Wetlands

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 70–81 | Cite as

Evaluating vernal pools as a basis for conservation strategies: A maine case study

  • Aram J. K. Calhoun
  • Tracey E. Walls
  • Sally S. Stockwell
  • Mark McCollough
Article

Abstract

Vernal pools in northeastern North America are typically seasonal woodland pools that support breeding populations of amphibians and invertebrates dependent upon fishless environments for successful reproduction. A survey of 304 vernal pools in southern, central, and northern Maine, USA was conducted to assess pool physical characteristics, landscape setting, and presence of pool-breeding amphibians for the purpose of guiding potential pool conservation strategies. In particular, information on reproductive effort by pool-breeding amphibians was used to assess the statewide applicability of the Maine Natural Resources Protection Act’s proposed definition of Significant Vernal Pool, a category of Significant Wildlife Habitats that allows closer environmental review of proposed impacts to vernal pools. The results of our study show regional differences in pool characteristics and amphibian usage. Defining “significance” based on number of egg masses and diversity of vernal pool indicator species is a useful tool but should be considered in the context of such landscape characteristics as availability of suitable terrestrial habitat and distribution of other breeding habitats and wetlands.

Key Words

vernal pools isolated wetland wetland conservation amphibians conservation planning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Adam, M. D. and M. J. Lacki. 1993. Factors affecting amphibian use of road-rut ponds in Daniel Boone National Forest. Transactions of the Kentucky Academy of Sciences 54:13–16.Google Scholar
  2. Brooks, R. T., J. Stone, and P. Lyons. 1998. An inventory of seasonal forest ponds on the Quabbin Reservoir watershed, Massachusetts. Northeastern Naturalist 5:219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burne, M. R. 2001. Massachusetts aerial photo survey of potential vernal pools. Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  4. Calhoun, A. J. K. 2003. Maine citizen’s guide to locating and documenting vernal pools. Maine Audubon Society, Falmouth, ME, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Calhoun, A. J. K. and P. K. deMaynadier. 2003. Forestry habitat management guidelines for vernal pool wildlife. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Boston, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Calhoun, A. J. K. and M. W. Klemens. 2002. Best development practices for conserving pool-breeding amphibians in residential and commercial developments in the northeastern U.S. Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Alliance. Bronx, NY, USA. MCA Technical Paper No. 5.Google Scholar
  7. Colburn, E. A. 1997. Certified: a Citizen’s Step-by-Step Guide to Protecting Vernal Pools. Massachusetts Audubon Society, Lincoln, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  8. Collins, J. P. and H. M. Wilbur. 1979. Breeding habits and habitats of the amphibians of the Edwin S. George Reserve, Michigan, with notes on the local distribution of fishes. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology 686:1–34.Google Scholar
  9. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC, USA. FWS/OBS-79/31.Google Scholar
  10. deMaynadier, P. G. and M. L. Hunter, Jr. 1998. Effects of silvicultural edges on the distribution and abundance of amphibians in Maine. Conservation Biology 12:340–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. deMaynadier, P. G. and M. L. Hunter, Jr. 1999. Forest canopy closure and juvenile emigration by pool-breeding amphibians in Maine. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DiMauro, D. and M. L. Hunter, Jr. 2002. Reproduction of amphibians in natural and anthropogenic temporary pools in managed forests. Forest Science 48:397–406.Google Scholar
  13. Fahrig, L., J. H. Pedlar, S. E. Pope, P. D. Taylor, and J. F. Wegner. 1995. Effect of road traffic on amphibian density. Biological Conservation 73:177–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibbs, J. P. 1993. Importance of small wetlands for the persistence of local populations of wetland-associated animals. Wetlands 13: 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gibbs, J. P. 2000. Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 14:314–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guerry, A. and M. L. Hunter Jr. 2002. Amphibian distributions in a landscape of forests and agriculture: An examination of landscape composition and configuration. Conservation Biology 16: 745–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Joyal, L. A., M. McCollough, and M. L. Hunter, Jr. 2001. Landscape ecology approaches to wetland species conservation: a case study of two turtle species in southern Maine. Conservation Biology 15: 1755–1762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kenney, L. P. 1991. Vernal pools in a suburban community. Master’s Thesis. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Marsh, D. M. and P. C. Trenham. 2001. Metapopulation dynamics and amphibian conservation. Conservation Biology 15:40–49.Google Scholar
  20. Munger, J. C., M. Gerber, K. Madrid, M. A. Carroll, W. Petersen, and L. Heberger. 1998. U.S. National Wetland Inventory classifications as predictors of the occurrence of Columbia Spotted Frogs (Rana luteiventris) and Pacific Treefrogs (Hyla regilla). Conservation Biology 12:320–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Semlitsch, R. D. 1998. Biological delineation of terrestrial buffer zones for pond-breeding amphibians. Conservation Biology 12:1113–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Semlitsch, R. D. and J. R. Bodie. 1998. Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conservation Biology 12:1129–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shoop, C. R. 1965. Orientation of Ambystoma maculatum: movements to and from breeding ponds. Science 149:558–559.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Snodgrass, J., M. J. Komoroski, A. L. Bryan Jr., and J. Burger. 2000. Relationships among isolated wetland size, hydroperiod, and amphibian species richness: implications for wetland regulation. Conservation Biology 14:414–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stone, J. S. 1992. Vernal pools in Massachusetts: aerial photographic identification, biological and physiographic characteristics, and state certification criteria. Master’s Thesis. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  26. Tappan, A. (ed.). 1997. Identification and Documentation of Vernal Pools in New Hampshire. New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, Concord, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  27. Tiner, R. W. Jr. 1990. Use of high-altitude aerial photography for inventorying forested wetlands in the United States. Forest Ecology and Management 33/34:593–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wilkinson, L., M. Hill, and E. Vang. 1992. Systat for windows Version 5. Systat Inc., Evanston, IL, USA.Google Scholar
  29. Windmiller, B. S. 1990. The limitations of Massachusetts regulatory protection for temporary pool breeding amphibians. Master’s Thesis. Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  30. Windmiller, B. S. 1996. The pond, the forest, and the city: spotted salamander ecology and conservation in a human-dominated landscape. Ph. D. Dissertation. Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  31. Zar, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aram J. K. Calhoun
    • 1
  • Tracey E. Walls
    • 1
  • Sally S. Stockwell
    • 2
  • Mark McCollough
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Plant, Soil, and Environmental SciencesUniversity of MaineOronoUSA
  2. 2.Maine Audubon SocietyFalmouthUSA
  3. 3.Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and WildlifeBangorUSA

Personalised recommendations