which is the persistent base of the two
- cleft styl e (s lender stalk containing the pollen tube) on top of the achene, is about one

half the length of the achene

. Although not all plants produce culms each year, flowering and seed production have been observed in very young plants. Fruiting typi cally occurs from July to September

. Seed dispersal mechanisms are not documented; however, bristles located on the achenes could assist in animal dispersal

.39

**Habitat** Rhynchospora kneiskernii occurs in groundwater

- influenced, constantly fluctuating, successional enviro nments. The plant was once thought to be closel y associated with natural bog iron deposits in the Pinelands, but has now been found in a wider variety of environments. Bog iron forms when slow

- moving, acidic stream water leaches iron from the Cretaceous outwash soils characteristic of the Pinelands. Upon contact with oxygen and oxidizing bacteria, the iron mobilizes and is re

- deposited in hard layers of "iron stone" in streambeds and adjacent floodplain wetlands. Continual stream erosion and challenging soi l chemistry

tend to inhibit growth of trees and shrubs that would normally shade out Rhynchospora kneiskernii . Six of the 38 known extant populations of the plant occur on this unusual substrate. Knieskern's beaked

- rush is an obligate h ydroph yt e (wetland plant). It typically occurs within wet openings of pitch

- pine forest, a community established and maintained by fire. Because fires are now often suppressed, the future of Knieskern's beaked

- rush and pitch

pine forests is uncertain. Rhynchospora kneiskernii is intolerant of competition, especially from woody species. It is found on naturall y occurring earl y successional habitats and disturbed habitats such as burns, gravel and clay pits, road cuts, mowed roadsides, utility and railroad rights

- of

- way , cl eared home sites, eroded areas, cleared edges of Atlantic white

- cedar swamps, wheel ruts, and muddy swales. Periodic disturbance, either natural or human

- induced, which maintains a damp

- to
- wet site in an earl y ecological successional stage may be necessary for the successful colonization, establishment, recruitment, and maintenance of this species. Human
- disturbed sites exhibit some of the same characteristics as bog

- iron sites, including a high water table, temporary inundation, and open, earl y- successi onal habitat with relativel y bare substrate. Ingeneral, most of these sites require periodic human

- induced disturbance to maintain their earl y- successional character. Plant species associated with Knieskern's beaked

- rush include warty panic

grass ( Panic um verrucosum ), poverty- grass ( Aristida longispica ), and spatulate

- leaved sundew. **Reasons for Current Status** Originall y, the primary

threat to the species was the loss of wetlands to urban and agricultural development. However, current State and federal w etland protection laws have reduced the loss of wetlands over time. Presentl y, vegetative succession is a major factor threatening Knieskern's beaked

- rush; 19 of the 38 extant populations are currentl y undergoing vegetative succession that could eliminate these populations. Without periodic intervention to reverse successional trends, these 19 sites will most likely become unsuitable for the species in the future. Human

- induced threats to the species include alteration to wetland h ydrology , off

- road vehicle s, trash dumping, and possibly roadside grading. F ire can be both beneficial and detrimental to the species depending on the timing, duration, and intensity of the burn.40

**AMERICAN CHAFFSEED** Schwalbea americana Family : Scrophulariaceae Status: State

– Endangered, Federal

– Endangered **Sources** http://www.bragg.arm y. mil/esb/american_chaffseed.htm **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Historically , Chaffseed occurred in fifteen States, including Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey , New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia at a total of approximately

78 sites. One historic record from Lo uisiana is now considered to have been erroneous. Currentl y, 51 populations are known, including one in New Jersey , one in North Carolina, 43 in South Carolina, four in Georgia, and two in Florida. Chaffseed was never considered to be common, but populatio ns have declined and the range has seriousl y contracted in recent decades. The species can no longer be found in 10 of the States in which it occurred historically . Many historic populations have been confirmed extirpated due to habitat destruction, primarily due to development. Others have been lost in the absence of habitat destruction, probably as a result of fire exclusion. **Historical Information** The American chaffseed was first listed on September 29, 1992. It is currently designated as endangered in the entire range. Historicall y, Chaffseed occurred in fifteen States, including Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey , New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia at a total of approximately 78 sites. One historic record from Louisiana is now considered to have been erroneous. Currently , 51 populations are known, including one in New Jersey , one in North Carolina, 43 in South Carolina, four in Georgia, and two in F lorida. Chaffseed was never considered to be common, but populations have declined and the range has seriously contracted in recent decades. The species can no longer be found in 10 of the States in which it occurred historicall y. Many historic populations have been confirmed extirpated due to habitat destruction, primarily due to development. Others have been lost in the absence of habitat destruction, probably as a result of fire exclusion. In New Jersey Schwalbea americana declined from 19 historical si tes to four by the early 1970s to two in 1980. One of these two sites (The Cape May site) was destroyed b y road construction in 1986, leaving a single remaining site in Brendan T. By rne State Forest (formerl y known as "Lebanon State Forest") at a sandy, mo wed roadside edge of a pitch pine

- dominated, lowland Pine Barrens forest. The population declined during the 1980s due to recreational trampling, collection and inappropriate mowing. In 1993 a management agreement was established between the State Forest, the cranberry grower leasing the site, the county

and the New Jersey

Office of Natural Lands Management. In accordance with the agreement, vehicle barriers have been erected, the mowing season was changed, and41

the site is kept open through thinning and mow ing of shrubs. These actions appeared to have stabilized the population as of 1995. **Life History** American chaffseed is an erect, hemiparasitic, perennial herb that grows 1.0

- 2.6 ft (0.3

- 0.8 m) in height. Although it is a root

- hemiparasite (partially dep endent on its host), the species is not host

- specific and may parasitize a variety of trees, shrubs, and herbs. April through June flowers are pollinated by bees, with fruits maturing in July

- September. Fruit dispersal is poorly

understood, but fruits are likely wind dispersed in close proximity to the parent. Requirements for seed germination and seedling establishment are unknown, but the species is considered shade

- intolerant. Although another species (S

. australis ) was once recognized, the genus Schw albea is now considered to be monotypic. **Habitat** American chaffseed occurs in sandy (sandy peat, sandy

loam), acidic, and seasonall y moist to dry soils. It is generally

found in habitats described as open, moist pine flatwoods, fire

maintained savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and xeric sandy soils, and other open grass

- sedge sy stems. Chaffseed is dependent on factors such as fire, mowing, or fluctuating water tables to maintain the crucial open to partly open conditions that it requires. Hi storically , the species existed on savannas and pinelands throughout the coastal plain and on sandstone knobs and plains inland where frequent, naturall y occurring fires maintained these sub

- climax communities. Under these conditions, herbaceous plants suc h as Schwalbea were favored over trees and shrubs. Most of the surviving populations, and all of the most vigorous populations, are in areas that are still subject to frequent fire. These fire

- maintained habitats include plantations where prescribed fire is part of a management regime for quail and other game species, army base impact zones that burn regularly because of artillery

shelling, forest management areas that are burned to maintain habitat for wildlife including the endangered red

- cockaded woodp ecker, and various other private lands that are burned to maintain open fields. Fire may

be important to the species in way s that are not yet understood, such as for germination of seed, or in the formation of the connection to the host plant. **Reasons fo r Current Status**  American chaffseed has been eliminated from two

- thirds of the States where it was historically

reported to occur. The most serious threats to its continued existence are fire

suppression, conversion of the habitat for commercial and residential purposes, and incompatible agriculture and forestry practices. The loss of periodic fire from the landscape seems to be the most serious factor in its decline. Residential and commercial development adjacent to populations can also pose a threat sinc e urbanization generall y results in fire suppression.42

**SENSITIVE JOINT -** **VETCH** Aeschynomene virginica Family : Fabaceae Status: State

– Threatened, Federal

– Threatened **Source** http://www.ncnhp.org/Images/1 07.pdf **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** Sensitive joint

- vetch is known from a total of 24 extant sites, including one in Maryland, one in New Jersey , two in North Carolina, and 20 in Virginia. The species shows considerable annual fluctuati on in population numbers, varying in at least one case from approximately

50 to 2,000 individuals over a 3

- ye ar period. Although populations do fluctuate, there is an apparent trend for large populations to remain large and small populations to remain smal l. A total of 24 extant sites are currently known to exist. **Historical Information** The Sensitive joint

- vetch was first listed on May 20, 1992. It is currentl y designated as Threatened in the entire range. The historic range for the species extended into Delaware and Pennsylvania, but the species has not been seen in those States for more than a century
. **Life History** Sensitive joint

- vetch is an annual plant in the bean family native to the eastern United States. Plants ty

pically attain heights of 1 to 2 m eters in a single growing season, although they can grow as tall as 2.4 meters. The stems are single, sometimes branching near the top, and with stiff or bristly hairs. The leaves are even

- pinnate, 2 to 12 centimeters (cm) long, with entire, glad

- dotted le aflets. Each leaf consists of 30 to 56 leaflets. L eaflets are 0.8 to 2.5 cm long and 0.2 to 0.4 cm wide. The leaves fold slightly when touched. The ye llow, irregular flowers are 1.0 to 1.5 cm across, streaked with red, and grow in racemes (elongated inflor escence with stalked flowers). The fruit is a loment with 4 to 10 one

seeded segments, turning dark brown when ripe. Fruits are 3.0 to 7.0 cm long and shallowly scalloped along one side. Plants flower from July

through September and occasionall y into Oct ober. In Autumn, senescence may

be triggered by

the drop in water temperature or b y salinity intrusion due to a decrease in freshwater flow. Bumblebees have been observed pollinating the flowers. Fruits form shortl y after the first signs of flowering in July . Although flowering continues until late Fall, production of vigorous fruits appears to decline significantly by mid

October. Seed maturation begins in August and continues through October. Germination takes place from late May to earl y June. Seedlings grow quickly , approximately doubling in size every

2 weeks during the first 6 weeks.43

**Habitat** Sensitive joint

- vetch grows in the intertidal zone where plants are flooded twice dail y. The species seems to prefer the marsh edge at an elevation near the upp er limit of tidal fluctuation. It is usuall y found in areas where plant diversity is high (50 species per acre) and annual species predominate. Bare to sparsely vegetated substrates appear to be a habitat feature of critical importance to this plant. As an annual, it requires such microhabitats for establishment and growth. Such areas may include accreting point bars that have not yet been colonized by perennial species, low swales within extensive marshes, or areas where muskrats have eaten most of the veg etation. In North Carolina, sensitive joint

- vetch appears to be a species that remains at a particular site for a relativel y short period of time, and maintains itself by colonizing new, recentl y disturbed habitats where it may

compete successfull y among o ther early

- successional species. It is frequentl y found in the estuarine meander zone of tidal rivers where sediments transported from upriver settle out and extensive marshes are formed. The substrate may be sandy , muddy , gravell y, or peaty. **Reasons for Current Status**  The extirpation of sensitive joint

- vetch from Delaware and Penns yl vania and its elimination from many

sites in other States can be directly attributed to habitat destruction. Many of the marshes where it occurred historically have been dredg ed and/or filled and the riverbanks stabilized with bulkheads or riprap. Other threats include sedimentation, competition from exotic plant species, recreational activities, agricultural activities, mining, commercial and residential development with assoc iated pollution and sedimentation, impoundments, water withdrawal projects and introduced insect pests. Sedimentation inhibits seed germination, smothers seedlings, and promotes invasion of competing weedy species. Herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers f rom golf courses, lawns, and gardens degrade water quality

. **SWAMP PINK** Helonias bullata Family : Liliaceae Status: State

– Threatened, Federal

– Threatened **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** New Jersey

supports the largest and most numerous populations of the species with 68 existing sites spread over 12 southern counties in the Coastal Plain area. Most of the populations are located along the Pinelands fringe in the Delaware River Drainage. Plant colonies are found in the following counties : Atlantic; Burlington; Camden; Cape May ; Cumberland; Mercer; Gloucester; Middlesex; Monmouth; Morris; Ocean; and Salem. New Jersey once supported 1OO populations; 32 of the State's populations have been extirpated. Besides New Jersey , six other States s upport populations including Delaware; Maryland; Virginia; North Carolina; South Carolina, and Georgia. One historic population was reported in Staten Island, New York, near Kreislerville, but this population is believed44

extirpated. Delaware's 1O existing sites are located in the Coastal Plain area of all three counties (New Castle, Kent, and Sussex). One historic colony, in the Piedmont, has been extirpated. In Maryland's Coastal Plain, six plant populations are located on privately

owned lands in Anne Arundel, Cecil, and Dorchester Counties. One other population has been extirpated. Fifteen of the sixteen Virginia populations occur across a 1O

- mile area on the western slopes of the central Blue Ridge Mountains. The other existing population is found in the Coastal Plain. Ten of Virginia's plant populations are located in the George Washington National Forest, and one is on the Blue Ridge Parkway , which is owned by the National Park Service. In North Carolina, the largest population is found in the Pisgah National Forest in the "Pink Beds" area. Seven other populations occur in Jackson, Henderson, and Trans yl vania Counties. South Carolina and Georgia have one known population each. The South Carolina population is located in Greenville County on South Carolin a Heritage Trust land. The privately owned, Georgia population is in Rabun County , close to the North Carolina border. **Historical Information** The Swamp pink was first listed on September 09, 1988. It is currentl y designated as Threatened in the entire r ange. This species is known to occur in: Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, New Jersey , New York, South Carolina, and Virginia. **Life History** A perennial, the Swamp Pink usually is one of the first wildflowers to bloom in the spring. The plant us ually

blooms from March to May . Its fragrant flowers are pink and occur in a cluster of 3O to 5O. Its dark evergreen, lance

- shaped, and parallel

- veined leaves form a basal rosette which arises from a stout, hollow stem. This stem can grow from a height of 2 to 9 decimeters during flowering, and to 1.5 meters during seed maturation (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 199O). The plant's stout rootstock has many fibrous rootlets. During the winter, the leaves often turn reddish brown and will lie flat on, or slightly raised, from the ground. These winter leaves are often hidden b y l eaf litter, but a visible large button, in the center of the leaves, represents next season's flower head. The plant produces three

- lobed fruit of an inverted heart shape. Each fruit has many ovules; each ovule opens into six lobes that release linear shaped seeds with appendages on both ends. Although the species can reproduce sexually , most of it's reproduction is asexual by clonal root growth. This means plants tend to grow in clumps, close to the parent plants, and that plant populations can be extremely dense. Densities of up to 56 plants per square meter have been found in southern Appalachia. Dense clusters of plants can also occur when plants reproduce sexually because of limited seed dispersal. Sometimes the seeds will fall out of the capsule and land beneath the mother plant. Swamp pink seeds have appendages, and animals may

sometimes help disperse the seeds. **Habitat** Swamp Pink occurs in a variety of wetland habitats. These include Atlantic white

- cedar swamps; Blue Ridge swamps; swampy forested wetlands that border small streams; meadows, and spring seepage areas. The plant requires habitat that is saturated, but not45

flooded, with water. Swamp Pink is commonly associated with eve rgreen trees such as Atlantic white

- cedar; pitch pine; American larch; and black spruce. The species appears to be somewhat shade tolerant. In areas with less canopy cover, deer are more likely to eat the plant's flowers, leaves, or shoots. **Reasons for Cu rrent Status**  The loss of wetlands to urban and agricultural development and timbering operations originall y was the primary threat to the species. Now, State wetland and Federal endangered species protection laws have slowed the loss of wetlands, and the m ajor threat to the Swamp Pink is habitat degradation caused by off

- site disturbances. Some of these impacts include off

- site water withdrawal for irrigation or crop production; discharge from sewage treatment plants; increased siltation from the inadequate control of soil erosion; and the introduction of excess nutrients or chemicals into the water. Sometimes, excess nutrients will cause an increase in natural succession, which allows the growth of competing species such as common reed, red maple, red alder , and mountain laurel. To alleviate the impacts of off

- site disturbances, buffer zones may be established around protected habitat. However, to be effective in areas with difficult site topography or in overdeveloped areas, buffer zones need to encircle ov er 500 feet of the area. In these areas, smaller buffer zones tend to isolate the wetland. An isolated wetland serves as a sink receiving all of the stormwater runoff and pollution from the adjacent areas. The attractiveness of the Swamp Pink makes it vuln erable to collecting b y gardeners and commercial collectors. To reduce collecting, which is illegal, people can obtain plants cultivated from seed from some private nurseries. Even when the plants are not collected, visitor trampling is a problem at some s ites. In the George Washington National Forest, a boardwalk has been constructed to help save a population there. Man
- induced threats are not the only factors threatening the Swamp Pink. It is also threatened b y limited genetic variability due to its mostly asexual reproduction, limited seed disperal and survival rates, a slow rate of growth, and limited flowering potential. Only 0 to 6 percent of the plants flower in any given North Carolina population. The flowering rate is not much higher in the three M aryland populations with only 12 to 15 percent of the plants blooming in a given ye ar.
**SMALL WHORLED POGONIA** Isotria medeoloides Family : Orchidaceae Status: State

– Threatened, Federal

– Threatened **Sources** http://www.ncnhp.org/Images/111.pdf **Geographic Boundaries and Spatial Distribution** This plant formerl y occurred in 48 counties in 16 eastern states and Canada, but when listed as endangered in 1982 it was known to exist in only 16 counties in 1O st ates, and one county in Ontario, Canada. By 1991, a total of 86 sites in 15 states were known, and46

by 1993, there was a known total of 104 sites in 15 states. Most populations are centered in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains in New England and no rthern coastal Massachusetts The 23 populations in the Southeast Region occur in North Carolina (5 populations); South Carolina (4 populations); Georgia (13 populations); and Tennessee (1 population). Most Southeastern populations number less than 25 plant s. South Carolina has one population of over 25 plants, and Georgia has two populations numbering about 100 plants. Small whorled pogonia is also known from Virginia, Delaware, and New Jersey , Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Ontario, Canada. **H istorical Information**  The Small whorled pogonia was first listed on September 09, 1982. It is currentl y designated as Threatened in the entire range. This species is known to occur in: Connecticut, District of Columbia, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey , New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, West Virginia, and Canada (Ont.). This plant was reclassified from endangered to threatened because the number of known populations increased from 34 in 1985 to 104 in 1993. Also, the species' 1992 revised recovery plan stipulates that at least 25 percent of the plant's self

- sustaining populations were protected through public ownership or private landowner management agreement. According to the October 6, 1994 Federal Register notice which officially downlisted the species, a total of 46 small whorled pogonia sites are currentl y protected rangewide, 24 of which have self

- sustaining popul ations. In the Southeast, North Carolina has two protected sites, both of which are viable; South Carolina has four protected sites, two of which are viable; and Georgia has seven protected sites, four of which are viable. **Life History** Flowering occurs May- June. This plant may remain dormant underground for several ye ars. It is usuall y found in colonies. Indian cucumber root ( Medeola virginiana ) often grows nearb y. In the vegetative stage, the two plants look very similar, thus the name medeoloides, means “medeola like.” It may appear in any

of four different states: vegetative (nonreproductive), with an abortive flower, flowering, or dormant. The flowering plant is tallest and has a wider whorl than the other three with a vegetative plant being the smalles t in size. Plants that are large usually reproduce (flower) the next year unless some event prevents them from storing adequate energy supplies. An individual plant may retain a flower for 4

- 14 day s. Dormancy may last from 1 to 10

- 20 years. Requires a s ymb iotic root/fungus association; seeds that germinate become established only on substrate containing the suitable m yco rrhizal fungus. **Habitat** This species typi call y grows in open, dry deciduous woods and areas along streams with acid soil. Also grows in ri ch, mesic woods in association with white pine (Pinus strobus) and rhododendron (Rhododendron spp. ) . Prefers leaf litter and decaying material but may be found on dry , rocky , wooded slopes, moist slopes or slope bases near vernal streams.47

**Reasons for Curr ent Status**  The current status of small whorled pogonia is attributed to loss of habitat and excessive utilization for scientific and private collections. However, some populations observed for a number of ye ars have also declined for unknown reasons. **2.3.1 Aqua**  **tic and Aquatic -** **dependent Species Selected for Biological Evaluation**  The aquatic and aquatic

- dependent species that are evaluated in this document and the rationale for their selection is given in Table 2.2; the listed species not selected and the rationale for their exclusion is given in Table 2.3. **Table 2.2. New Jersey Listed Species Included in Biological Evaluation S**  **pecies C**  **ategory R**  **ationale** Shortnos e sturgeon Freshwater aquatic Wholly aquatic species Dwarf wedge mussel Freshwater aquatic Wholly aquatic species Bog turtle Freshwater aquatic

dependent Inhabit fens, sphagnum bogs, and wet,

grass y pastures Indiana bat Freshwater aquatic

dependent Females and juveniles forage on insects in

the airspace near the foliage of riparian and floodplain trees. Bald eagle Freshwater aquatic

dependent Fish are their primary diet. Northeastern beach tiger beetle Saltwater aquatic

dependent Forages in the damp sand of the intertidal

zone; prey

species include lice, fleas, and flies. Adults also regularly sc avenge dead crabs and fish. Piping plover Saltwater aquatic

dependent The piping plover forages on intertidal

beaches, wash over areas, exposed mudflats and sandflats, wracklines, and shorelines Roseate tern Saltwater aquatic

dependent This bird forages over shallow coastal

waters, inlets, and offshore seas. Hawksbill sea turtle Saltwater aquatic

dependent F requents rocky areas, coral reefs, shallow

coastal areas, lagoons or oceanic islands, and narrow creeks and passes Kemp's ridley

sea turtle Saltwater aquatic

dependent C an inhabit deep or shallow estuaries

depending on their pr eferred diet Leatherback turtle Saltwater aquatic

dependent C an inhabit deep or shallow estuaries

depending on their preferred diet Lo ggerhead turtle Saltwater aquatic

dependent may be found hundreds of miles out to sea, as well as in inshore areas such as bay s, lagoons, salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and the mouths of large rivers48

**Table 2.2. New Jersey Listed Species Included in Biological Evaluation S**  **pecies C**  **ategory R**  **ationale** Knieskern's beaked

- rush Aquatic plant An obligate h ydroph yt e, it occurs in groun dwater

- influenced, constantly fluctuating, successional environments Sensitive joint

vetch Aquatic plant Grows in the intertidal zone where plants are flooded twice daily Swamp pink Aquatic plant occurs in a variety of wetland habitats **Table 2.3. New Jersey Listed Species Not Included in Biological Evaluation**  **Species Rationale**  Fin whale, Humpback whale, Right whale These species are largely pelagic and are expected to have limited

time within New Jersey ’s offshore jurisdictional range of three miles for water quality

criteria. Critical habitat for the right whale includes portions of Cape Cod Bay and Stellwagen Bank, the Great South Channel (each off the coast of Massachusetts), and waters adjacent to the coasts of Georgia and the east coast of Flori da where they

feed on dense populations of copepods. The near shore waters of New Jersey are apparentl y not a feeding area for the right whale. Eastern puma Prey species include deer, elk, occasionall y domestic livestock, and any smaller mammals which opportunity makes available. The preferred meat is deer. Seabeach amaranth Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches, where its

primary habitat consists of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands and lower foredunes and upper strands of none roding beaches. American chaffseed It is generall y found in habitats described as open, moist pine

flatwoods, fire

- maintained savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and xeric sandy soils, and other open grass

- sedge sy stems. Small whorled pogoni a This species typi call y grows in open, dry deciduous woods and areas along streams with acid soil.
**2.4 E**  **nvironmental B**  **aseline** The quality

of much of New Jersey ’s surface waters, where s everal threatened and endangered species live and forage for food, has been lowered b y multiple human activities, such as the release of toxic contaminants, the loss and degradation of aquatic habitats and their surrounding vegetation. From a total 2,151 segments of water bodies sampled, 973 (45%) had at least one chemical or phy sical parameter exceeding a water quality standard criterion . Note: information on impaired sites presented in this section was taken from the New Jersey 2004 Integrated Water Qua lity Monitoring and Assessment Report (NJDEP 2004b ) . In 1365 segments, the water quality standard was not attained49

because the waterway

was impaired or threatened for one or more designated uses by a pollutant(s). In most cases, impairment of a water body segment resulted from multiple contaminants. Lead and dissolved solids were among the causes of impairment in only 43 and 5 segments, respectively

. Some water bodies were more polluted than others. Out of a total 2870 nontidal river miles assessed (us ing 457 monitoring stations) for multiple chemical and phy sical parameters, 2187 (76%) did not meet the surface water quality standard for at least one factor. Concentrations of metals (arsenic, lead, mercury , copper, zinc, cadmium, chromium, thallium, se lenium, nickel) were monitored in 12% of nontidal river miles. Violation of one or more surface water quality standards occurred in 72% of the monitored river miles. Again, lead and dissolved solids represented small percentages of all criteria violation s. In tidal rivers, fewer chemical and ph ysical parameters were measured. Yet, 98% of all sampled river miles (1434.5 mi) were classified as impaired. In many water bodies, the evidence for pollution was indirect. The Division of Fish and Wildlife and the New Jersey Pinelands Commission evaluated 108 lakes (14,547 acres) for aquatic life designated use support. Two designated uses of New Jersey lakes, reservoirs, and ponds were considered in this assessment: recreation and aquatic life support. A total of 61 lakes full y supported their designated uses. One lake was full y supporting, but threatened its use, and 21 lakes did not support the designated use. Twenty six Pineland lakes could not be assessed because clear thresholds for biological evaluatio n had not yet been developed. The quality of waters from estuaries and coasts were assessed only for dissolved oxygen. Over the 616 square miles of open estuarine waters evaluated, ranging from Newark Bay

to Cape May , 48% had dissolved oxygen concentrati ons sufficiently high to support a healthy

biota and 52% had periodic drops to unacceptable levels of dissolved oxygen. In open ocean waters, from Sandy Hook to Cape May , samples collected at the depth of 1 meter had adequate dissolved oxygen concentratio ns to support a health y community in all evaluated areas. In contrast, concentrations of dissolved oxygen at the ocean floor were inadequatel y low in all of the 454 square miles where meter deep samples were taken. The impact on aquatic organisms of temp orary exposure to dissolved oxygen concentrations below 5 mg/Lis unclear. Many benthic invertebrates can tolerate h ypoxia, and many fishes can avoid areas with low concentrations of dissolved oxygen. Our concern here is with potential adverse effects of lead and total dissolved solids on listed species. As a first assessment of such risks, maps of the distributions of endangered species were overlain with maps identifying the river miles or sites impaired by these contaminants. The occurrence of impaired waters within the distribution range of a species suggests that it may be exposed to excessively high concentrations of lead or total dissolved solids. Conversely , no overlap in locations of impaired sites or river miles and the geographic range of an endangered species indicates that lead and dissolved solids are not likely to adversel y affect it. The available data on locations in New Jersey of sites impaired by

these contaminants (pg. 44 for total dissolved solids and pg. 80 for lead) suggest no overlap with distributions of the shortnose sturgeon ( Acipenser brevirostrum ,50

pg. 3), dw arf wedge mussel ( Alasmidonta heterodon , pg. 8) , Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle ( Lepidochelys kempii , pg. 3

- 4), Leather back turtle (

Dermochelys coriacea ), Loggerhead turtle ( Caretta caretta ), Piping plover ( Charadrius melodus , pg. 16), and Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii

, pg.7). The bog turtle ( Clemmys muhlenbergii), the Indiana bat ( Myotis sodalis , pg. 3), the bald eagle ( Haliaeetus leucocephalus , pg. 5), and the pink swamp ( Helonias bullata ) on the other hand, may be exposed to excessiv ely high concentrations of lead and total dissolved solids. The beaked

- rush Knieskern’s ( Rhynchospora knieskernii) and the sensitive joint

- vetch ( Aeschynomene virginica ) may be exposed to excessive concentrations of lead, yet their current distributions do not overlap with areas where concentrations of total diss olved solids exceed the surface water quality standard.
**3 .0**  **ASSESSING EFFECTS OF THE NEW JERSEY**  **CRITERIA ON FEDERALLY**   ** LISTED SPECIES** **3 .1 Overview**  See Section 3.1 of the Methods Manual

. **3 .2 Data Collection**  Lead The acute and chronic lead toxicity data used in this biological evaluation were collected from a literature search of EPA’s ECOTOX databas e, EPA’s Ambient Aquatic L ife Water Quality Criteria for Lead (U.S. EPA 1984), EPA’s draft Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria for Lead (GLEC 1998 ), and Jarvinen and Ankley (1999 ). To ensure completeness and broad applicability of this biological evaluation, data for non

-North American species were included. Total Dissolved Solids TDS is not a searchable parameter on EPA’s ECOTOX database. Therefore, g eneral on

line searches were conducted to identify and obtain information on the toxicity of TD S to freshwater organisms. Several reviews on TDS toxicity of were o btained and used to identify additional references. EPA has not prepared an ambient water quality criteria document for TDS, but there is an AWQC document for chloride (U.S. EPA 1988) , which was reviewed for acute and chronic toxicity of chloride. **3 .3 Toxic Effects on Aquatic Species**  This section presents the results of the toxic effects assessment, including the supporting data and anal ys es on Federall y- listed aquatic species, their surrogates, and their food items. The overall process for assessing aquatic toxicity of lead is described in detail in the Methods Manual , Section 3.3.51

Although the general approach is the same, the specific procedures presented in the Methods Manual do not apply to TDS. TDS is a measurement of inorganic dissolved solids in the water of which the more common ions are chloride, bicarbonate, nitrate, sulfate, phosphate, sodium , magnesium, calcium , potassium and iron

. Insurface waters, the combination of ions in TDS varies depending on the hydrogeology of the watershed as well as some anthropogenic sources. Since TDS is a complex matrix of constituents, it follows that its to xicity

would vary

depending on its makeup. The toxicity of an individual cation or anion in TDS may be masked or inseparably affected by

its associated anion or cation (Goodfellow et al., 2000) . Mount et al. (1997) evaluated the toxicity of more than 2,9 00 ion solutions using the daphnids, Ceriodaphnia dubia and Daphnia magna and the fathead minnow (

Pimephales promelas ). Based on a statistical anal ys is, Mount et al. (1997) ranked the toxicity of the ions from most to least, K + > HCO 3 - ≈ Mg 2+ > Cl - > SO 4 - ; Na+ and Ca2+ were not significant variables in the regression equation. Similar to the approach given in the Methods Manual , the general approach used to evaluate the New Jersey

TDS criteria was to evaluate the available acute and chronic toxicity data and make a conservative estimate as to potential effects to the listed freshwater aquatic species.
**3 .3.1 Aquatic Animals**  This section consists of the assessment results for water

- column only toxic ity to aquatic animals. The process for assessing the effects of lead from water onl y exposure is described in Section 3.3.1 of the Methods Manual . Aquatic data for the assessment of lead are presented in Table 3 .1 as values for a given species. These d ata are then used to derive the mean and 5 th percentile values for specific taxa in Table 3 .2. Several aspects of the assessment are worth noting here: (1) the no

- observed effect concentrations (NOECs) in Table 4 .1 are from either (a) chronic tests where lead in the exposure medium was measured, or (b) are derived from acute tests through acute

- to
- chronic ratios for lead , and (2) taxa in Table 3 .2 are given a 5 th percentile value only where there are four or more data points for the taxon, where an Intersp ecies Correlation Estimate (I CE) is available (see Appendix) for the taxon, and/or where a 5 th percentile value was derived via an alternative approach for the taxon. Aquatic toxicity

data used toward the assessment of TDS are given in Table 3.3. Where more than one value was available for a species tested with a specific component of TDS (i.e., a particular ion or a sy nthetic effluent), a geometric mean was calculated.52

**Table 3 .1**  **a . Freshwater**  **T oxicity**  **D ata**  **O btained**  **T hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Wate**  **r Quality Criteria Document for Lead U**  **sing the New Jersey Acute**  **- to**  **- chronic Ratio**  **(ACR) and**  **C onversion**  **F actor. Unless**  **o therwise**  **i ndicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs”**  **derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All**  **values are**  **dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Annelida Clitellata Lumbriculida Lumbriculidae Lumbriculus variegatus Oligochaete, worm 3190 228 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Cladocera Moinidae Moina macrocopa Water flea 546 39 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Ceriodaphnia dubia Water flea 55 44 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Ceriodaphnia reticulata Water flea 1358 97 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Daphnia magna Water flea 1148 41 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Daphnia pulex Water flea 2311 165 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Simocephalus vetulus Water flea 3254 232 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Chironomus tentans Midge 1 280 91 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Tanytarsus dissimilis Midge 161952 11568 Arthropoda Insecta Hemiptera Belostomatidae Lethocerus sp. Midge 983 70 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Crangonyctidae Crangonyx pseudogracilis Amphipod 19955 1425 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus pseudolimnaeus Scud 95 7 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Hyalellidae Hyalella azteca Scud 18 1 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes limosus Crayfish 2386 170 Arthropoda M alacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Procambarus clarkii Red swamp crayfish 396418 28316 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Catostomidae Xy rauchen texanus Razorback sucker 122910 8779 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Carassius auratus Gol dfish 22775 1627 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Cy

prinus carpio Common caro 912 65 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Danio rerio Zebra danio 342782 24484 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Gila elegans B onytail 122910 8779 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow 1709 238 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Ptychocheilus lucius Colorado squawfish 122910 8779 Chordata Actinopterygii Cyprinodonti formes Poeciliidae Gambusia affinis Western mosquitofish 173520 12394 Chordata Actinopterygii Cyprinodontiformes Poeciliidae Poecilia reticulata Guppy 14894 106453

**Table 3 .1**  **a . Freshwater**  **T oxicity**  **D ata**  **O btained**  **T hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Wate**  **r Quality Criteria Document for Lead U**  **sing the New Jersey Acute**  **- to**  **- chronic Ratio**  **(ACR) and**  **C onversion**  **F actor. Unless**  **o therwise**  **i ndicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs”**  **derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All**  **values are**  **dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill 74155 5297 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Micropterus dolomieui Smallmouth bass 8654 293 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho salmon,silver salmon 8352 597 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout,donaldson trout 16098 21 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout 2964 60 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Th ymallus arcticus Arctic grayling 2155 154 Chordata Actinopterygii Siluriformes Heteropneustida Heteropneustes fossilis Indian catfish 75915 5423 Chordata Amphibia Anura Ranidae Rana catesbeiana Bullfrog 565 Ciliophora Ciliatea Heterotrichida Spirostomidae Spirostomum am biguum Protozoa 1930 138 Ci liophora Ciliatea Heterotrichida Spirostomidae Spirostomum teres Ciliated protozoa 7794 557 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Corbiculidae Corbicula manilensis Asiatic clam 739795 52843 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Dreissenidae Dreissena polymorpha Zebra muss el 313 Mollusca Gastropoda Architaenioglos Viviparidae Filopaludina sp. Snail 137980 9856 Mollusca Gastropoda Architaenioglos Viviparidae Viviparus bengalensis Snail 1836 131 Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Lymnaeidae Lymnaea emarginata Pond snai l 10122 723 Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Lymnaeidae Lymnaea palustris Marsh snail 15 Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Physidae Aplexa hypnorum Snail 969 69 Mollusca Gastropoda Neotaenioglossa Hydrobiidae Amnicola limosa Snail 9133 652 Mollusca Gastropoda Neotaenioglossa Pleuroceridae Elimia livescens liver elimia, river snail 51333 3667 Nemata Secernentea Rhabditida Rhabditidae Caenorhabditis elegans Nematode 78554 5611 Ochrophyta Coscinodiscophyceae Thalassiosirale Stephanodiscace Cycl otella meneghiniana Diatom 1617 Cyanophycota Cyanophyceae Chroococcales Chroococcaceae Anacystis nidulans Blue

- green algae 144600 Cyanophycota Cyanophyceae Nostocales Nostocaceae Nostoc muscorum Cyanobacterium 14460 Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyce ae Bacillariales Bacillariaceae Nitzschia obtusa Diatom 178654

**Table 3 .1**  **a . Freshwater**  **T oxicity**  **D ata**  **O btained**  **T hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Wate**  **r Quality Criteria Document for Lead U**  **sing the New Jersey Acute**  **- to**  **- chronic Ratio**  **(ACR) and**  **C onversion**  **F actor. Unless**  **o therwise**  **i ndicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs”**  **derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All**  **values are**  **dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyce ae Bacillariales Bacillariaceae Nitzschia palea Diatom 2350 Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyce ae Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula confervacea Diatom 1077 Bac illariophyta Bacillariophyce ae Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula incerta Diatom 7924 Charophyta Charophyceae Charales Characeae Chara vulgaris Stonewort 5784 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Chlorococcaceae Chlorococcum sp. Al ga 1808 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Oocystaceae Ankistrodesmus falcatus Green algae 1808 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Oocystaceae Ankistrodesmus sp. Al ga 723 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Scenedesmus obliquus Al g ae 12523 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Scenedesmus sp. Green algae 362 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Selenastrum capricornutum Green algae 289 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmac eae Selenastrum sp. Al ga 362 Chlorophyta Trebouxiophycea Chlorellales Chlorellaceae Chlorella saccharophila Green algae 46127 Chlorophyta Trebouxiophycea Chlorellales Chlorellaceae Chlorella sp. Green algae 362 Magnoliophyta Liliopsida Arales Lemn aceae Lemna gibba Inflated duckweed 144600 Magnoliophyta Liliopsida Arales Lemnaceae Lemna minor Duckweed 5438 Magnoliophyta Magnoliopsida Haloragales Haloragaceae Myriophyllum spicatum Eurasian watermilfoil 26244955

**Table 3 .1**  **b. Freshwater T oxic**  **ity D**  **ata O**  **btained T**  **hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead U**  **sing the C**  **urrent USEPA H**  **ardness E**  **quation, A**  **cute -**  **to -**  **chronic Ratio**  **( ACR** **) and**  **C onversion**  **F actor. Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either**  **“Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 24.39 was used. All**  **values are dissolved lead in μg/L.** * **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Annelida Clitellata Lumbriculida Lumbriculidae Lumbriculus variegatus Oligochaete, worm 1442 59 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Ceriodaphnia dubi a Water flea 234 152 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Ceriodaphnia reticulata Water flea 409 17 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Daphnia magna Water flea 997 50 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Daphnia pulex Water flea 2361 97 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Simocephalus vetulus Water flea 11284 463 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Chironomus tentans Midge 98449 4036 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Tanytarsus dissimilis Midg e 512012 20993 Arthropoda Insecta Hemiptera Belostomatidae Lethocerus sp. Midge 75644 3101 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Crangonyctidae Crangonyx pseudogracilis Amphipod 59496 2439 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus pseudolimna eus Scud 309 13 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Hyalellidae Hyalella azteca Scud 19 1 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Procambarus clarkii Red swamp crayfish 3363308 137897 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Catostomidae Xy rauchen tex anus Razorback sucker 48901 2005 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Carassius auratus Goldfish 250635 10276 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Danio rerio Zebra danio 160880 6596 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

pri nidae Gila elegans Bonytail 48901 2005 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow 2443 855 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Ptychocheilus lucius Colorado squawfish 48901 2005 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy prinodontiformes Poeciliidae Poecilia reticulata Guppy 163907 6720 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill 99523 4080 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Micropterus dolomieui Smallmouth bass 5178 172 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho salmon,silver salmon 33098 1357 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout,donaldson trout 24565 13156

**Table 3 .1**  **b. Freshwater T oxic**  **ity D**  **ata O**  **btained T**  **hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead U**  **sing the C**  **urrent USEPA H**  **ardness E**  **quation, A**  **cute -**  **to -**  **chronic Ratio**  **( ACR** **) and**  **C onversion**  **F actor. Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either**  **“Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 24.39 was used. All**  **values are dissolved lead in μg/L.** * **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout 10617 213 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Th ymallus arcticus Arctic grayling 8538 350 Chordata Amphibia Anura Ranidae Rana catesbeiana Bullfrog 164 Ciliophora Ciliatea Heterotrichida Spirostomidae Spirostomum am biguum Protozoa 332058 13615 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Corbiculidae Corbicula manilensis Asiatic clam 347214 14236 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Dreissenidae Dreissena polymorpha Zebra mussel 189 Mollusca Gastro poda Architaenioglossa Viviparidae Viviparus bengalensis Snail 964 40 Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Lymnaeidae Lymnaea emarginata Pond snail 5883 Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Lymnaeidae Lymnaea palustris Marsh snail 10 Mollusca Gastropod a Basommatophora Physidae Aplexa hypnorum Snail 2175 89 Mollusca Gastropoda Neotaenioglossa Hydrobiidae Amnicola limosa Snail 146734 6016 Mollusca Gastropoda Neotaenioglossa Pleuroceridae Elimia livescens liver elimia, river snail 29835 1223 Ochrophy ta Coscinodiscophyceae Thalassiosirale Stephanodiscace Cyclotella meneghiniana Diatom 1617.49 Cyanophycota Cyanophyceae Chroococcales Chroococcaceae Anacystis nidulans Blue

- green algae 144600 Cyanophycota Cyanophyceae Nostocales Nostocaceae Nostoc mu scorum Cyanobacterium 14460 Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyceae Bacillariales Bacillariaceae Nitzschia obtusa Diatom 1785.8 Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyceae Bacillariales Bacillariaceae Nitzschia palea Diatom 2349.8 Bacillariophyta Bacillariophycea e Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula confervacea Diatom 1077.3 Bacillariophyta Bacillariophyceae Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula incerta Diatom 7924.1 Charophyta Charophyceae Charales Characeae Chara vulgaris Stonewort 5784 Chlorophyta Chlorophyc eae Chlorococcales Chlorococcaceae Chlorococcum sp. Al ga 1807.5 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Oocystaceae Ankistrodesmus falcatus Green algae 1807.5 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Oocystaceae Ankistrodesmus sp. Al ga 723 Chloro phyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Scenedesmus obliquus Al gae 12522.73 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Scenedesmus sp. Green algae 361.557

**Table 3 .1**  **b. Freshwater T oxic**  **ity D**  **ata O**  **btained T**  **hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead U**  **sing the C**  **urrent USEPA H**  **ardness E**  **quation, A**  **cute -**  **to -**  **chronic Ratio**  **( ACR** **) and**  **C onversion**  **F actor. Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. NOECs are either**  **“Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via ACR from acute LC50s. An ACR of 24.39 was used. All**  **values are dissolved lead in μg/L.** * **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Selenastrum capric ornutum Green algae 288.64 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Selenastrum sp. Al ga 361.5 Chlorophyta Trebouxiophycea Chlorellales Chlorellaceae Chlorella saccharophila Green algae 46127.4 Chlorophyta Trebouxiophycea Chlorellal es Chlorellaceae Chlorella sp. Green algae 361.5 Magnoliophyta Liliopsida Arales Lemnaceae Lemna gibba Inflated duckweed 144600 Magnoliophyta Liliopsida Arales Lemnaceae Lemna minor Duckweed 5437.83 Magnoliophyta Magnoliopsida Haloragales Haloraga ceae Myriophyllum spicatum Eurasian watermilfoil 262449 * The NJ Conversion Factor (0.723) was used to estimate the dissolved value for plants (algae) because hardness was not measured , and the CF for the current EPA criteria is hardness

depe ndent.58

**Table 3.1 c. Saltwater T**  **ox icity**  **D ata**  **O btained**  **T hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead**  **U sing the New Jersey**  **Acute -**  **to -**  **chronic ratio ( ACR** **) and conversio**  **n factor . Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. N**  **OECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via**  **ACR from**

**acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All values are dissolved lean in**  **μg/L. Phylum**  **Class Order**  **Family Genus**  **Species Common**  **Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Annelida Polychaeta Aciculata Dorvilleidae Ophryotrocha diadema Polychaete 3,329 237.8 Annelida Polychaeta Aciculata Dorvilleidae Ophryotrocha labronica Polychae te 4,755 339.6 Annelida Polychaeta Aciculata Nereididae Neanthes arenaceodentata Polychaete worm 8,440 602.9 Annelida Polychaeta Aciculata Nereididae Neanthes grubei Polychaete 4,755 339.6 Annelida Polychaeta Canalipalpata Ctenodrilidae Ctenodrilus s erratus Polychaete worm 5,231 373.7 Annelida Polychaeta Canalipalpata Pectinariidae Pectinaria californiensis Cone worm 4,755 339.6 Annelida Polychaeta Scolecida Capitellidae Capitella capitata Polychaete worm 1,141 81.5 Arthropoda Crustacea Thoracic a Balanidae Balanus eburneus Barnacle 49,547 3,539 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Ampeliscidae Ampelisca abdita Amphipod 520 37.2 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Corophiidae Corophium insidiosum Amphipod 4,755 339.6 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Elasmopus bampo Amphipod 9,510 679.3 Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Lysianassidae Onisimus litoralis Amphipod 3,329 237.8 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Cancridae Cancer anthonyi Yellow rock crab 951 67.9 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Cancridae Cancer magister Dungeness or edible crab 559 39.9 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Crangonidae Crangon sp. Caridean shrimp 1,997 142.7 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Palaemonidae Macrobrachium rosenbergii Giant river prawn 951 67. 9 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Palaemonidae Palaemon elegans Rockpool prawn 99,917 7,137 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Pandalidae Pandalus montagui Aesop shrimp 356,625 25,473 Arthropoda Malacostraca Decapoda Penaeidae Penaeus chinensis Fleshy prawn 1,522 108.7 Arthropoda Malacostraca Mysida Mysidae Americamysis bahia Opossum 2,977 16.259

**Table 3.1 c. Saltwater T**  **ox icity**  **D ata**  **O btained**  **T hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead**  **U sing the New Jersey**  **Acute -**  **to -**  **chronic ratio ( ACR** **) and conversio**  **n factor . Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. N**  **OECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via**  **ACR from**

**acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All values are dissolved lean in**  **μg/L. Phylum**  **Class Order**  **Family Genus**  **Species Common**  **Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** shrimp Arthropoda Maxillopoda Calanoida Acartiidae Acartia clausi Copepod 635 45.4 Chordata Actinopterygii Acipenseriformes Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula Paddlefish 9,925 709 Chordata Actinopterygii Atheriniformes Atherinidae Menidia beryllina Inland silverside 2,986 213 Chordata Actinopterygii Atheriniformes Atherinidae Menidia menidia Atlantic silverside 9,510 679.3 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy prinod ontiformes Cy prinodontidae Cy prinodon variegatus Sheepshead minnow 2,986 213.3 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy prinodontiformes Cy prinodontidae Fundulus heteroclitus Mummichog 23,106 1,650 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Mugilidae Liza vaigiensis Square tail mullet 129,769 9,269 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Serranidae Epinephelus sp. Rockcod, Grouper 16,167 1,155 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Terapontidae Terapon jarbua Tigerfish, crescent perch 1,170 83.6 Chordata Actinopterygii Pleuro nectiformes Bothidae Paralichthys olivaceus Hirame, flounder 28,530 2,038 Chordata Actinopterygii Pleuronectiformes Soleidae Cy noglossus joyneri Red Tongue Sole 713 50.9 Chordata Actinopterygii Scorpaeniformes Cottidae Scorpaenichthys marmoratus Cabezo n 1,441 102.9 Echinodermata Echinoidea Echinoida Echinidae Paracentrotus lividus Sea urchin, Echinoderm 458 32.7 Echinodermata Echinoidea Echinoida Strongylocentrotidae Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis Green sea urchin 9,225 658.9 Echinodermata Echi noidea Echinoida Strongylocentrotidae Strongylocentrotus purpuratus Purple sea urchin 9,225 658.9 Mollusca Bivalvia Myoida Myidae Mya arenaria soft

- shell clam 25,677 1,834 Mollusca Bivalvia Mytiloida Mytilidae Mytilus edulis Common bay mussel 453 32.360

**Table 3.1 c. Saltwater T**  **ox icity**  **D ata**  **O btained**  **T hrough ECOTOX and the 1998 Water Quality Criteria Document for Lead**  **U sing the New Jersey**  **Acute -**  **to -**  **chronic ratio ( ACR** **) and conversio**  **n factor . Unless otherwise indicated LC50s are from acute tests. N**  **OECs are either “Measured NOECs” from chronic tests or “Estimated NOECs” derived via**  **ACR from**

**acute LC50s. An ACR of 14 was used. All values are dissolved lean in**  **μg/L. Phylum**  **Class Order**  **Family Genus**  **Species Common**  **Name LC50**  **Meas NOEC**  **Est**

**NOEC** Mollusca Bivalvia Mytiloida Mytilidae Mytilus galloprovincialis Mediterranea n mussel 61,815 4,415 Mollusca Bivalvia Mytiloida Mytilidae Perna viridis Green mussel 8,388 599 Mollusca Bivalvia Ostreoida Ostreidae Crassostrea gigas Pacific oyster 587 4 2
Mollusca Bivalvia Ostreoida Ostreidae Crassostrea virginica American or virginia oyster 2,330 166.4 Mollusca Bivalvia Ostreoida Pectinidae Ar gopecten irradians Bay scallop 8,179 584.2 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Cardiidae Cerastoderma edule Cockle 4 75,500 33,964 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Donacidae Egeria radiata Freshwater Clam 208,269 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Mactridae Spisula solidissima Surf clam 5,135 366.8 Mollusca Bivalvia Veneroida Veneridae Mercenaria mercenaria Northern quahog 7 42 53.0 Mollusca Cephalopoda Teuthida Loliginidae Loligo opalescens California market squid 1,988 142.0 Bacillariophyta Coscinodiscophyceae Lithodesmiales Lithodesmiaceae Ditylum brightwellii Diatom 38.0 Bacillariophyta Fragilariophyceae Fragilarial es Fragilariaceae Asterionella japonica Diatom 256.8 Chlorophyta Chlorophyceae Volvocales Dunaliellaceae Dunaliella salina Green algae 855.9 Rhodophycota Rhodophyceae Gi gartinales Gracilariaceae Gracilaria tenuistipitata Red algae 3,804 Rhodophyco ta Rhodophyceae Rhodymeniales Champiaceae Champia parvula Red algae 19.361

**Table 3**  **.2a. Lead F**  **reshwater T**  **oxicity D**  **ata by T**  **axonomic G**  **roup for New Jersey C**  **riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations (EC A**  **s) in Table**  **4 .1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Annelida 1 3,190 227.8

Clitellata 1 3,190 227.8

Lumbriculida 1 3,190 227.8 Lum briculidae 1 3,190 227.8

Lumbriculus 1 3,190 227.8 Arthropoda 14 1,736 140.3 14.04 1.29

Branchiopoda 6 841 80.1 31.08 26.61

Cladocera 1 546 39.0 Moinidae 1 546 39.0 Moina 1 546 39.0 Diplostraca 5 916 92.5 27. 94 24.21 Daphniidae 5 916 92.5 27.94 24.21 Ceriodaphnia 2 274 65.3 Daphnia 2 1,629 82.6 Simocephalus 1 3,254 232.4 Insecta 3 5,885 420.4

Diptera 2 14,396 1,028.3 Chironomidae 2 14,396 1,028.3 Chironomus 1 1,280 91.4 Tanytarsus 1 161,952 11,568.0 Hemiptera 1 983 70.2 Belostomatidae 1 983 70.2 Lethocerus 1 983 70.2 Malacostraca 5 1,993 142.4 1.69 0.12

Amphipoda 3 322 23.0 Crangonyctidae 1 19,955 1,425.3 C rangonyx 1 19,955 1,425.362

**Table 3**  **.2a. Lead F**  **reshwater T**  **oxicity D**  **ata by T**  **axonomic G**  **roup for New Jersey C**  **riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations (EC A**  **s) in Table**  **4 .1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Gammaridae 1 95 6.8 Gammarus 1 95 6.8 Hyalellidae 1 18 1.3 Hyalella 1 18 1.3 Decapoda 2 30,754 2,196.7 Cambaridae 2 30,754 2,196.7

Orconectes 1 2,386 170.4 Procambarus 1 396, 418 28,315.6 Chordata 16 21,715 1,110.3 959.61 22.02

Actinopterygii 16 21,715 1,110.3 959.61 22.02

Cy priniformes 7 30,142 2,368.3 201.89 16.44

Catostomidae 1 122,910 8,779.3

Xy rauchen 1 122,910 8,779.3 Cy prinidae 6 23,84 7 1,903.7 172.49 14.19

Carassius 1 22,775 1,626.8 Cy prinus 1 912 65.2 Danio 1 342,781 24,484.4 Gila 1 122,910 8,779.3 Pimephales 1 1,709 237.9 Ptychocheilus 1 122,910 8,779.3 Cy prinodontiformes 2 50,837 3,631. 2

Poeciliidae 2 50,837 3,631.2 Gambusia 1 173,520 12,394.3 Poecilia 1 14,894 1,063.8 Perciformes 2 25,333 1,245.4 Centrarchidae 2 25,333 1,245.4

Lepomis 1 74,155 5,296.8 Micropterus 1 8,654 292.863

**Table 3**  **.2a. Lead F**  **reshwater T**  **oxicity D**  **ata by T**  **axonomic G**  **roup for New Jersey C**  **riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations (EC A**  **s) in Table**  **4 .1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Salmon iformes 4 5,413 103.6 1,060.86 7.17 Salmonidae 4 5,413 103.6 1,060.86 7.17

Oncorhynchus 2 11,595 111.6 Salvelinus 1 2,964 60.1 Th ymallus 1 2,155 153.9 Siluriformes 1 75,915 5,422.5 Heteropneustida 1 75,915 5,422.5 Heteropneustes 1 75,915 5,422.5 Ciliophora 2 3,879 277.1

Ciliatea 2 3,879 277.1

Heterotrichida 2 3,879 277.1 Spirostomidae 2 3,879 277.1 Spirostomum 2 3,879 277.1 Mollusca 7 18,901 1,350.1 550.23 39.30

Bival via 1 739,795 52,842.5

Veneroida 1 739,795 52,842.5 Corbiculidae 1 739,795 52,842.5 Corbicula 1 739,795 52,842.5 Gastropoda 6 10,258 732.7 512.35 36.60

Architaenioglos 2 15,918 1,137.0 Viviparidae 2 15,918 1,137.0 Filopaludina 1 137,980 9,855.7 Viviparus 1 1,836 131.2 Basommatophora 2 3,131 223.7 Lymnaeidae 1 10,122 723.0 Lymnaea 1 10,122 723.0 Physidae 1 969 69.2

Aplexa 1 969 69.264

**Table 3**  **.2a. Lead F**  **reshwater T**  **oxicity D**  **ata by T**  **axonomic G**  **roup for New Jersey C**  **riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations (EC A**  **s) in Table**  **4 .1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Neotaenioglossa 2 21,652 1,5 46.6 Hydrobiidae 1 9,133 652.4

Amnicola 1 9,133 652.4 Pleuroceridae 1 51,333 3,666.6 Elimia 1 51,333 3,666.6 Nemata 1 78,554 5,611.0

Secernentea 1 78,554 5,611.0

Rhabditida 1 78,554 5,611.0 Rhabditidae 1 78,554 5,611.0 Caenorhabditis 1 78,554 5,611.065

**Table 3.2b. Lead F reshwater**  **T oxicity**  **D ata by**  **T axonomic**  **G roup for**  **C urrent EPA**  **C riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations**  **(EC A**  **s) in Table 4.1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Annelida 1 1,442 59.1

Clitellata 1 1,442 59.1

Lumbriculida 1 1,442 59.1 Lumbriculidae 1 1,442 59.1 Lumbriculus 1 1,442 59.1 Arthropoda 12 6,895 362.1 19.2 0.66

Branchiopoda 5 1,205 89.5 106.4 9.40

Diplostraca 5 1,205 89.5 106.4 9.40 Daphniidae 5 1,205 89.5 106.4 9.40 Ceriodaphnia 2 309 50.6 Daphnia 2 1 ,534 69.7 Simocephalus 1 11,284 462.6 Insecta 3 156,227 6,405

Diptera 2 224,515 9,205 Chironomidae 2 224,515 9,205 Chironomus 1 98,449 4,036 Tanytarsus 1 512,012 20,993 Hemiptera 1 75,644 3,101 Belosto matidae 1 75,644 3,101 Lethocerus 1 75,644 3,101 Malacostraca 4 5,877 240.9 0.34 0.01

Amphipoda 3 708 29.0 Crangonyctidae 1 59,496 2,439 Crangonyx 1 59,496 2,439 Gammaridae 1 309 12.7 Gammarus 1 309 12.7 Hyalellidae 1 19.3 0.7966

**Table 3.2b. Lead F reshwater**  **T oxicity**  **D ata by**  **T axonomic**  **G roup for**  **C urrent EPA**  **C riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations**  **(EC A**  **s) in Table 4.1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Hyalella 1 19.3 0.79 Decapoda 1 3,363,309 137,897 Cambaridae 1 3,363,309 137,897 Procambarus 1 3,363,309 137,897 Chordata 13 33,678 1,296 2,344.5 118.64

Actinopterygii 13 33,678 1,296 2,344 .5 118.64

Cy priniformes 6 47,522 2,785 1,745.1 776.76

Catostomidae 1 48,901 2,005 Xy rauchen 1 48,901 2,005 Cy prinidae 5 47,251 2,975 970.9 441.97

Carassius 1 250,635 10,276 Danio 1 160,880 6,596 Gila 1 48,901 2,00 5 Pimephales 1 2,443 854.8 Ptychocheilus 1 48,901 2,005 Cy prinodontiformes 1 163,907 6,720

Poeciliidae 1 163,907 6,720 Poecilia 1 163,907 6,720 Perciformes 2 22,700 837.3 Centrarchidae 2 22,700 837.3 Lepomis 1 99,523 4,080 Micropterus 1 5,178 171.8 Salmoniformes 4 16,477 339.5 5,357.1 56.77 Salmonidae 4 16,477 339.5 5,357.1 56.77 Oncorhynchus 2 28,514 421.9 Salvelinus 1 10,617 213.1 Th ymallus 1 8,538 350.1 Cilio phora 1 332,058 13,61567

**Table 3.2b. Lead F reshwater**  **T oxicity**  **D ata by**  **T axonomic**  **G roup for**  **C urrent EPA**  **C riteria. The 5th percentile values are the basis for those effects concentrations**  **(EC A**  **s) in Table 4.1 that rely on surrogate data. All values are given**  **as dissolved lead in μg/L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus N**  **Mean LC50 Mean**  **NOEC 5th LC50**  **5th NOEC**  Ciliatea 1 332,058 13,615

Heterotrichida 1 332,058 13,615 Spirostomidae 1 332,058 13,615 Spirostomum 1 332,058 13,615 Mollusca 6 7,486 306.9 511.0 20.95

Bivalvia 1 347,214 14,236

Veneroida 1 347,214 14,236 Corbiculidae 1 347,214 14,236 Corbicula 1 347,214 14,236 Gastropoda 5 3,475 142.5 493.7 20.24

Architaenioglossa 1 964 39.5 Viviparidae 1 964 39.5 Viviparus 1 964 39.5 Basommatophora 2 3 ,577 146.7 Lymnaeidae 1 5,883 241.2 Lymnaea 1 5,883 241.2 Physidae 1 2,175 89.2 Aplexa 1 2,175 89.2 Neotaenioglossa 2 6,410 262.8 Hydrobiidae 1 1,377 56.5 Amnicola 1 1,377 56.5 Pleuroceridae 1 29,835 1,223 Elimia 1 29,835 1,22368

**Table 3 .**  **3 .**  **Freshw ater Toxicity Data for Total Dissolved Solids.**  **All values**  **are in**  **m g**  **TDS /L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name TDS**  **comp’t Mean** 

**LC50 Mean** 

**NOEC** Platyhelminthes Turbellaria Tricladida Pla nariidae Dugesia gonocephala Flatworm Cl 1,230 Annelida Clitellata Haplotaxida Tubificidae Tubifex tubifex Oligochaete, worm K+ 2,000 Annelida Clitellata Haplotaxida Tubificidae Tubifex tubifex Oligochaete, worm Ca2+ 814 Arthropoda B ranchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Ceriodaphnia dubia Water flea Cl 783 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Ceriodaphnia dubia Water flea HCO 3 - 1,077 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Daphnia magna Water flea Cl 1,467 372 Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphniidae Daphnia magna Water flea HCO 3 - 1,522 Arthropoda Maxillopoda Cyclopoida Cyclopidae Cyclops abyssorum prealpinus Copepod Ca2+ 7,000 Arthropoda Maxillopoda Cyclopoida Cyclopidae Cyclops abyssorum prealpinus Co pepod Mg 2+ 280 Arthropoda Malacostraca Isopoda Asellidae Lirceus fontinalis Isopod Cl 2,950 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Chironomus tentans Midge Synthetic effluent 1,543 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Chironomus attenuatus Midge Cl 4,900 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Cricotopus trifascia Midge K+ 1,567 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Cricotopus trifascia Midge Cl 1,406 Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Culicidae Culex sp. Mosquito Cl 6,222 Arthropoda Insec ta Trichoptera Hydroptilidae Hydroptila angusta Caddisfly K+ 2,316 Arthropoda Insecta Trichoptera Hydroptilidae Hydroptila angusta Caddisfly Cl 2,077 Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Physidae Physa gyrina Snail Cl 2,540 Mollusca Bivalvia Unionoid a Unionidae Obliquaria reflexa Threehorn wartback K+ >2,000 Chordata Actinopterygii Anguilliformes Anguillidae Angui l la rostrata American eel Cl 11,943 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout Cl 4,243 923 Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout Synthetic effluent 1,34869

**Table 3 .**  **3 .**  **Freshw ater Toxicity Data for Total Dissolved Solids.**  **All values**  **are in**  **m g**  **TDS /L.**  **Phylum Class**  **Order Family**  **Genus Species**  **Common Name TDS**  **comp’t Mean** 

**LC50 Mean** 

**NOEC** Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus keta Chum salmon Synthetic effluent 300 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow Cl 6,570 433 Chordata Actinopterygii Cy priniformes Cy

prinidae Carassius auratus Goldfish Cl 8,906 Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill Cl 5,685 Chlorophyta Chlo rophyceae Chlorococcales Scenedesmaceae Selenastrum capricornutum Green algae Synthetic effluent 2,02070

Besides toxicity

data in which L C50 and NOEC values were reported or estimated, other TDS data relevant to this evaluation was reviewed. Potassium ch loride, as well as other molluscicides has been found to be effective in controlling zebra mussels. Several researchers have been testing the effects of these chemicals on unionid mussels for the purpose of evaluating their safety on non - target organisms and their effectiveness in controlling zebra mussels. Waller et al. (1993) tested the acute toxicity of 18 chemicals including KCl on two fish species and the threehorn wartyback unionid mussel, Obliquaria reflexa

. An LC50 value could not be determined f or the KCl test with the threehorn wartyback mussel because of insufficient mortality at the highest c oncentration tested (2000 mg/L) indicating an L C50 > 2000 mg/L. In a separate study, Waller and Fisher (1998 ) tested a series of chemicals including calc ium chloride, potassium chloride and sodium chloride on eight unionid mussels to which zebra mussels were attached. Test s were conducted at a concentration and duration found to be lethal to the zebra mussel. The toxicity of the chloride salts to the uni onid mussels was varied between the eight species. The lowest mean mortality (6 percent) in a chloride salt treatment exposed to the unionids was 20,000 mg/L NaCl for 6 hours. The results for these tests suggest that acute effect levels for unionid musse ls are higher than the 500 mg/L criterion adopted by New Jersey
. A field approach to determine the effect of TDS on aquatic life was undertaken by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in their study , Statistical Analy sis of Surface Water Quality

Specific Conductance Data (FDEP 2005). Quantile regression was used to predict the effect of specific conductance on sensitive taxa found in Florida’s streams. Specific conductance is technically conductivity

normalized to a temperature of 25oC and recorded in μmhos/cm . Since s pecific conductance is a measure of water’s ability to conduct electricity , and therefore, a measure of the water’s ionic activity and content , it is directly

related to TDS

. Conversion factors relating specific conductance t o TDS range from 0.5 to 0.9 depending on the ionic make

- up. The study evaluated the correlative relationship between sensitive taxa and conductivity at sites determined to be “least disturbed.” Least disturbed sites were chosen to separate the effects of anthropogenic impacts from those related to specific conductance. A total of 585 sampling events at 86 “least disturbed” sites were evaluated with each sampling event containing both benthic community

and conductivity

measurements. The results show a st atistically significant (p<0.001) relationship at the 90 th quantile with the proportion of sensitive taxa and the proportion of sensitive individuals declining as conductivity increases. Specific co nduct ance in Florida’s “least impaired” sites ranged from approximately 20 to 600 μmhos/cm with the concentration of ions being very dependent on the hydrogeology of the watersh ed (i.e., groundwater

- influenced surface waters were much higher in conductivity than streams influence d primarily from runoff

). The mo del predicts that as conductivity increases from 20 to 200 μmhos/cm , about 50 percent of sensitive taxa are lost and 75 percent are lost b y 600 μmhos/cm . This relationship strongl y suggests that the composition of taxa in Florida as well as s treams outsid e of Florida naturally varies according to conductivity. Assuming a conversion factor of 0.7, a conductivity71

measurement of 600 μmhos/cm is 420 mg/LTDS a concentration at which many of sensitive taxa found at low TDS waters would be gone. The Florida model suggests that there are sensitive taxa that do not inhabit surface waters near the New Jersey

criterion of 500 mg/L

. It is important to reiterate that all the observations in the Florida study were made at “least impaired” sites, sites which have mi nimal influence from man. Since surface waters may naturall y contain TDS levels in this range, it is important to understand the natural water quality and specifically the TDS levels of the surface waters in which the two aquatic species of interest (dwarf wedge mussel and shortnose sturgeon) live. The prime habitat of the shortnose sturgeon includes river mouths, tidal rivers, estuaries, and bay s suggesting this species has a tolerance for higher levels of TDS. The current and historical record of the d warf wedge mussel indicates this species inhabits a range of stream types and water quality conditions from small tributaries to large rivers (e.g., Potomac River at Washington DC) (Moser 1993)

. Although limited information was found relating current populations and TDS levels, the dwarf wedge mussel can apparentl y tolerate a range of water quality conditions. **3 .3.**  **2 Comparison of New Jersey Lead Criteria with Current EPA Lead Criteria**  **(Freshwater Only)** New Jersey

derived their 2002 freshwater acute and chronic criteria without a hardness adjustment, which is a departure from the current EPA recommended freshwater lead criteria. An e ffects analysi s w as also performed on the EPA hardness

- based lead criteria to assess any potential differences in the protection of listed species. The estimates for acute and chronic effect concentrations of lead for the listed species were based on LC 50 and NOE C values derived using the respective parameters New Jersey and EPA used to calculate their c riterion. Since saltwater criteria for both New Jersey and EPA do not adjust for hardness, this comparison was restricted to the freshwater criteria. The respective parameters for New Jersey and EPA were:
Parameter New Jersey Current EPA

Acute Chronic Acute Chronic Hardness adjustment None None exp{1.273 [ln(hardness)]

- 1.460} (CF) exp{1.273 [ln (hardness)]

- 4.705} (CF) Acute

- to
chronic ratio NA 14 NA 24.39 Conversion factor 0.723 0.723 1.46203

- [(ln hardness)(0.145712)] 1.46203

- [(ln hardness)(0.145712)]
**3 .**  **3. 3**  **Multiple Routes of Exposure** Lead’ s exposure through the diet is a pot ential additional threat to listed species. Therefore, the added risk factor from other exposure routes, F R , is applied in the chronic72

assessment for lead, as per the Methods Manual . The derivation of the F R for lead is based on the data provided in the text box below. **Basis for Derivation of Risk Factors for Lead -**  **New Jersey Criteria** Species Aquatic

NOEC, μg/ml Diet NOEC,

μg/g ww Potency

Factora Food

Concentration Factor Risk Factor b
Oncorhynchus mykiss 0.021 c 7040 d 2.98 E

- 6 1 0 8 9 e 1.0032

**Basis for Derivati on of Risk Factors for Lead**  **- EPA Criteria**  Species Aquatic

NOEC, μg/ml Diet NOEC,

μg/g ww Potency

Factora Food

Concentration Factor Risk Factor b
Oncorhynchus mykiss 0.131 c 7040 d 1.86 E

- 5 1 08 9 e 1.020 6

a Potency

Factor = aquatic NOEC ÷ diet NOEC b Risk factor = 1 + (PF x Food CF); the chronic EC A values in Table 4.1 were divided by

the risk factors to obtain the EC A  values. c Aquatic NOEC is a measured value for O. mykiss

. d Diet NOEC is a measured valu e for O. mykiss

. e Food CF is the 84 th percentile of BCF/BAFs determined for macroinvertebrate and fish

. The 84 th percentile approximates one standard deviation above the geometric mean. Risk factors were not determined for TDS because the common constit uents in TDS ( K+ , HCO 3 - , Mg 2+ , Cl - , SO 4 - , Na+ , Ca2+ ) are not known to bioaccumulate in food. The biological evaluation for TDS assumed the cause of toxic effects to aquatic organisms was through aqueous exposure. **3 .3.**  **4 Aquatic Plants**  This section consists of the assessment results for water

- column only chronic toxicity

to aquatic plants. As indicated in the Methods Manual , there are few existing data on acute toxicity to plants at criteria levels for most of the 304(a) criteria pollutants, and these few data indicate that plants do not demonstrate acute effects at criteria levels. Accordingl y, the assessment methodology for the listed plant species is founded on appropriate measures of chronic toxicity , where: ( 1) the chronic values for plants (reported in Table 3 .1 as the NOEC) are from tests where the chemical in the exposure medium was measured, and (2) the endpoint measured was biologicall y significant (e.g., vegetative growth or reproduction). Because plant s are rarely as sensitive as fish and macroinvertebrates, the recovery rate for phy

toplankton is extremely

rapid, and because73

there are few data available on the toxicity to plants, the effects determination for plants is based on a comparison of the chronic criterion to the most sensitive acceptable plant value. Toxicity d ata for 20 plant species, 16 algal taxa and 4 vascular plant taxa, are available for lead

. The most sensitive are three algal taxa, Scenedesmus sp., Selenastrum sp ., and Chlorella sp

. , each with a measured NOEC value of 362 μg/L. Least sensitive taxa with measured NOEC values exceeding 100,000 μg/L are the blue

- green alga, Anacystis nidulans , and two vascular plants, Lemna gibba and Myriophyllum spicatum

. Because the potential chroni c effect concentration exceeds the freshwater and saltwater CCC by at least an order of magnitude, EPA is making a “not likely to adversel y affect” finding for the s wamp p ink, Helonias bullata , Kneiskern’s beaked rush , Rhynchospora knieskernii and sensitiv e joint vetch , Aeschynomene virginica

. Note: The EPA does not adjust lead toxicity values to plants based on hardness; therefore the NOEC values for plants are same for both the New Jersey and EPA data sets. Only one test with the alga, Selenastrum capri cornutum was available for TDS. EVS (1997) reported an NOEC for S. capricornutum of >2020 mg TDS/Lfor a s ynthetic effluent prepared to match the overall chemical characteristics of an effluent discharged from the a mine. Because the potential chronic ef fect concentration exceeds the freshwater CCC by almost three orders of magnitude, EPA is making a “not likely to adversel y affect” finding for the swamp pink, Helonias bullata , Kneiskern’s beaked rush , Rhynchospora knieskernii and sensitive joint vetch , A eschynomene virginica

. **3 .**  **4 Aquatic**  **- Dependent Species**  **3 .**  **4 .1 Overview and Background**  This section c omprises the assessment of the 3 freshwater and 7 sal twater aquatic

dependent animal species that have more than limited exposure to “ surface waters of New Jersey ,” and which may

be affected b y the lead freshwater and saltwater aquatic life criteria and the TDS freshwater criterion . The assessment methodolo gy for aquatic

dependent species is in Section 3.4 of the Methods Manual

. Effects to aquatic

- dependent animals from contaminants can be manifested directly through exposure of the contaminant from food and/or water intake and indirectly through the elimin ation of their prey . This section develops the variables needed to perform an effects assessment to aquatic

- dependent animals, namely :

 bioconcentration/bioaccumulation factor (BCF/BAF) used to estimate the concentration of the contaminant in the prey ti ssue living in water at chronic criterion concentrations ,  a dietary NOEC estimate for each listed aquatic

- dependent animal, and  the range of effect levels for aquatic prey species of the listed aquatic

dependent species

.74

The common constituents that mak e up TDS ( K+ , HCO 3 - , Mg 2+ , Cl - , SO 4 - , Na+ , Ca2+ ) do not bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms and therefore exposure from TDS in food to aquatic

- dependent animals is not included in this biological evaluation. Conversel y, lead does bioaccumulate in aquatic o rganisms over a long term exposure , albeit to levels not very high (GLEC 1998). Similar to other inorganic metals, the low bioaccumulation potential of lead may

be due in part to differences in the mechanisms for chemical uptake by aquatic organisms (e.g. , passive diffusion, facilitated transport, active transport), differences in sorption affinities to biotic and abiotic ligands, and differences in chemical speciation in water (EPA 2000). It is also possible that simple lead salts are poorly absorbed in animal intestine. An apparent characteristic of lead, as well as for certain other metals, is that BCF /BAF s for lead diminish up the food chain such that fish exhibit the lowest bioconcentration potential (Varanasi and Markey , 1978). Also, the period of time required to reach maximum values may be in the order of several weeks as opposed to several months (Allen, 1994, 1995). **3 .**  **4 .2**  **Freshwater Exposure Assessment**  Bioconcentration/bioaccumulation factors (BCF/BAFs) are used to estimate the concentration of lead in prey tissue (aquatic organisms). BCF/BAFs were available for 6 freshwater invertebrate species and 3 f ish studies (Table 3

. 4 ). The geometric mean of BCF/BAFs for 9 aquatic animals is 13 8 L/kg with a range of 3 ( Procambarus clarkia ) to 3670 L/kg ( Chironomus riparius ). Given the information available for assigning appropriate food partition coefficients, relative to natural (field) water and sediment concentrations, the freshwater partiti on coefficient is set at 1089 L/k g for invertebrates and vertebrates, which is the 84 th percentile BCF (from Table 3

. 4 ) and is roughl y the equivalent of the geometric mean BCF /BAF plus one standard deviation (the value recommended for calculating the asses sment exposure concentration in the Methods Manual). **Table 3**  **. 4**  **. Lead B ioconcentration**  **and B**  **ioaccumulation F**  **actors a**  **(BCF/BAFs) for**  **F resh**  **water A**  **quatic F**  **ood O**  **rganisms. BCF /BAF**  **s are B**  **ased on W**  **et W**  **eight. Sources I**  **nclude EPA’s ECOTOX D**  **atabase, and**  **the Ambien t Water Quality Criteria**  **D ocument for**  **L ead (GLEC 1998).** 

**Species Exposure**  **duration (days)**  **BCF /** 

**BAF Reference**  Invertebrate

Lymnaea palustris 133 1700 Borgmann, Kramar, and Loveridge , 1978 Physa integra 28 738 Spehar et al

. , 1978 Pteronarcys do rsata 28 1120 Spehar et al

. , 197875

**Species Exposure**  **duration (days)**  **BCF /** 

**BAF Reference**  Brachycentrus sp. 28 499 Spehar et al

. , 1978 Chironomus riparius 28 3670 Timmermans et al

. , 19 9 2 Procambarus clarkii 84 2.8 Naqvi and Howell , 1993 Fish Salvelinus fontinalis 140 42 Holcombe et al

. , 197 6

Lepomis ma crochirus BAF/NA 45 Atchinson et al

. , 1977 Oreochromis aureus 45 47 Allen 1994 Oreochromis aureus 45 38 Allen 1994 Oreochromis aureus 45 37 Allen 1994 Oreochromis aureus 140 147 Allen 1995 Oreochromis aureus 140 172 Allen 1995 Oreochromis aureus 140 41 Allen 1995
a Bioconcentration and bioaccumulation factor: concentration measured in whole animal tissue (soft tissue mo llusks) in units of  g/kg fresh weight, divided by concentration measured in water (  g/L).
**3 .**  **4. 3 Saltwater Exposure Assessment**  F ew er studies are available to determine the bioconcentration factors (BCFs) for lead f or saltwater food items of aqu atic species (Table 3

. 5 ). The data exist for only two classes of organisms: bivalve molluscs and bony fish. The BCF values reported in Table 3

. 5 range from a low of 1.8 L/k g for the salmonid Oncorhynchus kisutch to a high of 5,271 L/k g for Crassostrea gigas . The range of BCF values within this latter group of saltwater organisms (bivalve molluscs) is quite large and spans two orders of magnitude. For assessments of fish

- eating wil dlife, the BCF values in Table 3 .5 are conservative as lead levels in the tissue of fishes are lower than in invertebrates. Given the information available for assigning appropriate food partition coefficients, relative to natural (field) water and sediment concentrations, the saltwater partition coefficient is set at 679.5 L/k g for invertebrates and vertebrates, which is the 84 th percentile BCF (from Table 3

. 5 )

.76

**Table 3**  **. 5**  **. Lead B**  **ioconcentration F**  **actors a**  **(BCFs) for S**  **altwater A**  **quatic F**  **ood O**  **rganisms. BCFs are B**  **ased on W**  **et W**  **eight. Sources I**  **nclu de EPA’s ECOTOX**  **D atabase, the Ambient Water Quality Criteria**  **D ocument for**  **L ead (GLEC 1998),**  **and Jarvinen and Ankley (1999).**

**Species Exposure**  **duration (days)**  **BCF Reference**  Bivalve Mytilus edulis 40 650 b Schulz

- Baldes, 1974 Crassostrea gigas 2 1 5271 Amiard et al. , 1995 Crassostrea virginica 140 536 Zaroogian et al. , 1979 Crassostrea virginica 49 68 b Pringle et al. , 1968 Crassostrea virginica 140 69 1 b Pringle et al. , 1968 Mercenaria mercenaria 56 1 8 b Pringle et al. , 1968 Fish C Onco rhynchus kisutch (200g) 14 1.8 Varanasi and Markey, 1978 Oncorhynchus kisutch (200g) 14 2.3 Varanasi and Markey, 1978 Oncorhynchus kisutch (200g) 14 2 5 Varanasi and Markey, 1978
a Bioconcentration factor: concentration measured in whole animal tissue (soft tissue mollusks) in units of  g/kg fresh weight, divided by concentration measured in water (  g/L). b Factor was converted from dry weight to wet weight basis by dividing tissue concentration by 5 (assuming 80% moisture in tissue). c Factor based on renewal tests. **3 .4.4**  **Toxicity As sessmen**  **t -**  **Lead** In formation on the chronic dietary effects of lead to potential surrogat e species is compiled in Table 3

. 6 . Data are primarily from U.S. EPA’s ECOTOX database

. The long

- term chronic dietary effects of lead have been assessed on the endpoints: mortality , growth , reproduction and eggshell thickness using surrogates of aquatic

dependent species (Table 3

. 6 ). For vertebrates, the NOECs for mortality and growth for several bird species and two rodent species range from a low of 54 mg Pb/kg diet to 2,000 mg Pb/kg diet

. A diet concentration of 100 mg Pb/kg did not affect egg thickness of mallard d ucks in an 85 d study

(Table 3

. 6 ). A lowest

- observed effect concentration (LOEC) based on growth was determined for juvenile shrew fed a 371

- 423 mg Pb/kg diet in a 31 d study

. For the vertebrate data, the chronic dietary effects concentration is set at77

100 mg Pb/kg diet, the 16 th percentile of the vertebrate values in Table 3

. 6

. This value is rou ghl y the equivalent to the geometric mean chronic dietary toxicity value minus one standard deviation (the value recommended for calculating the assessment exposure concentration in the Methods Manual). New Jersey

has a listed insect, the Northeastern beach tiger beetle that feeds on dead and live marine organisms. Two chronic studies using invertebrates have assessed the effect of dietary lead on growth and reproduction. Denneman and Straalen ( 1991 ) reported an NOEC of 431 mg/kg f

or growth and reproduction in an oribatid mite after a 3 month exposure to lead in its diet. Growth and cocoon production in the compost worm was not affected b y 886 mg/kg, but this concentration did affect hatching success of exposed worms. The chronic dietary effects concentration is set at 431 mg Pb/kg diet for invertebrates based on the oribatid mite study , because of the uncertainty of the NOEC for compost worm hatching success. **Table 3**  **. 6**  **. Chronic Toxicity of Lead to Potential Surrogate Species Bas ed on Wet**  **Weight of Oral Dose. Data are from ECOTOX.**

**Species (age) Chemical**  **Dose Description, Duration, and**  **Endpoint Acute Toxicity** 

**LD50 (m**  **g/kg) Chronic Toxicity** 

**(m g/kg diet)**  **Reference** Oribatid mite Platynothrus peltifer Lead

nitrate Diet , 3 months,

N OEC

– Grow

th and reproduction - 431 Denneman and Straalen, 1991
Com post worm Eisenia fetida Lead

nitrate Diet, 8 weeks,

NOEC

– Grow

th, cocoon production - 886 Reinecke and Reinecke, 1996 Com post worm Eisenia fetida Lead

nitrate Diet, 8 weeks,

LOEC

– H atching success - 886 Reinecke and Reinecke, 1996 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhinchos Lead Diet, 85 d, NOEC

- Egg thickness - 100 Haegele et al., 1974 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhinchos (22 wk) Lead Diet, 10 w k, NOEC

- Grow

th (weight) - 207 Heinz et al., 1999
Swan goose Anser cygnoides (26 wk) Acetic acid

Lead (2+)salt Diet, 12 w

k, NOEC

- Grow

th (w t. gain) - 2000 Johnson and Dam ron, 1982
American kestrel, Falco sparverius Lead Diet, 5

- 7 mo, NOEC

- carcass weight - 54 Franson, et al. 198378

**Species (age) Chemical**  **Dose Description, Duration, and**  **Endpoint Acute Toxicity** 

**LD50 (m**  **g/kg) Chronic Toxicity** 

**(m g/kg diet)**  **Reference** American kestrel, Falco sparverius Acetic acid

Lead (2+)salt Diet, 60 d, NOEC

- Mortality - 448.3 Custer et al., 1984
Domestic chicken Gallus domesticus (4 wk) Acetic acid

Lead (2+)salt Diet, 4 wk, NOEC

- Growth (wt. gain) - 100 Dam ron et al., 1969

Common shrew Sorex ara neus, (<=5 mo) Lead Diet, 31 d, LOEC

- Grow th (weight) - 371

- 423 Pankakoski, et al. 1994 Japanese quail Coturnix japonica (juvenile, 1d) Acetic acid

Lead (2+)salt Diet, 14 d, NOEC

- Growth (weight) - 200 Stone et al., 1981
Norway rat Rattus norvegicus (juv enile) Acetic acid

Lead (2+)salt Diet, 22 mo,

NOEC

- Growth (weight) - 1000 Jessup and Shott, 1969

**3 .**  **4 .5**  **Risk Analysis** The exposure of lead to aquatic

- dependent organisms through their food is predicted b y the “estimated residue level in diet.” This value is determined by multiplying the CCC for lead by the bioaccumulation potential for lead which is represented by the 84 th percentile of the BCF/BAF values. The “estimated residue levels in diet” for the freshwater and saltwater lead chronic criteria are: Pb Freshwater (NJ ) = 5.4  g/L (CCC) * 1089 L/kg (BCF) = 5.881 mg/kg Pb Freshwater (EPA) = 2.5  g/L (CCC) * 1089 L/kg (BCF) = 2.722 mg/kg Pb Saltwater = 24  g/L (CCC) * 679.5 L/kg (BCF) = 16.31 m g/kg This tissue exposure concentration for each criterion (5.881, 2.722, and 16.31 mg Pb/kg prey tissue) is substantially

below any

potential chronic dietary threshold for aquatic

dependent species (invertebrates: 431 mg Pb/kg diet; vertebrates: 100 mg P b/kg diet) and therefore, the effects determination of lead and TDS for aquatic

- dependent species is made solely on the acute and chronic assessment effects concentration (EC A) values for food organisms of these species listed in Table s 4

. 1, 4 .2 and 4 .3 (f ound in Section 4 of this document). In each instance, the food item effect concentration was derived from known toxicity values for suspected food items.79

**3 .5 Food Items of Federally**  **- Listed Species**  This section consists of the assessment results for water

- column only toxicity to food items of aquatic and aquatic

- dependent animals. For a description of the methodology to assess the effects of the New Jersey lead and TDS aquatic life criteria on food items of such species refer to Section 3.5 of the Methods Manual

. The aquatic toxicity

data used for this assessment are presented in Table s 3

. 1 (lead) and 3.3 (TDS) as acute (geometric mean LC50) and chronic (geometric mean NOEC) values for a given spe cies. These data are then grouped into common categories (e.g., oligochaetes , insects, fish, etc.) that are relevant as food for the listed species in New Jersey . The range of acute and chronic EC A values for freshwater (based on New Jersey and EPA criteria) and saltwater food items are shown in the text box es below. **Lead: Range of Effect Concentrations for**  **Freshwater Food Items Used in**  **Table s**  **4 .1**  **a and 4 .**  **2a**

**– Ne** **w Jersey Freshwater Criteria Parameters**  **Organism Type Acute EC (**  **g Pb/L) Chronic EC (**  **g Pb/L )**  Detritus, plant matter

--- 289

- 262,449 Diatoms

--- 1,077

- 7,924 Oligochaetes 1,405 228 Shrimp and crayfish 7.9

- 176,633 1

- 28,316 Insect s 433

- 71,344 70

- 11,568 Snails 427

- 60,784 15 Seeds, plants and carrion 7.9

- 325,901 15

- 262,449 Fish and turtles 402

- 151,005 21

- 565

**Lead: Range of Effect Concentrations for Freshwater Food Items Used in**  **Table s**  **4 .1**  **b and 4**  **.2b**

**– EPA**  **Freshwater Criteria Parameters**  **Organism Type Acute EC (**  **g Pb/L) Chronic EC (**  **g Pb/L)** Detritus, plant matter

--- 289

- 262,249 Diatoms

--- 1,077

- 7,924 Oligochaetes 503 59 Shrimp and crayfish 8.4

- 1,481,633 1

- 137,89780

**Lead: Range of Effect Concentrations for Freshwater Food Items Used in**  **Table s**  **4 .1**  **b and 4**  **.2b**

**– EPA**  **Freshwater Criteria Parameters**  **Organism Type Acute EC (**  **g Pb/L) Chronic EC (**  **g Pb/L)** Insect s 33,323

- 225,556 3,101

- 20,933 Snails 424

- 64,641 10 Seeds, plants and carrion 8.4

- 1,481 ,633 1

- 144,600 Fish and turtles 1,076

- 110,412 13 1

- 855

**Lead: Range of Effect Concentrations for Saltwater Food Items Used in**  **Table 4**  **. 3**  **Organism Type Acute EC (**  **g Pb/L) Chronic EC (**  **g Pb/L)** Algae

- 19.03

– 3,804 Jellyfish, sponges, and sessile organis ms a 202

- 4,064 32.7

- 658.9

worms 503

- 3,718 81.5

- 602.9 Arthropods 229

- 157,104 16.2 Crustaceans 229

- 157,104 16.2 Horseshoe crabs b 229

- 157,104 16.2 Blue crabs b 229

- 157,104 16.2 Molluscs 200

- 209,471 208,269 Fish 314

- 57,167 50.9

- 9,269 a Used data for Ec hinodermata because there were no data for these groups

. b Used data for Crustaceans because there were no data for this taxon.
**Total Dissolved Solids: Range of Effect Concentrations for Freshwater Food Items**  **Organism Type Acute EC (**  **g Pb/L) Chronic EC (**  **g Pb/L)** Detritus, plant matter

--- 2020 Diatoms

--- 202081

**Total Dissolved Solids: Range of Effect Concentrations for Freshwater Food Items**  **Organism Type Acute EC (**  **g Pb/L) Chronic EC (**  **g Pb/L)** Oligochaetes 814

- 2,000 372

- 1,543 a Shrimp and crayfish 2,950 b 372

- 1,543 a Insect s 1,406

- 6,222 372

- 1,543 a Snails 2,540 372

- 1,543 a Seeds, plants and carrion N/A 2020 Fish an d turtles 4,243

- 11,943 300

- 1,348 a Range is for all invertebrates b Malacostraca was used as a surrogate
**3 .6 Effects on Glochidia Host Species**  EPA’s recent revision of the Methods Manual (No vember 2005) includes an evaluation of criteria concentrations that are likel y to adversel y affect freshwater mussels due to toxic effect to the host fish species of glochidia. Glochidia are mussel larvae, which are released by the f emale mussel to find a suitable fish host for transformation into juvenile mussels. Glochidia attach to the gills or fins of the host fish where they ency st and eventually

fall and settle to the bottom as juveniles. The listed species of New Jersey inclu des the dwarf wedge mussel which has two host fish species to which its glochidia attach, the tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi) and the mottled sculpin ( Cottus bairdi ). EPA recommends using the toxicity information from Table s 3 .1 and 3 .2 from this document to estimate the sensitivity to the host species. Because the host species are not listed species, the central tendency of the toxicity (mean LC50 or NOEC) of the obligate host species, and not the 5 th percentile conservative estimates, is used t o assess whether there is an impact. The mean acute and chronic EC A values of obligate fish host species are compared to the acute and chronic criteria. The lead toxicity data set (Table 3 .1) does not contain EC A values for either of the host species. T he closest surrogate taxon for the mottled sculpin ( Cottus bairdi) is the family Cottidae in Table 3 .2 which has a mean LC50 of 1441  g/L (both New Jersey and EPA criteria); the mean NOEC for this taxon is 102.9  g/L (New Jersey

criteria) and 59.07  g/L (E PA criteria). The closest surrogate taxon for the tessellated darter (

Etheostoma olmstedi ) is the order Perciformes in Table 3 .2 , which has a mean LC50 of 13,488  g/L (both New Jersey and EPA criteria); the mean NOEC for this taxon is 963.4  g/L (New Jers ey criteria) and 553.0  g/ L (EPA criteria). Because all the EC A values for the host species are well above the respective acute and chronic criteria (both New Jersey

and EPA) , EPA make s a “ not likely to adversel y a ffect ” finding for the host species of the dwarf wedge mussel

.82

For TDS, the closest surrogate for the two host fish species is the bluegill sunfish in the order Perciformes. The acute value for the bluegill (5,685 mg Cl -/L ) is well above the New Jersey ’s numeric criterion of 500 mg TDS/L

. Si nce no chronic values were available for the bluegill, the chronic EC A value was estimated by calculating the geometric mean of the four NOEC values for the class Actinopterygii (638 mg/L). Because both the EC A values for the host species are above the re spective numeric criterion, EPA makes a “not likely to adversel y affect” finding for the host species of the dwarf wedge mussel.
**4 .0 EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS**  **4 .1 No Effect** 

**– Notes**  EPA is making a “no effect” determination for species that have limited exposure to “waters of New Jersey .” See S ection 2.3 of this document for a discussion on which species were selected as aquatic or aquatic

- dependent and which species were considered to have limited exposure

. **4 .2 May Effect** 

**– Notes**  This section contains the effect determinations for the species addressed in this biological evaluation , which are found in Table s 4 .1 , 4 .2 and 4 .3 below. These effect determinations are based on the data and anal ys es in Section 3 of this document and are according to the methodology

described in Section 4 of the Methods Manual . The effect determinations for lead and TDS rely

on surrogate data and accordingl y are a con servative estimate of the assessment effect concentration (EC A). The effect determinations were made on aquatic and aquatic

- dependent listed species according to the following rationale as given in Section 4.2 of the Methods Manual

. **Aquatic Species: Ra**  **tionale for the Effect Determination in the Lead Analysis**  **Type of Criterion If the effect**  **s con**  **centration is: Then the effects** 

**determination is:** New Jersey freshwater lead acute ( 38  g/L)  3 8  g/ L < 3 8  g/L Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a New Jersey

freshwater lead chronic (5.4  g/L)  5.4  g/ L <5. 4  g/L Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a New Jersey

saltwater lead acute (210  g/L)  210  g/ L <210  g/L Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a83

New Jersey

saltwater lead chronic (24  g/L)  24  g/ L <24  g/L Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a EPA freshwater lead acute (65  g/L)  65  g/ L <65  g/L Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a EPA freshwater lead chronic (2.5  g/L)  2.5  g/ L <2.5  g/L Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a New Jersey

freshwater TDS (500  g/L)  500  g/ L <500  g/L Not likely to adv ersel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a
**Aq uatic**  **- dependent Species: Rationale for the Effect**  **Determination in the Lead Analysis**

**Estimated Residue Level in Diet If the**  **chronic dietary effects**  **c oncentration is:**  **Then the effects**

**determination is:** New Jersey

Freshwater (5.88 mg/kg)  5.88 mg/kg < 5.88 mg/kg Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a New Jersey

Saltwater (16.31 mg/kg)  16.31 mg/kg <16.31 mg/kg Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a EPA Freshwater (2.72 mg/kg)  2.72 mg/kg <2.7 2 mg/kg Not likely to adversel y affect. Likel y to adversel y affect a

a Unless further evaluation or best professional judgment indicates it is reasonable to conclude not likel y to adversel y affect. **4 .2.1 Not Likely to Adversely Affect**  Lead According to Table s 4 .1 , 4 .2 and 4 .3 , a “not likel y to adversel y affect” finding was determined for all aquatic and aquatic

- dependent animal species. In making the effect determination s for the food item component, a ‘l ikely to adversel y affect’ determination is made where there is toxicity to a meaningful portion of the listed species’ diet, as indicated in Section 4.2 of the Methods Manual

. The chronic effect concentration for plants (see Section 3.3.4) exceeds the freshwater and saltwater CCC by

at least an order of magnitude. Therefore, EPA is making a “not likely to adversel y affect” finding for the swamp pink, Helonias bullata , Kneiskern’s beaked rush, Rhynchospora knieskernii and sensitive joint vetch, Aeschyno mene virginica
.84 **Table 4.1a. Results of Effects Analysis for Freshwater Aquatic Listed Species (all units in**  **g/L) (New Jersey Dissolved Freshwater Lead Criteria: CMC = 38**   **g/L, CCC = 5.4**  **g/L)**
Scientific Name Saltwater v.

Freshwater Exposure Order Ac ute EC Aa (μg/L) Chronic

EC Ab (μg/L) Chronic

ECA’ (μg/L) Taxon

Represented by ECA Food Items Analysis c Adverse Effects Family Item s Ac ute EC A (μg/L) Chronic EC A

(μg/L) Dwarf Wedge Mussel Alasmidonta heterodon FW Unionoida Unionidae 242 S 39.3 S 39.2 Mollusca Detritus, plant matter diatoms N/A

N/A 289

- 262,449

1,077

- 7,924 Not likely to

adversely affect Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum FW Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae 191 I 31.0 I 30.9 Acipenser brevirostrum oligocha etes,

aquatic insect larvae, plants, snails, shrimp, and crayfish 1,405

433

- 71,344 N/A 427

- 60,784 7.9

- 176,633 228

70

- 11,568 289

- 262,449 15

- 9,856 1

- 28,316 Not likely to

adversely affect

a Ac ute assessment effects concentration derived using divisor of 2.27. b Chronic assessment effects concentration based on the NOEC. c Ranges of toxicity values for food items are provided in the order the food items appear. Ranges are from text box (Section 3.5 this document). I Estimate derived from an ICE model (lo wer bound of the 95% confidence interval) at the species, genus, or family level. All selected models are listed in Appendix A. S Estimate derived from the SSD model (5% percentile). Value taken from Table 3.2a.85 **Table 4.1b. Results of Effects Analysis f or Freshwater Aquatic Listed Species (all units in**   **g/L) (USEPA Freshwater Dissolved Lead Criteria based on a hardness of 100 m**  **g/L as CaCO 3**  **: CMC = 65**  **g/L, CCC = 2.5**  **g/L)**
Scientific Name Saltwater v.

Freshwater Exposure Order Ac ute EC Aa (μg/L) Chronic

EC Ab (μg/L) Chronic

ECA’ (μg/L) Taxon

Represented by ECA Food Items Analysis c Adverse Effects Family Item s Ac ute EC A (μg/L) Chronic EC A

(μg/L) Dwarf Wedge Mussel Alasmidonta heterodon FW Unionoida Unionidae 225 S 21.0 S 20.6 Mollusca detritu s diatoms plant matter N/A

N/A N/A 289

- 262,249

1,077

- 7,924 289

- 262,249 Not likely to

adversely affect Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum FW Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae 278 I 25.9 I 25.4 Acipenser brevirostrum oligochaetes,

aquatic insect larvae, plants, snails, shrimp, and crayfish 503

33,323

- 225,556 N/A 424

- 64,641 8.4

- 1,481,633 59

3,101

- 20,993 289

- 262,249 10

- 6,016 1

- 137,897 Not likely to

adversely affect

a Ac ute assessment effects concentration derived using divisor of 2.27. b Chronic assessm ent effects concentration based on the NOEC. c Ranges of toxicity values for food items are provided in the order the food items appear. Ranges are from text box (Section 3.5 this document). I Estimate derived from an ICE model (lower bound of the 95% con fidence interval) at the species, genus, or family level. All selected models are listed in Appendix A. S Estimate derived from the SSD model (5% percentile). Value taken from Table 3.2.86 **Table 4.2a. Analysis of Effects to Freshwater Aquatic -**  **Dependent Species (Concentrations Based on Wet Weight)** 

**(New Jersey Dissolved Freshwater Lead Criteria: CMC = 38**  **g/L, CCC = 5.4**  **g/L)**

Species BAF of food organism

– Freshwater a Estimated Residue

levels in diet

– Freshwater (mg/kg) b Chronic EC (Dietary Effects Conce ntration) (mg/kg) c Food Items Analysis d (all units in  g/L, unless noted otherwise) Adverse Effects Item Ac ute EC A Chronic

EC A Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 1089 5.88 100 fish and turtles; small mammals, waterfowl and carrion 402

- 151,005 N/A 21

- 24,484

N/A Not likely to adversely affect Bog Turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii 1089 5.88 100 oligochaetes, insects, seeds, plant leaves, carrion 1,405 433

- 71,344 7.9

- 325,901 228

70

- 11,568 5,438

- 262,449 Not likely to adversely affect

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis 1089 5.88 100 insects 433

- 71,344 70

- 11,568 Not likely to adversely affect

a BAF values were determined on a wet weight basis. The BAF of 1089 is the 84 th percentile of 14 BCF/BAFs determined for fish and invertebrates. The 84 th percentile appro ximates one standard deviation above the geometric mean . b Estimated residue value is the product of the default BAF value for lead and the freshwater CCC value, 5.4 μg/L, then divided by 1000  g/L, e.g., (5.4  g/L x 1089 L/kg) x 1mg/1000  g, assuming 1L i s approximately 1 kg (see Section 3.4.5). c Chronic EC values are the 16 th percentile of the dietary effect values for seven bird studies, one shrew study and one rat study. d Ranges of toxicity values for food items are provided in the order the food item s appear. Ranges are from text box (Section 3.5 this document), unless indicated otherwise.87 **Table 4.2b. Analysis of Effects to Freshwater Aquatic -**  **Dependent Species (Concentrations Based on Wet Weight) (USEPA Freshwater Dissolved Lead Criteria based on**  **a hardness of 100 m g/L as CaCO**  **3 : CMC = 65**   **g/L, CCC = 2.5**  **g/L)**

Species BAF of food organism

– Freshwater a Estimated Residue

levels in diet

– Freshwater (mg/kg) b Chronic EC (Dietary Effects Concentration) (mg/kg) c Food Items Analysis d (all units in  g/L, unless noted otherwise) Adverse Effects Item Ac ute EC A Chronic

EC A Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 1089 2.72 100 fish and turtles; small mammals, waterfowl and carrion 1,076

- 110,412 N/A 131

- 10,276

N/A Not likely to adversely affect Bog Turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii 1089 2.72 100 oligochates, insects, seeds, plant leaves, carrion 503 33,323

- 225,556 8.4

- 1,481,633 59

3,101

- 20,993 1

- 144,600 Not likely to adversely affect

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis 1089 2.72 100 insects 33,323

- 225,556 3,101

- 20,99 3 Not likely to adversely affect

a BAF values were determined on a wet weight basis. The BAF of 1089 is the 84 th percentile of 14 BCF/BAFs determined for fish and invertebrates. The 84 th percentile approximates one standard deviation above the geometric mean. b Estimated residue value is the product of the default BAF value for lead and the freshwater CCC value, 2.5 μg/L, then divided by 1000  g/L, e.g., (2.5  g/L x 1089 L/kg) x 1mg/1000  g, assuming 1L is approximately 1 kg (see Section 3.4.5). c Chronic EC values are the 16 th percentile o f the dietary effect values for seven bird studies, one shrew study and one rat study. d

. Ranges of toxicity values for food items are provided in the order the food items appear. Ranges are from text box (Section 3.5 this document), unless indicated othe rwise.88 **Table 4.3. Analysis of Effects to Saltwater Aquatic -**  **Dependent Species (Concentrations Based on Wet Weight)**

**(New Jersey Saltwater Dissolved Lead Criteria: CMC = 210**  **g/L, CCC = 24**  **g/L)**

Species BAF of food

organism

– Freshwater a Estimated Residue

levels in diet

– Freshwater (mg/kg) b Chronic EC

(Dietary Effects Concentration) (mg/kg) c Food Items Analysis d

(all units in  g/L, unless noted otherwise) Adverse Effects Item Ac ute EC A Chronic

EC A Northeastern beach tiger beetle Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis 679.5 16.31 431 beach arthropods, dead amphipods, marine fish and crabs 229

- 157,104 229

- 157,104 16.2

- 25,473

16.2

- 25,473 Not likely to adversely

affect Piping plover Charadrius melodus 679.5 16.31 100 marine worms; marine mollusks; marine crustaceans and insects 503

- 3,718 200

- 209,471 229

- 157,104 81.5

- 602.9

32.3

- 208,269 16.2

- 25,473 Not likely to adversely

affect

Roseate tern Sterna dougallii dougallii 679 .5 16.31 100 fresh and marine small fish and minnows 314

- 57,167 50.9

- 9,269 Not likely to adversely affect Hawksbill sea turtle Eretmochelys imbricata 679.5 16.31 100 jellyfish, sponges, sessile organisms; marine algae 202

- 4,064 32.7

- 658.9 19

- 3,80 4 Not likely to adversely

affect

Kem p' s ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kempi 679.5 16.31 100 blue crabs and other marine crustaceans 229

- 157,104 16.2

- 25,473 Not likely to adversely affect
Leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea 679.5 16.31 100 jelly fish and 'soft

- bodied' sea animals 202

- 4,064 32.7

- 658.9 Not likely to adversely affect89

Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta 679.5 16.31 100 marine sponges; mo llusks; horseshoe crabs 202

- 4,064 200

- 209,471 229

- 157,104 32.7

- 658.9

32.3

- 208,269 16.2

- 25, 473 Not likely to adversely

affect

a BAF values were determined on a wet weight basis. The BAF of 679.5 is the 84 th percentile of BCF/BAFs determined for fish and invertebrates. The 84 th percentile approximates one standard deviation above the geometri c mean. b Estimated residue value is the product of the BAF value for lead and the freshwater CCC value, 24 μg/L, then divided by 1000  g/L, e.g., (24  g/L x 679.5 L/kg) x 1mg/1000  g, assuming 1 L is approximately 1 kg (see Section 3.4.5). c Several chr onic dietary toxicity values exist for surrogate aquatic

- dependent species where the dose has been expressed in the desired units of mg Pb/kg food (prey item). The 16 th percentile value of 100 mg/kg food was selected as the NOEC value for the analysis. d Ranges of toxicity values for food items are provided in the order the food items appear. Ranges are from text box (Section 3.5 this document), unless indicated otherwise.90

Total Dissolved Solids The two listed freshwater species that are the focus of the biological evaluation for TDS are the dwarf wedge mussel and the shortnose sturgeon. The closest taxonomic grouping in Table 3.3 for the shortnose sturgeon is Class Actinopterygii which has five mean LC50 values ranging from 4,243 to 8,906 mg/L ; and fo ur mean NOECs (range, 300 to 1,348 mg/L). The prime habitat areas for shortnose sturgeon are river mouths, tidal rivers, estuaries, and bay s suggesting this species is tolerant to high levels of TDS. Shortnose sturgeon do migrate upstream to spawn to wat ers most likely with lower TDS levels . TDS has been associated with effects on egg hardening in salmonids, but in a review of TDS effects on salmonids as well as other aquatic life by Scannell and Jacobs (2001), the authors noted fertilization and hatchin g rates in coho and chum salmon are significantly reduced beginning in the range of 750 mg/L

. Although little is known of the spawning requirements of the shortnose sturgeon, a criterion of 500 mg/L should be protective of yo ung production based on the re sponse of sensitive salmonid species. Based on the toxicity data for Class Actinopterygii in Table 3.3 and its preference for high TDS waters, EPA is making a “not likely to adversel y affect” finding for New Jersey ’s TDS criteria on the shortnose sturgeon

. Regarding the dwarf wedge mussel, Table 3.3 lists an L C50 of >2000 mg KCl/Lfor a mussel in the same family (Unionidae), the threehorn wartyback. Since no chronic data are available for mollusks, the surrogate NOECs for invertebrates are 372 mg/L ( Daph nia magna ) and 1,543 mg/L ( Chironomus tentans ). Daphnids appear to be one of the more sensitive groups to TDS with D. magna and Ceriodaphnia dubia all having mean L C50 values less than 2000 mg/L(Table 3.3). This latter observation is relevant to the New Jersey TDS criteria in that C. dubia is a test species in New Jersey’s whole effluent toxicity (WET) program and part of the TDS criterion requires compliance with WET limitations (see Section 2.2.1). Based on the ability of the WET program to control TD S and the apparent lack of sensitivity of Unionid mussels to TDS, EPA is making a “not likely to adversel y affect” finding for New Jersey’s TDS criteria on the dwarf wedge mussel. For the plants that may

be exposed to TDS, the potential chronic effect con centration exceeds the freshwater CCC by almost three orders of magnitude. Therefore, EPA is making a “not likely

to adversel y affect” finding for the swamp pink, Helonias bullata , Kneiskern’s beaked rush, Rhynchospora knieskernii and sensitive joint vetc h, Aeschynomene virginica

. **4 .2.2 Species Requiring Further Evaluation**  Lead None. N o particular group of organisms as a whole appears to be most sensitive , such that further evaluation would be needed

.91

Total Dissolved Solids None. Neither the dwarf wedge mussel nor the shortnose sturgeon appear to be sensitive to TDS, such that further evaluation would be needed.
**5 .0**  **ASSESSING EFFECTS OF THE NEW JERSEY**  **LEAD AND TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS**  **CRITERIA O N DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT**  None of the listed species addressed in this biological evaluation have a critical h abitat designated in New Jersey

. Accordingl y, where EPA has made a “not likely to adversel y affect” for a listed species, EPA will similarly make a “not likel y to adversely affect” determination for its critical habitat.92

**REFERENCES** Allen, P. 1994. Accumulation profiles of lead and the influence of cadmium and mercury in Oreochromis aureus (Steindachner) during chronic exposure. Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 44(1

- 2):101

- 112. Allen, P. 1995. Accumulation profiles of lead and cadmium in the edible tissues of Oreochromis aureus (Steindachner) during acute exposure. J. Fish. Biol. 47(4):559

- 568. Amiard, J.C., H. Ettajani, A.Y. Jeantet, C. Ballan

- Dufrancais and C. Amiard

- Triquet. 1995. Bioavailability

and toxicity

of sediment

- bound lead to a filter

- feeder bivalve Crassostrea gigas . BioMetals 8(4): 280

- 289. Atchinson, G.J., et al. 1977 . Trace metal contamination of bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) from two Indiana lakes. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 106:637. Borgmann, Kramar, and Loveridge, 1978

. Rates of mortality , growth, and biomass p roduction of Lymnaea palustris during c hronic e xposures to l ead . Jour. Fish. Res. Board Can. 35:1109. Custer, T.W., J.C. Franson, and O.H. Pattee. 1984. Tissue Lead Distribution and Hematologic Effects in American Kestrels (Falco sparverius L.) Fed Biologically In corporated Lead. J Wildl Dis. 20(1):39

- 43. Damron, B. L., C.F. Simpson, and R.H. Harms. 1969. The Effect of Feeding Various Levels of Lead on the Performance of Broilers. Poult. Sci. 48: 1507

- l 509. Denneman , C.A.J. and N.M. van Straal en 1991. The toxicity of lead and copper in reproduction tests using the oribatid mite Platynothrus peltifer . Pedobiologia 35:305

- 311. FDEP. 2005. Franson, J.C., L . Sileo, O.H. Pattee, and J.F. Moore. 1983. Effects of Chronic Dietary L ead in American Kestrels (Falco Sparverius). J. Wildl. Dis. 19:110

– 113. Goodfellow , W.L
. et al. 2000. Major ion toxicity in effluents: a review with permitting recommendations. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 19(1):175

- 182. Great Lakes Environmental Center (GLEC). 1998. Draft lead ambient water quality criteria document. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Washington D.C., Contract No. 68

- C6

- 0036; Work Assignment 1

- 31. Haegele, M.A., R.K. Tuck er, and R.H. Hudson. 1974. Effects of Dietary Mercury and Lead on Eggshell Thickness In Mallards. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 11(1):5

- 11.93

Heinz, G.H., D.J. Hoffman, L . Sileo, D.J. Audet, and L .J. LeCaptain. 1999. Toxicity of Lead

- Contaminated Sediment to Mallards. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 36(3): 323

- 333. Holcombe , G.W. et al. 197 6

. Lo ng term effects of lead exposure on three generations of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis ). Jour. Fish. Res. Board Can. 33:1731. Jarvinen, A.W. and G.T. Ankley

. 1999. Linkage of effects to tissue residues: Development of a comprehensive database for aquatic organisms exposed to inorganic and organic chemicals. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola FL. Jessup, D.C., and L .D. Shott. 1969. L ead Acetate, 22 Month Chronic Toxicity Study

- Rats. Rep. No. API

- EA7102

- 1, Hazleton Lab, Inc., Falls Church, VA. Johnson, W.L ., and B. L. Damron. 1982. Influence of Lead Acetate or Lead Shot Ingestion Upon White Chinese Geese. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 29(2):177

- 83. Moser, G.A. 1993. Dwarf Wedge Mussel ( Alismidonta heterodon ) Recover Plan. US Fish and Wildlife, Anapolis, MD. Mount, D.R., D.D. Gulley, J.R. Hockett, T.D. Garrison, and J.M. Evans. 1997. Statistical models to predict the toxici ty of major ions to Ceriodaphnia dubia , Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas (fathead minnows). Environ. Toxicol. and Chem. 16(10): 2009

- 2019. Naqvi , S.M. and R.D. Howell

. 1993 . Cadmium and lead uptake b y red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) of Louisiana. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 51(2):296

- 302. NJDEP . 2004 a . Surface Water Quality Standards. http://www.state.nj.us/dep/wmm/sgwqt/swqsdocs.html N JDEP . 2004 b

. New Jersey 2004 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report (includ es 305(b) report and 303(d) list). http://www.state.nj.us/dep/wmm/sgwqt/wat/integratedlist/integratedlist2004.html Pankakoski, E., I. Koivisto, H. Hy varinen, J. Terhivuo, and K.M. Tahka. 1994. Experimental Accumulation of Lead from Soil Through Earthworms to Common Shrews. Chemosphere. 29(8):1639

- 49. Pringle B.H., D.E. Hissong, E.L. Katz, S.J. Mulawka. 1968. Trace metal accumulation by estuarine mollusks. J. Sanit. Eng. Div. Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Eng. 94: 455

- 475. Prothro, M.G. 1993. Office of water policy and technical guidance on interpretation and implementation of aquatic metals criteria. U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. (Memorandum from acting Assistant Adminis trator for water. U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.).94

Reinecke, A.J., and S.A. Reinecke

. 1996

. The Influence of Heav y M etals on the Growth and Reproduction of the Compost Worm Eisenia fetida (Oligochaeta)

. Pedobiologia 40:439

- 448. Scannell , P.W. and L .J. Jac obs. 2001. Effects of Total Dissolved Solids On Aquatic Organisms: A L iterature Review. Technical Report No. 01

- 06. Ala ska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Habitat and Restoration

. Schulz

- Baldes, M. 1974. Lead uptake from seawater and food, an d lead loss in the common mussel Mytilus edulis . Mar. Biol. 35: 17. Spehar , R.L., et al. 1978 . Toxicity and bioaccumulation of cadmium and lead in aquatic inverterbrates. Environ. Pollut. 15:195. Stone, C.L ., M.R.S. Fox, and K.S. Hogye. 1981. Bioavailab ility of Lead in Oy sters Fed to Young Japanese Quail. Environ Res. 26(2):409

- 21. Timmermans , K.R., W. Peeters and M. Tonkes . 199 2

. Cadmium, zinc, lead and copper in Chironomus riparius (Meigan) larva (Diptera, Chironomidae): Uptake and effects. Hydrobi ologia 241(2):119

- 34. U.S. EPA. 1980. Ambient water quality criteria for lead. EPA

- 440/5

- 80

- 057. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA. U.S. EPA. 1984. Ambient water quality criteria for lead. EPA

- 440/5

- 84

- 027. National Technical Infor

mation Service, Springfield, VA. U.S. EPA. 1993. Water quality criteria: Aquatic life criteria for metals. Federal Register. 58(108): 32131

- 32133. U.S. EPA. 1994. Water quality standards handbook, second ed. EPA

- 823

- B
- 94

- 005b. U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. U.S. EPA. 2000. Methodology for deriving ambient water quality criteria for the protection of human health (2000). Technical support document volume 1: Risk assessment. EPA

- 822

- B
- 00

- 005. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency , Washington , DC. Waller , D.L
. et al. 1993. Toxicity of candidate molluscicides to zebra mussels ( Dreissena polymorpha ) and selected non

- target organisms. J. Great L akes Res. 19(4):695

- 702. Waller , D.L
. and S.W. Fisher

. 1998 . Technical Notes. Evaluation of sever al chemical disinfectants for removing zebra mussels from unionid mussels. Prog. Fish Cult. 60(4):307

- 310.95

Varanasi, U. and D. Markey . 1978. Uptake and release of lead and cadmium in skin and mucus of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch ). Comp. Biochem. P hy siol. 60C:187

- 191. Zaroogian, G.E., G. Morrison, J.F. Heltshe. 1979. Crassostrea virginica as an indicator of lead pollution. Mar. Biol. 52: 189

- 196.