HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 Dredge Site Habitat Assessment Final1
Dredge Site Habitat Assessment (2012)
Town of Southold – Beach-Dependent Species Management Program
NYS DEC Piping Plover and Least Tern Site Monitoring
__________________________________
It is highly recommended that all sites featured in this assessment have a dredge management plan
created, taking into account breeding Piping Plover (PIPL) and Least Tern (LETE) populations.
The following sites were visited and evaluated based on the following factors:
Amount of sandy beach and suitable nesting habitat above the high tide mark.
Estimate regarding the amount of foraging habitat transient and winter shorebirds.
Proximity to homes and/or recreational areas, e.g. heavy watercraft use, beach
bathing, fishing.
Presence or absence of PIPL and LETE in past surveys either nesting or foraging at
site(s).
Dredge Site
Suitable
Nesting
Habitat
Suitable
Foraging
Habitat
Nesting Piping
Plovers in
2012
Nesting Least
Terns in
2012
NYS DEC
Monitored
Sites
1. Brushes Creek
2. Cedar Beach Creek
3. Corey Creek
4. Deep Hole Creek
5. Goldsmith Inlet
6. Goose Creek
7. Halls Creek
8. James Creek
9. Little Creek
10. Mud Creek
11. Richmond Creek
12. School House Creek
13. Sterling Harbor
14. Town Creek
15. West Creek
16. Wickham Creek
2
Brushes Creek
Due to presence of multiple groins and bulkheads at this site (see Figure 1), PIPL and LETE did not
nest in 2012 and most likely will not in the near future. PIPL were not observed during site visits
but LETE were occasionally observed foraging in the area, particularly on the eastern beachside of
the creek.
Recommendation – none at this time.
Figure 1
Cedar Beach Creek
This site is most interesting, as it contains light boat traffic and is a popular nesting site for PIPL and
LETE, as well as other shorebirds and other water birds. However, dredging of this site should be a
top priority, not for the boaters but for the birds. In 2012, Suffolk County monitored the Cedar
Beach County Park breeding sites, which resulted in at least one pair of breeding PIPL and at least
one pair of LETE. The birds nested on dredge material from the adjacent creek to the west.
Recommendation – in an effort to assist Suffolk County and not to employ redundant monitoring
efforts, this site should be included in the list of beach-dependent species monitoring sites. Future
dredging efforts should direct material to the same area as past effort (see Figure 2).
Figure 2
Dredge material and
2012 PIPL nest location
Groins
Bulkheads
3
Corey Creek
Both sides of Corey Creek had PIPL nesting attempts this year, which is in keeping with past years.
This is a very popular beach destination for bathers, fisherman and boaters. In addition, a
significant amount of private beach exists to the west of the creek’s mouth. However, this is not a
suitable nesting area for PIPL or LETE. The best habitat for LETE is on the east side of the creek’s
mouth, while PIPL tend to nest to the west.
Recommendation – following the behavior and guidance of where PIPL and LETE are choosing to
nest, it should follow that dredge material be placed in two sections at this site (see Figure 3).
Figure 3
Deep Hole Creek
Due to presence of multiple groins at this site (see Figure 4), PIPL and LETE did not nest in 2012
and most likely will not in the near future. PIPL were not observed during site visits but LETE were
occasionally observed foraging in the area, particularly offshore in Peconic Bay. There is a need to
dredge this area at some point in the future, as scores of watercraft navigate these waters
frequently. As noted in the field, the only reasonable area to place dredge material is on the point.
Recommendation – none at this time.
Figure 4
Areas to place
dredge material
Groins
Dredge material
4
Goldsmith Inlet
This site is emblematic of “build it” and they will come. Since dredge material was placed adjacent
to the Town parking area (see Figure 5) within the past decade, PIPL have attempted to nest at this
site. In 2011 and 2012, a pair was successful and fledged three young each year. No LETE were
noted as nesting either year, however up to a dozen were seen foraging and resting on the beach
intermittingly during the season.
Recommendation – enhancing the current PIPL nest location with dredge material to the
north/northwest will ensure nesting habitat in the future for both PIPL and LETE.
Figure 5
Goose Creek
This site possesses suitable nesting habitat (see Figure 6) but due to its popularity as a beach
bathing location and an area where boaters come ashore, it will likely remain a non-breeding locale
in the future. Neither PIPL nor LETE were observed during the breeding season.
Recommendation – none at this time.
Figure 6
Dredge material
2012 PIPL nest location
Potentially suitable nesting habitat
5
Halls Creek
This site appears to not have been dredged in many years. Despite this, and the lack of bulkheads
and groins in the area, nesting habitat is marginal. Neither PIPL nor LETE attempted to nest, but
were seen in the area as transients, with the latter being seen most frequently on visits.
Recommendation – dredging at this site could greatly impact beach-nesting birds if placed
strategically (see Figure 7). By taking advantage of the area west of the creek where there are no
homes, placement of dredge material adjacent to, and over, existing vegetation will create suitable
nesting opportunities for PIPL and LETE.
Figure 7
James Creek
Due to presence of multiple groins and bulkheads at this site (see Figure 8), PIPL and LETE did not
nest in 2012 and most likely will not in the near future. PIPL were not observed during site visits
but LETE were occasionally observed foraging in the area.
Recommendation – none at this time.
Figure 8
Area to place
dredge material
Groins
Bulkheads
6
Little Creek
This site remains to be one of the most productive for PIPL and LETE, with the former fledging at
least one young in 2012. LETE did not nest but were seen foraging close to shore on nearly every
visit. Erosion has taken a toll on both sides of Little Creek, reduces the amount of viable nesting
areas due to the frequency of flooding.
Recommendation – a balance will need to be made between redistributing dredge material to the
public beach south of the creek or on the town-owned land immediately to the north of the creek.
The latter is more desirable for beach-nesting birds, as it is more secluded from the public and
there is more room to develop more suitable nesting habitat (see Figure 9).
Figure 9
Mud Creek
During the breeding season it appeared PIPL would nest within this site, as 1-2 pair was seen
intermittingly. It was difficult to ascertain whether one of the pair had nested at nearby Meadow
beach, also on Cutchogue Harbor. LETE were observed as well, but gave no indication that they
would nest, and the site remained only as a foraging area for both species.
Recommendation – due to the lack of viable nesting habitat due to beach erosion, there is a need to
create habitat with dredge material to the west of Mud Creek (see Figure 10).
Figure 10
Area to place
dredge material
Area to place
dredge material
7
Richmond Creek
This site has tremendous potential for nesting PIPL and LETE, as suitable habitat currently exists
but needs to be enhanced. This site does have very good foraging habitat, and both species
were noted during survey periods.
Recommendation – removal and relocation of dredge material on an upland portion to the west of
the creek will greatly enhance breeding opportunities for PIPL and LETE (see Figure 11), as well as
other shorebirds, e.g. Willet, American Oystercatcher.
Figure 11
School House Creek
Due to presence of docks, groins and a significant bulkhead at this site (see Figure 12), PIPL and
LETE did not nest in 2012 and most likely will not in the near future. Neither species was observed
during site visits. A significant amount of boat traffic is present in this small area, also contributing
to an insufficient breeding area.
Recommendation – none at this time.
Figure 12
Area to place
dredge material
Bulkhead
Docks
Groins
8
Sterling Harbor
This site no longer contains suitable nesting and very little if any foraging habitat. A peninsula
centrally-located in Sterling Harbor is the only area with any potential. No PIPL or LETE were seen
on any site visits. In addition, this area is a very short distance from the Gull Pond West site – the
most productive breeding site for PIPL and second most productive for LETE in 2012.
Recommendation – removal of upland vegetation and placement of dredge material on the
peninsula will help improve nesting habitat for beach-nesting birds (see Figure 13)
Figure 13
Town Creek
With an extensive network of bulkheads and docks within this popular waterway (see Figure 14),
there is not any viable nesting and minimal foraging areas due to a complete lack of open beach
habitat. A significant amount of boat traffic is present in this area, also contributing to an
insufficient breeding and foraging area. No PIPL or LETE were seen on any site visits.
Recommendation – none at this time.
Figure 14
Area to remove upland
vegetation and place
dredge material
Docks
9
West Creek
This area is affected by multiple groins and a large bulkhead, thus minimizing the amount of
available open beach habitat suitable for breeding PIPL and LETE. Neither species were seen
attempting to nest, however LETE were noted foraging in the bay on several visits.
Recommendation – by enhancing the peninsula present at the mouth of West Creek, likely the result
of previous dredge material placement, a potential foraging area for PIPL and LETE will be created
and with proper fencing, signage and outreach, could prove to be a suitable nesting site.
Figure 15
Wickham Creek
The western portion of this area has potentially adequate nesting habitat and good foraging habitat
(see Figure 16). However, neither PIPL nor LETE have attempted to nest here in recent years, and
they were not observed on any site visits. One reason could be the close proximity to Meadow
Beach, previously a LETE colony and this year a breeding site for a pair of PIPL.
Recommendation – removal and placement of dredge material to beachfront, including placement
on a portion of upland vegetation (see Figure 16).
Figure 16
Bulkhead
Groins
Area to place
dredge material
Potentially suitable nesting habitat