Biodiversity of the Moodna Creek Watershed - Orange County Water ...

Biodiversity of the Moodna Creek Watershed: 

Important Resources and Conservation Recommendations 

19 June 2008 

DRAFT 

Photos by L. Heady 

Laura Heady, NYS DEC Hudson River Estuary Program 

in partnership with Cornell University Department of Natural Resources

Moodna Biodiversity 

L. Heady, 19 June 2008 DRAFT 

Acknowledgements 

Special thanks to Tom Lake, Chris Bowser, and Leah Abuza of the NYS DEC Hudson River 

Estuary Program for sharing their observations of the Moodna mouth system and providing 

valuable natural history information. Leslie Zucker, also from the Hudson River Estuary 

Program, contributed the “Streams and Riparian Corridors” section and Trout Brook analysis. 

Kelly Dobbins of Orange County Planning provided GIS data layers, and Gretchen Stevens and 

Bob Schmidt of Hudsonia offered assistance with identifying past studies of Moodna 

biodiversity. Jamie Deppen of Hudsonia helped with checking breeding bird data for the 

watershed. 

Prepared by: 

Laura Heady 

Biodiversity Outreach Coordinator 

NYS DEC Hudson River Estuary Program 

in partnership with Cornell University Department of Natural Resources 

21 South Putt Corners Road 

New Paltz, NY 12561



Table of Contents 

Introduction 1 

Significance of Biodiversity to Watershed Planning 1 

Threats to Biodiversity and Associated Impacts to Watershed Health 1 

Biodiversity of the Moodna Creek Watershed 2 

Priority Habitats of the Watershed 3 

How to Use This Information 3 

Hudson River Shoreline: The Moodna Mouth 4 

Lower Reach of Moodna Creek 4 

Confluence 4 

Marsh and Mudflats 4 

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation 7 

Threats and Conservation Opportunities 7 

Streams and Riparian Corridors 8 

Birds 8 

Bats 9 

Amphibians and Reptiles 9 

Fish 9 


Forests 13 

Globally Important Forests 13 

Regionally Important Forests 14 

Locally Important Forests 14 

Stepping Stone Forests 14 


Wetlands 15 

Rare Wetland Wildlife 15 

Wetland Habitat Types 16 


Grasslands, Shrublands, and Farmland 18 

Grasslands 18 

Shrubland and Early Successional Forest 19 


Cliffs and Caves 20 

Habitats and Wildlife of Cliffs and Caves 20 


Cores, Connections, and Landscape Perspective 21 

Cores 21 

Connections 23 


Conclusions 27 

Literature Cited 28 

Additional Publications on Biodiversity in the Moodna Creek Watershed 32



Figures 

Figure 1: Ecological Communities of the Moodna Creek Mouth 5 

Figure 2: Ecological Communities of the Moodna Creek Mouth 

and Lower Reach to Firthcliffe Dam 6 

Figure 3: Analysis of Riparian Buffers Along Trout Brook 11 

Figure 4: Documented Biodiversity Resources of Importance in the 

Moodna Creek Watershed 22 

Figure 5: Conservation Network of Biodiversity Cores and Connections 

in the Moodna Creek Watershed 23 

Tables 

Table 1. Recommendations for minimum widths and connectivity of natural 

cover within the stream corridor to conserve biodiversity . 12 

Appendices 

Appendix A. Flagship Species of the Moodna Creek Watershed 

Appendix B. Birds of Conservation Concern in Moodna Creek Watershed 

Appendix C. Reptiles and Amphibians of Conservation Concern in Moodna Creek Watershed



Introduction 

Significance of Biodiversity to Watershed Planning 

The Moodna Creek watershed plan provides an ideal opportunity to consider conservation of 

biological resources. The plants, animals, and habitats—or biodiversity—of the Moodna 

watershed are a significant part of the region’s character and natural infrastructure, and 

contribute directly to the quality and quantity of drinking water available to residents living in 

the region. 

The term “biodiversity” is used to describe all the components of nature that are needed to 

sustain life. While people often associate the term biodiversity with threatened and endangered 

species, it actually encompasses much more. Biodiversity refers to all living things, both rare 

and common, the complex relationships between them, as well as their relationship to the 

environment. Biodiversity includes genetic variety, species diversity, and variability in natural 

communities, ecosystems, and landscapes. All of these parts and processes comprise the web of 

life that contributes to healthy ecosystems. 

Why is biodiversity important to the people living in the Moodna Creek watershed? For starters, 

the watershed has a diverse and rich natural heritage, with species and ecological communities of 

regional, statewide, and global significance. These natural systems are the scenery and living 

fabric that provides the Moodna Creek watershed with a regional identity, and creates a sense of 

place for its residents. And healthy, natural systems are in essence a “green infrastructure,” 

supplying services that support life as we know it, through purification of drinking water, control 

of floodwaters, replenishment of aquifers, pollination of crops, creation of fertile soil, control of 

insect pests, and adaptation to a changing climate. They also provide opportunities for hunting 

and fishing, outdoor recreation, and environmental education and research. All of these services 

and benefits to the community cost less than the artificial or built alternatives, and are widely 

recognized as important assets by a variety of stakeholders. 

Threats to Biodiversity and Associated Impacts to Watershed Health 

Two of the greatest threats to biodiversity are habitat loss and invasive species. In particular, 

land use changes that degrade and destroy natural habitats pose the most significant threats to 

native biodiversity. Suburban sprawl, for instance, fragments the landscape into smaller and 

smaller pieces of habitat, and surrounds these fragments with development, often having lethal 

effects on wildlife species that require large, connected natural areas. Furthermore, the resulting 

patchwork of land uses creates ideal conditions for invasive species to take hold. 

Land-use decisions made at the municipal and regional level will have lasting impacts on the 

function of natural systems in the Moodna Creek watershed, and their ability to support its 

human communities. For example, loss of habitat can lead to a corresponding loss in basic 

watershed functions, such as water infiltration and purification by forests and grasslands, erosion 

control along stream banks, and flood attenuation in wetlands. Habitat loss and fragmentation 

also creates unsuitable conditions for many native plants and animals, and leads to increased 

populations of more common, nuisance species such as white-tailed deer, Canada geese, 

mosquitoes, and black-legged tick, which carries Lyme disease. 

1



Additional threats to biodiversity include impacts associated with human development, many of 

which can be reduced or prevented altogether, such as light pollution, failing septic systems, and 

household pets; and pollution of natural areas from contaminants such as road salt, pesticides, 

fertilizers, and household chemicals and pharmaceuticals. Increasingly, global climate change 

presents a new array of conservation challenges and variables, such as shifts in habitat 

availability and timing of natural events. 

Biodiversity of the Moodna Creek Watershed 

The rich biodiversity of the Moodna Creek watershed is a result of the variable landscape 

included within its boundaries. To the east and southeast, the watershed includes part of the 

Hudson Highlands, where it has its highest point on the steep ridges above 1500 ft (500m) in 

elevation. This area also contains portions of the very large forest that continues beyond the 

watershed boundary south to Harriman and Bear Mountain State Parks. The foothills of the 

Highlands are scattered throughout the southern portions of the watershed, creating steep slopes 

and hills interspersed with creeks and wetlands. The Moodna/Otterkill corridor runs generally 

west-to-east, starting in the rich farmland to the west, and traversing a fairly broad, forested 

floodplain. This corridor forms somewhat of a demarcation between the more diverse, forested 

terrain of the southern half of the watershed and the more rolling topography and farmland to the 

north, which is rich with numerous wetlands. Where the Moodna finally meets the Hudson 

River, the watershed reaches its lowest elevation at sea level, with the tidal influence of the river 

felt in its lower mile. 

The biological resources of the Moodna Creek watershed have been recognized on many levels 

as having high conservation value: 

Moodna Creek, together with its tributary the Otterkill Creek, is identified in the Orange 

County Open Space Plan as a Priority Aquatic System (June 2004). The Open Space 

Plan also identifies several areas within the Moodna watershed as Biological Diversity 

Hotspots, including Goose Pond and Schunemunk mountains and Purgatory Swamp. In 

addition, it identifies the Moodna/Otterkill corridor as a Potential Wildlife Corridor. 

In the Southern Wallkill Biodiversity Plan (Miller et al. 2005), the Metropolitan 

Conservation Alliance (MCA) studied biodiversity in Chester, Goshen, and Warwick. 

Areas delineated as important for conservation in the Moodna watershed included Goose 

Pond, Bellvale, Snake, Brimstone, and Sugar Loaf mountains; and the Otter Kill, Seely 

Brook, and Black Meadow Creek corridors. Associated floodplains, wetlands, steep 

slopes, and important core and connecting habitats were included in the areas mapped as 

important for biodiversity. 

The Nature Conservancy’s report, Identifying Conservation Priorities in the Hudson 

River Estuary Watershed, identifies a short list of ecoregional aquatic conservation 

targets (priority watersheds) within the Hudson River Estuary watershed, and the Moodna 

Creek Watershed is listed as one of these priorities (Shirer and Tear 2005). 

The Highlands Coalition has designated the Schunnemunk Mountain/Moodna 

Creek/Woodcock Mountain area as one of its Critical Treasure Areas in the New York 

Highlands, in part due to its biodiversity values (Highlands Coalition 2005). 

2



A southern portion of the Moodna watershed is included in the “Highlands” Significant 

Biodiversity Area (SBA) in the NYS DEC’s Hudson River Estuary Wildlife and Habitat 

Conservation Framework (Penhollow et al. 2006). This SBA recognizes the Hudson 

Highlands region as important for biodiversity; some features of the Moodna watershed 

that are included are Schunnemunk Mountain, Woodcock Hill, Goose Pond Mountain, 

Sugarloaf Mountain, Black Rock Forest, Woodbury Creek, Satterly Creek, Seely Brook, 

and Trout Brook. 

The Moodna Creek mouth and tidal wetlands were also included in the Framework as 

part of the Hudson River Estuary and Tidal Wetlands SBA. This part of the watershed, 

spanning the creek from Orrs Mills to its confluence with the Hudson, was designated as 

“irreplaceable” Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat by the NYS Coastal Zone 

Management Program, and highlighted as one of four Selected Priority Watersheds by 

the Orange County Open Space Plan (June 2004). 

Priority Habitats of the Watershed 

The underlying geology, soils, topography, surface and groundwater, and land use history of the 

Moodna Creek watershed all weave together to shape a diversity of habitats that support an 

equally diverse array of plant and animal communities. The priority habitats of the watershed 

include Hudson River shoreline; streams and riparian corridors; forests; a variety of wetlands; 

grasslands, shrublands, and farms; and cliffs and caves. Appendix A contains a list of 17 

animals of conservation concern, selected as “flagship species” of the Moodna watershed 

habitats they use, along with associated planning recommendations, seasonal considerations, and 

other natural history. In many cases, conserving enough habitat to support healthy populations 

of these flagship species will protect other plants and animals with similar habitat needs. 

Appendix B includes a list of birds of conservation concern in the watershed, and Appendix C 

lists amphibians and reptiles of conservation concern; both include general habitat information as 

well. 

How to Use This Information 

The following discussion of these priority habitats, along with the aforementioned appendices, 

can be useful not only for watershed planning, but for taking conservation action at the municipal 

level, as well. While the entire watershed has not been studied to locate and map all biological 

resources, there is some knowledge of where important habitats are, and what plants and animals 

they support. It is likely many of these same habitats occur elsewhere in the watershed, where 

underlying conditions are similar. Future assessments can take into consideration what is known 

about important habitat occurrences in the watershed, to predict and assess their distribution in 

other unstudied areas, and to proactively plan for the associated rare species. Such information 

can provide a baseline for habitat maps, natural resource inventories, open space plans, and other 

conservation and smart growth plans. This approach will also contribute to keeping common 

species in the watershed common, and maintaining overall ecosystem function. Finally, many of 

the planning and conservation recommendations discussed below for the watershed also apply to 

land-use decision making at the local level. 

3



Hudson River Shoreline: The Moodna Mouth 

The confluence of the Moodna Creek and Hudson River is especially rich in biodiversity, and 

marks the average northern extent of the salt front in the estuary (although the front moves 

farther upstream under low flow conditions). The input of nutrients from the Moodna watershed; 

the mixing of the Moodna’s fresh water with brackish water from the Hudson; and the tidal 

influence of the estuary together create conditions and habitats that are uncommon in New York. 

Habitats of the Moodna mouth system include 3.5 miles of freshwater tributary, with the lower 

mile in tidal range of the Hudson River. Where it reaches the river, the creek flows into an 

approximately 75 acre (30 ha) embayment, with extensive emergent marsh, swamp, mudflats, 

submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), and wooded islands. (See Figure 1.) East of the railroad 

trestle, there are additional mudflats and a large area of SAV that continues northward along the 

shoreline. The various habitats and wildlife assembled at the Moodna mouth offer excellent 

opportunities for recreational fishing, birdwatching, paddling, environmental education, and 

overall outdoor enjoyment. 

Lower Reach of Moodna Creek. Fish habitat in the lower portion of Moodna Creek extends 

from the mouth and upstream for 3.5 miles to the dam located just upstream of the Orrs Mill 

bridge on NYS Route 32. (See Figure 2.) Anadromous fish, including alewife and blueback 

herring, enter the creek in the spring for spawning, and the resulting larval fish develop in the 

flats at the creek mouth. The lower portion of the Moodna also supports a warmwater fish 

community throughout the year; resident species include American eel, largemouth bass, 

smallmouth bass, bluegill, pumpkinseed, white perch, yellow perch, white catfish, and brown 

bullhead. As the salt front moves up the Hudson, bluefish, bay anchovy, weakfish, Atlantic 

silversides, hogchoker, and blue crab may enter the tributary to feed. 

Confluence. The confluence of the Moodna and Hudson provides important habitat for bald 

eagle (NYS Threatened) and osprey (NYS Special Concern). Both feed on spawning fish and 

waterfowl, and use the tall trees along the shoreline and on wooded islands for perching and 

roosting. The Moodna mouth is one of the few areas in the Hudson where eagles are consistently 

observed in the summer, and the area is considered important breeding habitat for bald eagle by 

the NY Natural Heritage Program. In addition, it supports a wintering population of bald eagles 

from December through March. (See Appendix A for conservation recommendations for bald 

eagle.) 

Marsh and Mudflats. The tidal freshwater marsh at the mouth of the Moodna is the largest in 

Orange County. This 59 acre (24 ha), Class 1 NYS Regulatory Freshwater wetland includes 

areas of brackish tidal marsh and brackish intertidal mudflats. Statewide, there are few 

occurrences of these rare ecological communities, which host suites of species especially adapted 

to the changing conditions caused by tides. Due to their changing salinity values, brackish tidal 

marshes provide habitat for a combination of species that are characteristic of both salt and 

freshwater tidal marshes. Brackish intertidal mudflats support populations of mobile 

invertebrates like clams, snails, worms, and crustaceans that are adapted to the unstable surface 

of the mudflat. During high tide, these invertebrates are fed upon by shad, bass, and other fish; 

low tide brings foraging opportunities for shore birds. Rare plants associated with mudflats at 

the Moodna mouth include spongy arrowhead, and historical records of estuary beggarticks. 

4

Figure 1. Ecological Communities of the Moodna Creek Mouth 

Orange County, NY 

Legend 

NHPCommunities_in_Moodna 

Brackish Intertidal Mudflats 

Brackish Tidal Marsh 

Water Celery SAV Bed 

NYS Freshwater Wetland 

NWI Palustrine Wetland 

NWI Riverine Wetland 

NHP Important Habitat Area 

Moodna Watershed Boundary 

Kowawese Unique Area 

Railroad 

¯ 

Hudson 

River 

NEW WINDSOR 

Moodna Creek 

US9W 

CORNWALL 

0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

Miles 

Map created 14 June 2008 by: 

Laura Heady, Hudson River Estuary Program, 

NYS Department of Environmental Conservation 

in partnership with Cornell University 

Data Sources: 

NY Natural Heritage Program 


National Wetland Inventory

Figure 2. Ecological Communities of the Moodna Creek Mouth 

and Lower Reach to Firthcliffe Dam Orange County, NY 

Legend 

NHPCommunities_in_Moodna 

Brackish Intertidal Mudflats 

Brackish Tidal Marsh 

Water Celery SAV Bed 

NYS Freshwater Wetland 

NWI Palustrine Wetland 

NWI Riverine Wetland 



Kowawese Unique Area 

Railroads 

NEW WINDSOR 

US9W 

Hudson 

River 

¯ 

Moodna Creek 

CORNWALL 

Firthcliffe Dam 

Storm King 

0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 

Miles 





Data Sources: 



National Wetland Inventory



The wetland complex at the Moodna mouth provides breeding habitat for a number of birds, 

including green-backed heron, black duck, wood duck, Virginia rail, spotted sandpiper, fish 

crow, and marsh wren, and has been identified as important habitat area for least bittern (NYS 

Threatened). (See Appendix A for conservation recommendations for least bittern.) Herons, 

waterfowl, and shorebirds concentrate in the area during spring and fall migrations, and the creek 

is thought to be a major crossing point for raptors migrating along the northern slope of the 

Hudson Highlands. In addition, the NY Natural Heritage Program considers the Moodna mouth 

an important “Waterfowl Winter Concentration Area.” 

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation. The submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) beds also contribute 

to the overall habitat value of the Moodna mouth system. They occur in the lower reach of the 

creek, in the embayment, and east of the train trestle along the Hudson shoreline. (See Figure 2.) 

Unlike other tidal coves and bays in the Hudson where the invasive water chestnut often 

dominates and poses management challenges, the SAV beds at the Moodna mouth are comprised 

of water celery, a native plant. SAV beds trap fine sediment and organic matter, maintain 

dissolved oxygen levels, and provide habitat for a rich diversity of fish and invertebrates 

(Findlay et al. 2006). 

Threats and Conservation Opportunities 

• Water quality. Habitat value for fish and wildlife in the lower reach of the creek, and 

associated recreation opportunities, is dependent on good water quality. Herring may 

already be an indicator of declining conditions in the Moodna. In 1996, Hudsonia 

reported a moderately large herring run on the Moodna (Schmidt and Cooper 1996). 

Local fishermen have observed declines in this run in the last six years, and speculate that 

this decrease coincides with sewage problems in the Moodna (L. Abuza, pers. comm.). 

The NYS DEC Hudson River Fisheries Unit selected the Moodna for the 2008 Volunteer 

River Herring Monitoring Survey due to its historically large herring run. Over 35 

monitoring sessions in April and May found no evidence of river herring in the Moodna, 

while the same protocols were used successfully to document herring in other monitored 

streams in the estuary watershed. To address water quality concerns, the two sewage 

treatment plants in the vicinity of the Moodna mouth should be assessed to understand 

and avoid impacts to the rich biodiversity of the area. Riparian buffers should be 

maintained and restored as necessary, and pollution from stormwater runoff should be 

prevented. 

• Marsh and mudflats. The large marsh and mudflat habitat complex may also be 

vulnerable to pollution from the nearby sewage treatment plants, and to dumping, 

channeling, and disturbing remaining upland buffers. An additional threat is invasion of 

exotic species such as purple loosestrife and water chestnut. Recreational boat traffic that 

scrapes mudflats at high tides degrades their important habitat value and should be 

prevented. Hardened shorelines should be minimized or avoided and instead, low-sloped 

shorelines should be maintained within the tidal zone. This will be especially important 

as climate change causes sea level rise, and tidal habitats need to migrate inland. 

• SAV beds. SAV beds are especially vulnerable to motorized boating activity and 

shoreline access; recreational activity should be limited in areas of SAV. Maintaining 

natural shorelines is strongly encouraged. 

• Breeding marsh birds. Disturbance of breeding birds can result in failed nesting efforts 

or abandonment of nests completely. Marsh bird communities have shown significant 

7



decline when urban/suburban development within 1600 ft (500 m) and 3200 ft (1000 m) 

of the marsh exceeds 14% and 25%, respectively (DeLuca et al., as cited in McElfish et 

al. 2008). Such impacts can be reduced by maintaining and restoring effective buffers, 

and by educating visitors and landowners about marsh bird ecology. (See Appendix A.) 

• Citizen science. Pursuit of opportunities to engage local residents in citizen science and 

conservation of the Moodna mouth system is encouraged. Partnerships with the Hudson 

River Estuary Program can be formed to engage high school students in eel monitoring, 

provide continuing volunteer opportunities for herring monitoring in the tidal creek, and 

plan riparian buffer restoration through Trees for Tribs. 

• Public outreach. Exploration of the Hudson shoreline and tidal creek through public 

canoe and kayak programs is recommended to help connect watershed residents to their 

rich local resources. 

Streams and Riparian Corridors 

Written by Leslie Zucker, NYS DEC Hudson River Estuary Program and Cornell University 

Streams and the vegetated corridors around them (called “riparian areas”) make a critical 

contribution to the health and overall biodiversity of the Moodna Creek Watershed. Plants and 

animals create the environmental conditions necessary for many of the water quality and 

hydrologic functions of streams. Plants allow groundwater to infiltrate the soil and recharge 

aquifers, streams, and reservoirs. Plants hold soils in place and contribute to processes that filter 

contaminants and excess nutrients from runoff. Vegetated, low-lying areas near streams absorb 

storm waters and lessen flooding and erosion downstream. Ultimately, these benefits save local 

governments money and protect private property. 

Riparian areas are also unique habitats that support a high abundance and diversity of plants and 

animals. Because they are transition zones between the wet, aquatic environment of the stream 

channel, and the drier and higher terrestrial uplands, they are highly biodiverse. Some aquatic 

and semi-aquatic animals that must be near water, are found only in riparian corridors, while 

other wildlife are found in greater abundance in riparian corridors. Stream corridors contain other 

unique habitat features. When flooded during high flows, riparian corridors become stream 

channel habitat and are used as refuges for larval fish. Riparian areas often contain wetlands that 

provide habitat for the Hudson Valley’s globally important amphibian and reptile diversity. And, 

streams corridors are used by wildlife as transportation routes if suitable habitats remain 

connected across the landscape. 

Some of the unique fish and wildlife of the Moodna Creek and its tributaries are described 

below. 

Birds 

A variety of songbirds can be found nesting and rearing their young in wide, forested 

bottomlands of the Moodna Creek, including a few that prefer to nest near streams such as the 

yellow-throated vireo, warbling vireo, and Louisiana waterthrush. The cerulean warbler and least 

flycatcher are likely stream corridor birds that have declined throughout their ranges in recent 

decades, but are still found in the Moodna Creek Watershed. Other birds that might be seen in 

stream corridors of the watershed include the wood duck, great blue heron, green heron, belted 

kingfisher, and in the deeper forests, the red-shouldered hawk. Birds are found more abundantly 

8



in stream corridors than in other portions of the landscape and bird diversity increases as the 

width of stream corridors increase. 

Bats 

An abundance of insects and forest openings make stream corridors prime foraging habitat for 

bats. Large trees with peeling bark, such as shagbark hickories and dead standing snags are used 

as maternity colonies or summer roosting sites for bats. In addition to foraging and roosting, bats 

use stream corridors as travel routes. Bats that might be seen in stream corridors of the Moodna 

Creek and tributaries include the big brown bat, little brown bat, and the rare Eastern smallfooted 

bat (NYS Special Concern). The Eastern small-footed bat has been observed in the 

Mineral Spring Brook and Trout Brook stream corridors. The watershed and its stream corridors 

are also home to the federally endangered Indiana bat (NYS Endangered). 

Amphibians and Reptiles 

Several turtle, frog, and salamander species rely heavily on stream corridor habitats. The wood 

turtle is particularly interesting, not just because its angular shell looks like a wood carving, but 

also because the wood turtle spends its entire life in stream corridors. Wood turtle populations 

are found in stream corridors of the Otter Kill, Seely Brook and Woodbury Creek. 

Stream salamanders are lungless and must obtain oxygen through their skin. As a result, they can 

be found in the moist areas of streambanks, seepages, and both intermittent and perennial 

streams. The most abundant headwater stream salamander in the Hudson Valley region is the 

northern two-lined salamander followed by the northern dusky salamander. The longtail 

salamander is rare in Orange County and declining within New York State. 

Fish 

Fish communities of the Moodna Creek range from anadramous fishes that use the tidal creek 

and mouth for spawning, to inland warmwater and coldwater fish communities. Little 

comprehensive monitoring of the Moodna Creek fish community has been conducted. The 

historical warmwater fish community includes the following species: white sucker, creek 

chubsucker, rock bass, redbreast sunfish, pumpkinseed, black crappie, blueback shad, American 

shad, cutlips minnow, Eastern silvery minnow, golden shiner, bridle shiner, common shiner, 

spotfin shiner, spottail shiner, fallfish, longnose dace, blacknose dace, creek chub, redfin 

pickerel, chain pickerel, brown bullhead, fourspine stickleback, and tessellated darter (NYS 

Museum 1936). Of these, the creek chubsucker, Eastern silvery minnow, bridle shiner, spottail 

shiner, spotfin shiner, fallfish, and fourspine stickleback have not been observed in recent times 

(NYSDEC Bureau of Fisheries 2007). However, additional surveys would be needed to confirm 

the presence or absence of these species. 

Coldwater fishes of the Moodna Creek Watershed include the native brook trout, and the stocked 

rainbow trout and brown trout. Stream reaches supporting coldwater fishes, invertebrates, and 

salamanders are usually fed by cold-cool groundwater. Brook trout and slimy sculpin are the 

dominate fish of small coldwater streams of high quality. These streams have shallow margins, 

woody debris, canopy shading, and boulders. Blacknose dace, creek chub, and white sucker 

might also occur at coldwater sites. Both brook and brown trout are found in the Trout Brook and 

Woodbury Creek tributaries. The DEC annually stocks the Moodna Creek mainstem with brown 

and rainbow trout and the Woodbury Creek with brown trout. 

9



Little is known about changes in the abundance of fish within the watershed. Parts of the 

watershed could still retain near historical levels of fish diversity, if not abundance. However, 

other major tributaries of the Hudson River have experienced declines in fish diversity and shifts 

in abundance between the 1930s and the 1990s related to changing land uses and pollution, and 

it’s likely parts of the Moodna Creek system have as well (Stainbrook et al. 2006, Daniels 1999). 


• Stream fragmentation. One of greatest threats to stream corridor biodiversity is the 

modification and fragmentation of stream corridors. Fragmentation occurs through direct 

modification of the stream channel and clearing for incompatible land uses within the 

stream corridor. A first step to the conservation of existing riparian corridors is to map 

riparian cover from the edge of the bankfull channel, to as far inland as natural vegetation 

extends. These areas can then be reviewed for their biological significance and level of 

connectivity, given the surrounding land uses. (See Figure 3 for an example of how 

buffer width analysis can be used to identify conservation and restoration opportunities.) 

Approaches that have been used to protect existing buffers include: fee simple 

acquisition, conservation easements, municipal planning tools, riparian buffer ordinances, 

and development tools (Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay 2004). 

• Riparian buffers. Riparian buffer plantings are recommended for stream reaches with 

breaks in continuous natural cover. To enhance connectivity, stream corridor 

conservation programs should seek to maintain existing natural cover along both banks of 

the stream and extending as far into adjacent areas as needed to maintain stream integrity 

(see Table 1 for width recommendations). It is important to protect riparian areas along 

both stream banks for both habitat and channel stability. Most streams in settled areas 

have variable-width buffers that can accommodate both land uses and conservation goals. 

Generally, headwater streams (first to third order) require smaller buffer widths to 

maintain stream integrity, while mid-order reaches require the widest buffers. Midreaches 

are usually highest in biological diversity (although headwater streams are key to 

overall stream health) and most prone to channel erosion. 

• Comprehensive conservation and management. It is possible, and recommended to 

combine conservation of stream corridor habitats with other stream management 

priorities. For example, the mapped 500-year floodplain viewed along with mapped 

stream corridor habitats could be used to identify conservation zones that meet both 

habitat and floodplain management objectives. 

• Climate change adaptation. As precipitation patterns change due to global climate 

change, more high flow events are likely to occur, putting infrastructure near streams at 

risk (NECIA 2006). Shifts in streamflow have the ability to create new patterns of 

erosion and deposition in channels (see Rosgen 1994). Conserving wide, connected 

stream corridors is an important climate change adaptation strategy that will help to 

maintain biodiversity and protect vulnerable infrastructure, water supplies and water 

quality. 

• Stream microhabitats. High quality in-stream habitat usually requires a patchwork of 

riffles and pools, and the input of woody debris to maximize habitat structure and create 

sufficient oxygen levels for aquatic life. Where possible, woody vegetation (shrubland 

and forests) should be allowed to mature, or restored through forest buffer plantings. 

10

Figure 3. Analysis of Riparian Buffers 

Along Trout Brook 

Trout Brook flows nearly 6 miles from its 

headwaters in the Towns of Warwick and 

Monroe through the Town of Chester where it 

merges with Seely Brook. The Trout Brook 

watershed forms a corridor between the 

Sterling Forest State Park in the far southern 

portion of the watershed and Goose Pond State 

Park to the north. Most of Trout Brook is a 

coldwater stream classified as trout waters by 

the NYSDEC and is suitable for primary and 

secondary contact recreation. Fish surveys 

conducted by DEC near Lakes Road in 2000 

found blacknose dace, brook trout, brown 

trout, pumpkinseed, and white sucker. The 

Trout Brook watershed is heavily forested and 

primarily developed for residential land use 

near the stream. The uplands are a complex of 

large Appalachian oak-hickory and Chestnut 

oak forests and wetlands. 

An analysis of buffer widths along Trout 

Brook reveals opportunities for conservation of 

existing wide forest buffers that connect the 

stream with forested uplands. Stream reaches 

shown in bright green in the illustration at left 

have forest buffers over 500’ in width. These 

reaches are likely to have high biological 

diversity. Sections shown in darker green are 

bordered by forests of at least 300’ in width on 

one or both sides of the stream. Buffers of this 

width support stream integrity and provide 

habitat for breeding birds, wood turtles, and 

stream salamander populations. Opportunities 

for rehabilitation in these reaches should be 

further investigated. Sections shown in bright 

pink have buffers of 100’ or less on one or 

both sides of the stream. Along these reaches, 

there are opportunities for landowners to 

engage in riparian buffer plantings and other 

management improvements. A nearly 

continuous forest buffer of 35’-100’ in width is 

necessary to provide shading and protect 

coldwater habitat for trout. 

Analysis by Leslie Zucker, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation in partnership with 

Cornell University. Map created May 23, 2008.



• Watershed land use. Another significant threat to stream integrity is watershed land use 

that alters the flow patterns of water. A number of studies have observed a “threshold 

effect” where urban land cover over 10% of the watershed area coincides with 

degradation in stream fish and macroinvertebrate communities (Schuler 1994. This 

threshold has been observed in the Moodna Creek for both anadromous and resident 

fishes (Limburg and Schmidt 2001). The impacts of urbanization can be reduced by 

limiting sprawl, implementing stormwater control practices, and situating development 

outside of stream corridors. Urban development and land modification within the stream 

corridor is particularly harmful. These actions create local stress for a system that may 

already be impaired by overall watershed development. The alternative is for landowners 

and municipalities to engage in programs that protect or restore natural conditions near 

the stream. 

• Further study. Little is known about the status of fish and other aquatic communities in 

the Moodna Creek and its tributaries. Partnerships to complete biological surveys and 

develop monitoring protocols should be explored with a range of actors such as the 

NYSDEC, county and local agencies, and area research and conservation organizations. 

At the same time, an assessment of stream habitat and physical condition should be 

conducted to determine if habitat alteration is a significant threat to stream integrity in the 

Moodna watershed. 

Table 1. Recommendations for minimum widths and connectivity of natural cover within the stream 

corridor to conserve biodiversity. Table created by L. Zucker. 

Wildlife Species 

or Group 

Minimum 

Buffer Width 

Wood Turtle 300-1,000’ 1 mile 

Stream 

Salamanders 

Minimum 

Stream Length 

Sources 

NYSDEC Endangered Species 

Program; NY Natural Heritage 

Program; Compton et al. 2002 

150’ Continuous Simlitsch and Bodie 2003 

Bats 300’-500’ Continuous 

Birds 

Warmwater 

fishes 

Minimum 100’ for 

edge and resident 

birds 

Minimum 300-500’ 

for migratory and 

forest interior birds 

150’ 

Coldwater fishes 35’-100’ 

Continuous 

Limit breaks in 

cover and reduce the 

direct hydraulic 

connection of 

surface water and 

storm sewers to the 

stream 

80% of banks with 

at least 35’ forest 

cover 

NY Natural Heritage Program; 

Menzel et al. 2005 

Spackman and Hughes 1995; 

Stauffer and Best 1980 

Wang et al. 2001 

Wenger et al. 1999 

12



Forests 

While much of the forested land in the Moodna Creek watershed is fragmented, there remain 

significant forest resources, ranging from large, matrix forests of global importance to smaller, 

stepping stone forests which provide important links to core habitat areas. These forest 

ecosystems, located primarily in the eastern and southern portions of the watershed, are 

extremely important to biodiversity, but also offer essential services to the human community. 

Forests, particularly large stands, contribute to water quality and quantity, mitigate effects of 

climate change, produce timber, and provide recreational opportunities such as hiking, hunting, 

and birdwatching. 

The Orange County Open Space Plan (2004) provides a good overview of forest resources for 

the entire county; the following discussion of the Moodna watershed reflects the size classes 

described in the Open Space Plan. 

Globally Important Forests (greater than 15,000 acres). The Nature Conservancy’s 

“ecoregional planning” efforts identified “matrix” community types that extend over very large 

areas of 1,000 to many millions of acres, often covering 80% or more of the undeveloped 

landscape. The size and natural condition of the identified “matrix forests” allow for the 

maintenance of dynamic ecological processes and meet the breeding requirements of species 

associated with forest interior conditions. The Moodna watershed contains two such globallyimportant, 

matrix forests. The east side of the watershed contains a large portion of the West 

Point/Black Rock matrix forest, which in total includes over 20,000 acres (8,100 ha) of core 

habitat, and connects southward to the even larger Harriman matrix forest. Protected lands in 

this forest include Storm King State Park, Black Rock Forest, and West Point Military Academy 

(although the latter is not permanently protected). The watershed’s southern tip in Monroe enters 

the Ringwood matrix forest, which in total includes an expanse of over 50,000 core acres (20,000 

ha) and includes protected lands in Sterling State Forest. Forests of this size are large enough so 

over time they will express a range of forest successional stages including areas that have been 

subjected to recent large-scale disturbance such as blowdowns and fire, areas under recovery, 

and mature areas. These forests also provide sufficient area to support enough individuals of 

most species to maintain genetic diversity over several generations. (Orange County Open Space 

Plan 2004) 

The large forests of the Hudson Highlands are primarily Appalachian oak-hickory forest, 

chestnut oak forest, and oak-tulip forest, and are interspersed with smaller but ecologically 

significant patch communities, such as pitch pine-oak-heath rocky summit, rocky summit 

grassland, and woodland pools. These large, relatively undeveloped blocks of forests, wetlands, 

grasslands, and ridges are noteworthy for the links they provide between the mid-Atlantic states 

and New England, and for the wildlife species they support, which are wide-ranging and areasensitive, 

and thrive in large, unfragmented landscapes. Examples of wildlife using large forest 

habitat in the Moodna watershed include black bear and bobcat; Indiana bat; timber rattlesnake 

and wood turtle; and many birds, including warblers and thrushes. 

Regionally Important Forests (14,999 down to 6, 000 acres). The Orange County Open Space 

Plan highlights forest patches greater than 6,000 acres (2,400 ha) as important for habitat to more 

area-sensitive species, and because they can accommodate the large-scale disturbances that 

maintain forest health over time. The plan identifies a regionally important forest on and around 

13



Schunnemunk Mountain. This forest is primarily chestnut oak forest, but at higher elevations, 

includes one of the best statewide examples of pitch pine-oak-heath rocky summit community. 

In the stream drainages, the chestnut oak forest is replaced by hemlock-northern hardwood 

forest, most of which has been killed off by wooly adelgid. 

Locally Important Forests (5,999 down to 2,000 acres). These small but locally important 

forests often represent the lower limit of intact, viable forest size for forest-dependent birds, 

which often require 2,500 to 7,500 acres (1,000 to 3,000 ha) of intact interior habitat. These 

forests, like the larger regionally important forests, also provide important corridors and 

connectivity among forest ecosystems within Orange County. The Open Space Plan indicates 

that in the Moodna watershed, there are a only a few locally important forests remaining. These 

are found in Goose Pond Mountain State Park in Chester, near the headwaters of Trout Brook, 

and straddling the borders of Hamptonburgh and Goshen along the Otter Kill. 

Stepping Stone Forests (1,999 down to 200 acres). These smaller forests provide valuable, 

relatively broad corridors and links to larger patches of habitat such as the local, regional, and 

global forests found in the watershed. Such broad connections are more effective than narrow, 

linear corridors, and enable species to move from one habitat to another across an otherwise 

hostile and fragmented landscape. There are a number of stepping stone forests in the Moodna 

watershed, including patches to the west of Schunnemunk; to the west and south of Goose Pond; 

and to the south of Stewart State Forest. 


• Setting priorities for forest conservation. Smaller blocks of forests are less likely to 

support the rich diversity of species of the Moodna Creek watershed. The Orange 

County Open Space Plan suggests that priorities for protection therefore should range 

from high to low as forest blocks range from globally important (high priority) to 

stepping stone (lowest priority). 

• Protection of large forests. Globally-important forests are increasingly rare in the 

Hudson Valley, where development patterns have fragmented most forested lands into 

smaller and smaller patches. Communities in the Moodna watershed have an important 

stewardship role to play in the conservation of large, contiguous forests, and where 

possible, expanding on them by protecting adjacent forested lands through acquisition, 

conservation easement, sustainable forestry agreements, and effective conservation 

subdivision design. The forest blocks identified in the Orange County Open Space Plan 

should serve as a framework for establishing priorities and opportunities to maintain 

habitat connectivity between large core areas such as Schunnemunk Mountain and Storm 

King, or Goose Pond and Sterling Forest. (See “Cores, Connections, and Landscape 

Perspective” section.) 

• Forest fragmentation. Further fragmentation of forest patches should be prevented. 

Placement of future roads, driveways, utility lines, and other fragmenting features should 

be designed to avoid intact, contiguous forested areas. Such fragmentation leads to 

decreased habitat availability, introduction of invasive species like Japanese barberry, 

increased songbird nest predation and parasitism, and increased mortality of wildlife 

attempting to cross roads and developed areas. There are human health implications as 

well. Research conducted in Dutchess County suggested a link between increased risk of 

Lyme disease and reduced forest size, due to an associated reduction in small mammal 

14



diversity. The prevalence of white-footed mice in small, isolated forest patches led to 

higher incidence of Lyme, since this mouse is the most effective carrier of the bacterium 

that causes the disease. The risk of Lyme disease is much lower in intact forest 

ecosystems where the infection rate is diluted by a diverse small mammal fauna (Allan et 

al. 2003). 

• Forest habitat for pool-breeding amphibians. Planning for future development and 

timber harvesting should include practices to conserve adequate forested habitat around 

woodland pools to support forest amphibians (see “Wetlands” section). Pool-breeding 

species such as marbled salamander, Jefferson salamander, and wood frog require 

substantial forested areas for all non-breeding parts of their life cycle. Recommendations 

in Calhoun and Klemens (2002) and Calhoun and deMaynadier (2004) should be 

followed. 

• Natural disturbance. Forest systems benefit from cycles of natural disturbance. A 

history of fire suppression in the larger forests of the watershed has contributed to 

changes in forest community structure, and build-up of fuel material. The expansive 

wildfire at Minnewaska State Park Preserve in Ulster County in spring 2008 illustrates 

how fire suppression can ultimately lead to more intense and difficult to manage 

wildfires. Prescribed burning may provide a favorable alternative for the large forests in 

the Moodna watershed, and warrants investigation. 

Wetlands 

The Moodna Creek watershed contains a diversity of wetland habitats…from the freshwater tidal 

marsh at the creek mouth to the small woodland pools in Black Rock Forest, to the large 

hardwood swamps in the Otter Kill basins, and the fens and freshwater marshes in the Black 

Meadow Creek drainage. Each of these wetland types is shaped by different hydrology, 

chemistry, and position on the landscape; in turn, they support different species that are adapted 

to the particular conditions of the habitat. These wetland systems also provide a number of 

services to Moodna watershed residents, including floodwater retention, water purification, and 

in some cases, groundwater recharge. 

Rare Wetland Wildlife. In addition to the countless common plants and animals supported by 

wetland communities in the Moodna watershed, there is an especially rich diversity of rare 

wildlife, including: 

• southern leopard frog (NYS Special Concern) in the Otter Kill and Seely Brook basins 

(primary habitat is wet meadow, also permanent and seasonal wetlands and some upland 

areas); 

• northern cricket frog (NYS Endangered) in the Black Meadow Creek basin (primary 

habitat complex includes permanent wetlands and upland forest); 

• marbled salamander (NYS Special Concern – Watch List) in Black Meadow Creek basin 

and other pool-breeding amphibians in Seely Brook and Otter Kill basins (breeding 

habitat is woodland pools and non-breeding habitat is upland forest); 

• bog turtle (NYS Endangered) in the Black Meadow Creek basin (primary habitats are 

fens and wet meadows); 

15



• spotted turtle (NYS Special Concern – Watch List) in Black Meadow Creek, Seely 

Brook, and Otter Kill North basins (habitat complex includes woodland pools, upland 

forest, and wet meadows or swamps); 

• great blue heron rookeries in Purgatory Swamp in the Otter Kill South basin and 

Hamptonburgh Preserve in Otter Kill North; 

• nesting bald eagle (NYS Threatened) at Tomahawk Lake in Cromline Creek basin, and at 

the Moodna Creek mouth; 

• gray petaltail (NYS Special Concern) in the Highlands (habitat is seepage slopes), New 

England bluet in Black Rock Forest (habitat is ponds or lakes with boggy edges), and 

many more dragonflies and damselflies. 

Note that the above records are based on documented occurrences in the NY Natural Heritage 

Database; observations from the NYS Herpetological Atlas; and Orange County biodiversity 

data. There are likely occurrences of these and other species elsewhere in the watershed that are 

yet unrecorded. Refer to the appendices for additional information on wetland wildlife of 

conservation concern. 

Wetland Habitat Types. A thorough survey of the different wetland types in the Moodna 

watershed has not been conducted, so available habitat information is limited to wetland 

classifications on the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, or inferences from reported 

species presence. Wetland habitats that appear to occur in the watershed include lakes and 

ponds, hardwood swamps, floodplain forest, emergent marsh, wet meadows, fens, woodland 

pools, springs and seeps, beaver ponds, and possibly bog lakes and kettle pools. (Detailed 

profiles of different wetland habitats are included in Edinger et al. 2002 and Kiviat and Stevens 

2001.) 

Two small but important wetland habitats that are known to occur in the watershed are fens and 

woodland pools. Due to their small size, they are more frequently omitted from regulatory 

wetland maps than swamps, marshes, and other large wetlands. While these larger wetlands are 

no less important, fens and woodland pools are often missed completely during the land use and 

conservation planning process and therefore warrant special conservation consideration, as they 

support species that rarely occur in other habitat types. 

Fens are shallow, open-canopy wetlands, fed by groundwater seepage and dominated by 

herbaceous vegetation. Fens are an uncommon type of wet meadow, and are often quite 

small. Their calcareous conditions result from underlying limestone or carbonate rock. 

Fens often support rare plants, as well as rare animals like bog turtle, spotted turtle, 

ribbon snake, and several butterflies like Dion skipper. Because the presence of fens is 

so strongly linked to the bedrock properties and groundwater of the area, they are 

particularly vulnerable to alterations in hydrology and chemistry. Fens in the Moodna 

Creek watershed are known to occur in the southwestern subbasins, including Black 

Meadow Creek basin, but their full distribution in the watershed is not known. 

Woodland pools are small, isolated wetlands that typically dry out annually. This subset 

of “vernal” pools occurs in depressions in forested landscapes, and usually has no inlet or 

outlet, and therefore does not support a fish community. As a result, woodland pools are 

excellent “nurseries” for developing amphibian eggs and larvae. In the Hudson Valley, 

they provide important breeding habitat for marbled salamander, Jefferson salamander, 

blue-spotted salamander, spotted salamander, wood frog, and fairy shrimp, and also are 

16



used as foraging habitat by turtles, snakes, frogs, wood ducks, bats, and other wildlife. 

Because of their small size and isolation, woodland pools lack Federal or State 

protection, and consequently are often overlooked, filled, or drained. In instances where 

pools receive local protection, the protected adjacent area or “buffer” is typically 

inadequate. In order to sustain populations of pool-breeding amphibians, substantial 

forested habitat in the surrounding area must be protected. Calhoun and Klemens (2002) 

recommend maintaining forested buffers of 750 feet around pools, with less than 25% 

development or disturbance in the forested zone. While Black Rock Forest is known to 

have many woodland pools, and pool locations were documented in MCA’s Southern 

Wallkill Biodiversity Plan (Miller et al. 2005), distribution of this habitat on private lands 

is relatively unknown or undocumented for the watershed and requires further study. 


• Wetland habitat mapping. Watershed communities will be better equipped to make 

land-use decisions if higher-quality wetland maps are available. One method to obtain 

such information is to create town-scale wetland maps; although this process can be 

costly, volunteers can be engaged to assist with appropriate components (see below). 

These maps can be part of a comprehensive natural resource inventory (NRI), and can 

represent different wetland habitat types (e.g., hardwood swamp, emergent marsh, etc.); 

include wetlands of all sizes, with no minimum area; and designate zones with varying 

degrees of conservation need. In these zones, regulated buffer sizes could be adjusted to 

meet specific goals; for example, maintaining water quality in an urbanized area versus 

protecting important habitat for a rare species. In the absence of a town-scale map, at a 

minimum, NYS Freshwater Wetland (including 2008 amendments for Orange County), 

NWI, and hydric soil data can be compiled into a GIS project as a baseline that can 

eventually be enhanced by detailed remote sensing and field investigations. Wetland 

buffers of at least 150 ft (50 m) can be added as important adjacent area. When setting 

conservation priorities, special attention can be given to large wetland complexes, and 

clusters of small or medium size wetlands. Larger buffer sizes can be added if local 

conditions or conservation needs are known (e.g., forested buffers of 750 ft [250 m] are 

recommended for woodland pools.) 

• Citizen science. Citizen scientists and volunteers can be engaged in mapping of locallyimportant 

wetlands. For example, a partnership with the Hudson River Estuary Program 

can be pursued to develop a map of woodland pools in the watershed. In addition, 

biodiversity assessment training is available to municipalities from Hudsonia Ltd. on 

identification and mapping of ecologically-significant habitats; this habitat approach can 

be part of an NRI process. 

• Local ordinances. Municipalities can pursue creation of local wetland ordinances, to 

ensure that wetlands and buffer areas that are inadequately protected by existing state and 

federal regulations no longer fall through regulatory cracks. Such ordinances can ensure 

protection of important community resources, while assisting decision-making boards 

and landowners in identifying conservation priorities early in the planning process. 

• Amphibian and reptile habitat complexes. The Moodna watershed has an extremely 

rich diversity of amphibians and reptiles, many of which are increasingly rare. These 

species often require habitat complexes for survival, so maintaining landscape 

connectivity is extremely important. (Mitchell et al. 2006) For example, within New 

York, the imperiled northern cricket frog is known to migrate at least 750 ft (250 m) from 

17



its summer wetland habitats. Similarly, spotted turtle needs to make overland movements 

to access different seasonal habitats. Local planning boards, decision makers, 

landowners, and conservation leaders should be educated on the habitat needs of these 

protected and declining species, to ensure their ability to persist in the watershed. 

• Dragonflies and damselflies. Orange County has the second highest number of 

dragonfly and damselfly species in the United States. In North America, about 15% of 

dragonfly species are at risk of extinction in the foreseeable future. (Dunkle 2000) 

Aquatic dragonflies and damselflies use a variety of wetland habitats, and can be 

impacted by fish stocking, mosquito control, pesticides, hydrologic alteration, removal of 

aquatic vegetation, and other changes to habitat quality. Outreach and education to 

landowners and local leaders on conservation-oriented practices may help generate a 

sense of stewardship responsibility around this local natural legacy. 

Grasslands, Shrublands, and Farmland 

The history of agricultural practices in the watershed, along with current farming activity, has 

maintained important early-successional habitats like meadows and shrubby old fields. A 

number of wildlife species are dependent on these grassland habitats for breeding and foraging. 

In addition, agricultural lands can provide a ‘permeable’ landscape that is important for 

connecting core habitats across the landscape. While some farms and farming practices (e.g., 

large-scale industrial operations) cause damage to habitats and ecosystems, other farms (e.g., 

small-scale family farms) support species that are disappearing as rural countryside converts to 

suburban neighborhoods. (Miller et al. 2005) Finally, old and active farms create the pastoral 

landscape that adds to local scenery and a community’s “sense of place,” as well as sustain a 

region’s ability to provide locally-grown food and contribute to groundwater infiltration. 

Grasslands. Grassland-breeding birds are especially dependent on open, grass-dominated fields 

for nesting. Studies have found that patches greater than 100 acres (40 ha) are necessary to 

support a diversity of breeding grassland birds; considerably larger patches, however, have 

greater potential for high species diversity and breeding success (Helzer and Jelinski 1999, 

Herkert 1991). Some of the smaller patches of grassland in the Moodna watershed are suitable 

for species that require less area for breeding, such as bobolink. (See Appendix A.) Grassland 

species that were reported as ‘confirmed breeders’ in the watershed during the 2000-2005 NYS 

Breeding Bird Atlas include bobolink, eastern meadowlark, and savannah sparrow; several 

additional grassland species were observed during the Atlas but breeding was not confirmed. 

(See Appendix B.) 

The open, grassy areas at Stewart International Airport have historically supported grassland 

breeding birds, including upland sandpiper (NYS Threatened) in the 1980s. Given the recent 

expansion of the airport, it is uncertain whether grassland habitat remains available; however, 

small local airports and other facilities with large ‘lawns’ may provide suitable breeding or 

overwintering habitat if managed appropriately. Northern harrier (NYS Threatened) and shorteared 

owl (NYS Endangered) have been observed using grasslands near Purgatory Swamp as 

overwintering habitat. 

For information on the values of wet meadow habitat, see the “Wetlands” section. 

18



Shrubland and Early Successional Forest. If not managed as grassland, inactive fields 

eventually evolve into shrubland and the early stages of young forest. Some grassland bird 

species prefer the structural difference provided by woody vegetation. Species documented as 

‘confirmed breeders’ in the watershed during the NYS Breeding Bird Atlas include blue-winged 

warbler, brown thrasher, eastern towhee, field sparrow, indigo bunting, prairie warbler, and 

willow flycatcher. (See Appendix B.) 

Old fields and shrublands are also valuable as part of the habitat complex of eastern box turtle 

(NYS Special Concern – Watch List), which was documented in nearly all subbasins in the 

southern half of the watershed during the NYS Herp Altas (Appendix C). While primarily a 

species of riparian corridors, wood turtle also uses field habitats, and other turtle species may 

seek nesting sites in open, exposed areas of meadows. Larger mammals, snakes, and raptors 

prey upon the mice, voles, and other small mammals living in old fields, and a number of rare 

butterflies and other invertebrates are also associated with early-successional habitat. 


• Grassland habitat mapping. Little is known about areas in the Moodna watershed that 

provide important habitat for grassland-dependent species. As part of their NRI or open 

space planning processes, communities in the watershed can map and evaluate grassland 

habitat to inform future planning and conservation decisions. Large grasslands (greater 

than 100 acres [40 ha]), or those known to support breeding birds of conservation 

concern, should be priorities for protection or management. Local naturalists and 

members of bird clubs may be interested in volunteering to assist with such a project, by 

identifying suitable habitat, breeding sites, and nesting success. 

• Grassland management and mowing. Grassland-breeding birds are ground-nesters, 

and therefore are especially vulnerable to mowing and other farming equipment. 

Mowing areas with ground-nesting birds should be avoided before August 1. While 

some young birds may be fledged by late June, species such as savannah sparrow and 

eastern meadowlark raise a second brood later in the season, and the young fledge in late 

July. If herpetofauna (reptiles and amphibians) are a conservation concern, then mowing 

should occur after the first frost (late November or early December.) (LaBruna and 

Klemens 2007, Mitchell et al. 2006) If mowing is essential prior to August 1 (such as in 

fields leased to farmers for hay), try to avoid areas where birds are frequently seen and/or 

leave small patches unmowed to provide cover and feeding areas for the remainder of the 

summer until birds depart on southward migrations. It is not necessary to mow every 

year for grassland birds. Mowing can be limited to every one to three years in fields not 

harvested for high-quality hay. If managing for a shrubby field habitat, then mowing can 

be even less frequent. 

• Public outreach. Educate the public on the values of grasslands, and provide 

appropriate opportunities for community members to visit grasslands and observe 

wildlife. Partner with local land trusts and conservation organizations to educate 

landowners on stewardship and management strategies for grassland conservation. This 

may be especially effective on properties with large “ornamental” meadows that are not 

hayed for income. Reach out to local farmers who may be interested in maintaining some 

wildlife habitat on their lands, and explore cost-share programs like the USDA Natural 

Resource Conservation Service’s Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program. 

19



Cliffs and Caves 

The ridges of the Moodna Creek watershed generally follow a northeast-southwest configuration, 

with the steep slopes of the Hudson Highlands and Schunnemunk Mountain most prominent in 

the southeast portion of the watershed. Also reaching higher elevations are the foothills of the 

Highlands, including Woodcock Hill, Goose Pond Mountain, and Sugarloaf Mountain. At its 

most southern point, the watershed captures the northern end of Bellvale Mountain. These rocky 

slopes are favorite destinations for hikers and birdwatchers, and while their summits offer 

incredible views of surrounding valleys, they themselves are important features of local scenery. 

Habitats and Wildlife of Cliffs and Caves. These mountains and ridges create an array of 

habitats and natural communities that are not found in other parts of the watershed, including 

outcrops, ledges, acidic talus slopes, rocky summit grassland, and pitch pine-oak-heath rocky 

summit. The plants and animals that use these habitats are adapted to the thin soils, and 

somewhat exposed, harsh conditions. Rare plants such as green rock-cress (NYS Threatened) 

and violet wood-sorrel (NYS Threatened) have been documented in ridge habitats in the 

watershed, along with a number of rare dragonflies, butterflies, and moths like pine barrens 

underwing (NYS Special Concern). Worm-eating warbler is a documented breeder in the ridges 

of the watershed, where it likely favors the steep, forested slopes for nesting. Other species that 

may inhabit rocky ridges in the watershed include five-lined skink, slimy salamander, peregrine 

falcon, porcupine, and bobcat, and many songbirds and raptors use the ridges of the Highlands as 

migratory corridors. 

Snakes are most often associated with rocky cliffs, and the ridges of the Moodna watershed 

indeed support populations of species like timber rattlesnake (NYS Threatened), northern 

copperhead, black rat snake, and eastern racer. While rocky habitats on south and southeast 

facing slopes provide den and basking sites, these species use forests and some wetland habitats 

for other life needs, and require connected landscapes in order to move from one habitat to the 

next. (See Appendix A.) Eastern racer and black rat snake may travel 600 ft (190 m) or more to 

forage, bask, breed, nest, and hibernate, and copperhead and timber rattlesnake have even larger 

home ranges, traveling distances of 3300-7900 ft (1000-2400 m) (Hartwig and Stevens 2007). 

The Bull Mine in Satterly Creek basin supports a bat hibernacula, used by eastern small-footed 

myotis (NYS Special Concern) and Indiana bat (NYS Endangered). (See Appendix A.) Human 

disturbance while the bats are overwintering is a serious threat, particularly now after tens of 

thousands of hibernating bats died in the Northeast in winter 2007-08 for unknown reasons. Bats 

play a very important role in the ecosystem, with one individual bat consuming as many as 3,000 

flying insects each night during the summer. This group of mammals deserves special 

conservation consideration. 


• Rocky habitat “islands.” The Moodna watershed is fortunate that many of its major 

ridges are protected as parks or preserves. However, unless these areas can have 

landscape connections to other surrounding habitats, they will essentially become isolated 

“islands” that will lose function and resiliency as ecosystems. Such fragmentation cannot 

support wildlife species that require multiple habitats to survive, or that travel great 

20



distances. Opportunities to identify and conserve natural areas between and/or around 

these rocky summits should be pursued, such as the biodiversity areas identified by MCA 

surrounding Goose Pond Mountain (Miller et al. 2005). 

• Recreation impacts. While the protected status of the prominent ridges reduces the 

threat of development, such as cell tower construction, there remains an element of 

disturbance from recreational activities like hiking and ATV use. Good trail systems, 

signage, and visitor education can help prevent trampling of fragile plant communities, 

disturbance of nesting birds, erosion of steep slopes, and overall habitat degradation. 

Trails should steer visitors away from the most ecologically-sensitive areas, while still 

providing positive experiences to enjoy nature and the scenic beauty of the watershed. 

New York/New Jersey Trail Conference is a likely partner for trail-related planning. 

• Snake conservation. In addition to habitat fragmentation (see above), the decline in 

snake populations in New York can be attributed to illegal collection for the pet trade. 

Specific den locations and other sensitive information should not be publicized unless 

essential for conservation of the population. 

• Bat conservation. Current use of Bull Mine for exploration and caving should be 

assessed to determine whether bat populations are being impacted. If so, visits to the 

Bull Mine should be discouraged, particularly in winter, to conserve bat overwintering 

habitat. If visitation or disturbance to the bat colony is considered a serious problem, 

then closures or restrictions may be advisable. Researchers are still uncertain what role 

white-nose syndrome has played in the recent deaths of bats in the Northeast, but the US 

Fish and Wildlife Service website has posted precautionary recommendations to avoid 

spreading the fungus. 

Cores, Connections, and Landscape Perspective 

Analysis of biodiversity resources at the watershed scale enables residents, planners, and 

conservation leaders to recognize patterns across the larger landscape, and to see the “big 

picture” that is often left out of the traditional site-plan review process. Whereas the latter is 

influenced by zoning districts, setback requirements, Department of Health approvals, location of 

infrastructure, and similar concerns, it often fails to consider how whole communities are 

developing, and where important biological resources are positioned on the landscape. Streams, 

ridges, wetlands, and other habitats, like the wildlife they support, are not influenced by political 

boundaries or municipal codes. However, they can suffer greatly from misguided or uninformed 

land-use planning. The Moodna Creek Watershed Plan offers an opportunity for municipalities 

to identify their individual and shared resources, set priorities, and create new approaches for 

planning with a more comprehensive perspective. 

Cores 

To plan for conservation and future development on the watershed scale, it’s useful to know 

where important biodiversity “cores” are, and what lands are suitable for providing 

“connections” between them. The map in Figure 4 includes data layers from various 

conservation organizations that have identified or documented important resources. Planning for 

biodiversity at the watershed level, and the local level for that matter, would be much simpler if 

exhaustive survey data and widespread habitat mapping were available throughout the region. 

Unfortunately, such comprehensive resource information is rarely available for large areas, so 

21

I87 

Figure 4. Documented Biodiversity Resources of Importance 

in the Moodna Creek Watershed Orange County, NY 

Legend 


Major Road 

Orange County Rare Species 

MCA S. Wallkill Biodiversity Plan 

TNC Matrix Forest Blocks 

SR17K 


CRAWFORD 

MONTGOMERY 

This map includes known areas of importance for biodiversity, 

including those identified by the NY Natural Heritage Program, 

Orange County Planning, and the Metropolitan Conservation 

Alliance. Also included are very large forest stands identified by 

The Nature Conservancy as "matrix forests," and Moodna water 

resources with conservation-oriented buffers of adjacent areas. 

Note that not all areas of the watershed have been studied, 

and there are likely other significant biodiversity resources not 

represented here. This map is intended for planning purposes only, 

and can be enhanced with further study on multiple scales. 

I84 

NEWBURGH 

US9W 

NEWBURGH 

WAPPINGER 

−FISHKILL 

BEACON 

Hudson River 

SR17 

WALLKILL 

SR211 

NEW WINDSOR 

MIDDLETOWN 

MIDDLETOWN 

HAMPTONBURGH 

PHILIPSTOWN 

WAWAYANDA 

CORNWALL 

US6&SR17M 

BLOOMING GROVE 

GOSHEN 

HIGHLANDS 

SR94 

CHESTER 

WOODBURY 

US6 

CORTLANDT 

MONROE 

US6&SR17 

US6 

US6 

SR94 

SR94&SR17A 

WARWICK 





TUXEDO 

SR17 

PALISADES I. PKWY 

STONY POINT 

0 1 2 4 6 8 

Miles 

PEEKSKILL 

CORTLANDT 

HAVERSTRAW 

Data Sources: 



National Wetland Inventory 

The Nature Conservancy 

Orange County Planning Department 

Metropolitan Conservation Alliance 

US9W



the next step is to collect existing information, and recognize that gaps will need to be filled by 

further study. 

Figure 4 includes recommended conservation areas from MCA’s Southern Wallkill Biodiversity 

Plan, which studied Chester, Warwick, and Goshen; Orange County data on rare species; 

Important Areas identified by the NY Natural Heritage Program; and matrix forests mapped by 

The Nature Conservancy. (The map also shows water resources in the watershed with buffers of 

325 ft (100 m) on large streams; 215 ft (65 m) on wetlands and waterbodies; and 165 ft (50 m) 

on smaller tributaries.) These collective areas do not represent the only important biological 

resources in the watershed, as there is much yet to learn; they also aren’t “hands-off” areas where 

development or disturbance is prohibited. Rather, they provide a framework that can be used to 

think about the big picture, and employ different approaches to avoid the known threats to local 

biodiversity, and to pursue the various conservation opportunities at hand. 

Another existing source of information on Moodna resources is the Orange County Open Space 

Plan (2004), which identified a number of resources as “Core Biological Diversity Areas” that 

are located in the Moodna watershed (Figure 5): 

• Hudson Highlands (including Sterling Forest, Storm King, and Black Rock 

Forest) 

• Schunnemunk Mountain 

• Goosepond Mountain (including Goosepond Mountain State Park) 

• Purgatory Swamp 

• Stewart State Forest. 

These large areas, many of which are protected, are known biodiversity hotspots with primarily 

undeveloped lands. Studies at more local scales will help to determine what additional, smaller 

hotspots may be important components of this conservation network. For example, the Southern 

Wallkill Biodiversity Plan emphasized the biological importance of the Black Meadow Creek 

corridor and its relationship to Glenmere Lake, which is outside of the Moodna watershed but 

supports a northern cricket frog (NYS Endangered) population that crosses the boundary (Miller 

et al. 2005). Recent research suggests that habitat restoration efforts should focus on enlarging 

core areas, particularly by widening narrow sections of large fragments, to provide more interior 

habitat for core-dwelling species and to reduce invasive species, which flourish at the edge of 

habitat fragments (Ewers and Didham 2007). 

Connections 

Identifying and conserving links between biodiversity cores is necessary to allow wildlife to 

overcome fragmentation and still move between habitats. These wildlife ‘corridors’ are not the 

narrow, straight passageways we’re familiar with in our built environment; rather, they need to 

be broad, natural areas without roads, housing developments, and other fragmenting features. 

These connections enable wildlife to move safely between breeding and foraging habitats; to 

shift habitats when conditions become unsuitable; and to maintain genetic exchange between 

populations. Well-connected landscapes will also enable future migrations northward and to 

higher elevations, as species respond to increasing temperatures from climate change. This may 

be particularly important in Orange County where a number of species, like marbled salamander 

and box turtle, are already close to the northern limit of their range. 

23

Figure 5. Conservation Network of Biodiversity Cores and 

Connections in the Moodna Creek Watershed Orange County, NY 

Legend 


Major Road 

Orange County Cores & Corridors 

Orange County Rare Species 

MCA S. Wallkill Biodiversity Plan 

TNC Matrix Forest Blocks 

SR17K 


This map includes the biodiversity hotspots and wildlife corridors 

identified in the Orange County Open Space Plan, overlaid onto the 

documented biodiversity resources shown in Figure 4. Also identified 

are riparian corridors not included in the county's 'Cores & Corridors' 

network, but which may serve as important landscape linkages. Further 

analysis is needed on a finer scale, to identify additional cores and 

connections, and appropriate land-use strategies that will conserve 

important biodiversity areas, with generous buffers and connectivity 

to other hotspots. This map can be considered a "first step" toward 

developing a comprehensive biodiversity conservation strategy for 

the watershed, and is intended for planning purposes only. 

US9W 

− 

I84 

SR17 

SR211 

Hudson River 

RIPARIAN CORR 

Stewart 

State Forest 

Moodna 

Mouth 

US6&SR17M 

SR94&SR17A 

RRIDOR 

RIPARIAN C O 

SR94 

Purgatory 

Swamp 

US6&SR17 

Goose Pond 

Mountain 

RIPARIAN CORRIDOR 



ID O R 

Schunnemunk 

Mountain 

SR17 

US6 

RRIDOR 

RIPARIAN C O 

US6 

I87 

Hudson Highlands 

Storm 

Black 

King 

Rock 

Forest 

US6 

US9W 

SR94 

Sterling Forest 

0 1 2 4 6 8 

Miles 





Data Sources: 



National Wetland Inventory 

The Nature Conservancy 

Orange County Planning Department 

Metropolitan Conservation Alliance



The following recommendations for landscape connections incorporate suggestions included in 

the Orange County Open Space Plan (Figure 5): 

• Goosepond Mountain to Sterling Forest 

• Goosepond Mountain to Schunnemunk Mountain 

• Schunnemunk Mountain to Stewart State Forest 

• Schunnemunk Mountain to Storm King 

• Black Meadow Reservoir to Purgatory Swamp 

• Otter Kill/Moodna Creek corridor (linear along river) 

• Stream corridors throughout the watershed. 

Land cover and fragmenting features in these potential connections will need to be assessed to 

determine feasibility for establishing functional biodiversity corridors. In addition to 

maintaining existing connections, there may be opportunities to restore linkages severed by 

major roadways, dams, and other barriers. Academic institutions, graduate students, 

conservation organizations, and the Hudson River Estuary Program may serve as good partners 

for conducting such analyses. Subsequent steps may require intermunicipal partnerships, 

outreach to landowners, coordination with land trusts, and planning tools such as conservation 

overlay zones, critical environmental areas, and conservation subdivision guidelines. 

Establishment of a biodiversity network does not necessitate outright purchase and protection of 

all lands, but it does require careful planning and innovative designs to maintain a permeable 

landscape, where wildlife does not perish due to vehicular traffic, lawnmowers, stormdrain 

pitfalls, household pets, and impassable barriers. 

While habitat connections at the regional scale are very important, finer-scale assessment of the 

watershed is needed to identify the importance of local-scale connections; e.g., forested 

connectivity between clusters of woodland pools, or connections between core wetlands and 

upland overwintering habitats used by northern cricket frog. Because they provide important 

landscape links, stream corridors should be analyzed to evaluate the condition of riparian buffers 

and identify opportunities for restoration or conservation. (See Figure 3.) 


• Data gaps. More information is needed to build a strong smart growth plan for the 

watershed, which preserves cores and connections for biodiversity, while adequately 

addressing the needs for future growth of human communities. The Orange County 

Watershed Authority may want to convene an advisory committee to identify priority 

data gaps, pursue further studies, and refine recommendations to implement a plan for 

conserving Moodna’s conservation network. 

• Updates to County plans. Orange County’s “Priority Growth Areas,” which suggest 

future population growth centers, contradict the recommendations set forth in the Orange 

County Open Space Plan for biodiversity cores and connections. For example, a priority 

growth area is projected for the area between Goosepond and Schunnemunk Mountains, 

but this same area was identified as an important corridor in the open space plan. These 

discrepancies should be resolved or compatible priorities should be established to 

accommodate future development in appropriate areas. The upcoming update of the 

county comprehensive plan presents an excellent opportunity to reevaluate these 

recommendations. 

25



• Southern Wallkill Biodiversity Plan. Recommendations in the Southern Wallkill 

Biodiversity Plan (Miller et al. 2005) should be reviewed and implemented by all 

appropriate stakeholders. The Hudson River Estuary Program can provide technical 

assistance to facilitate implementation. Similar studies in other portions of the watershed 

should be considered. 

• Land trust partners. The Orange County Land Trust is a likely partner to implement 

the Moodna Creek Watershed Plan recommendations to develop a strategy for 

establishing a biodiversity network. They can assist with determining key parcels, 

exploring landowner incentive programs, and considering voluntary protection measures 

to maintain important cores and connections. 

• Local and intermunicipal action. Local municipalities can incorporate biodiversity 

recommendations of the Moodna Creek Watershed Plan into their comprehensive plans, 

and explore intermunicipal agreements to promote a more landscape-level vision for the 

future of the watershed. 

• Planning board education. Due to intense development pressure and the sheer volume 

of applications before planning boards, the standard “planning” process at the municipal 

level focuses less on actual planning and more on decision-making. Planning boards in 

the watershed should be offered training to understand the recommendations of the 

watershed plan, how the plan fits into their role as land-use decisionmakers, and how they 

can be partners in plan implementation. In addition, planning board members should be 

offered training on local biodiversity resources, planning considerations, and how the 

State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) process can be used most effectively to 

support conservation-oriented planning. 

• Environmental commissions and NRIs. More local-scale information is needed to 

elucidate both the landscape and local core and connection priorities (see discussion 

above). Where they are not already engaged, watershed municipalities can empower 

environmental commissions to become effective partners in the planning process. 

Environmental commissions should be charged with developing municipal NRIs and/or 

open space plans, as set forth in the State of New York General Municipal Law, Article 

12-F Section 239-x and 239-y, and should serve as important advisory bodies to town 

boards, planning boards, and zoning boards of appeals and contribute substantially to 

environmental reviews. They too should be offered training to facilitate their 

conservation work. 

• Habitat assessment guidelines. Considering biodiversity early in the planning process 

can be beneficial to all stakeholders. Municipalities can use “Habitat Assessment 

Guidelines” to supplement larger-scale maps and inventories with site-specific 

information. Habitat Assessment Guidelines are being used by several planning boards 

in Ulster and Dutchess County to identify important resources early in the planning 

process, and to have preliminary discussions on conservation priorities before serious site 

planning begins. This has been found to save time and resources for both the decisionmaking 

boards and the applicants, and often eliminates the need for a ‘positive 

declaration’ during the SEQR process. Moodna Creek watershed municipalities should 

explore similar guidelines. 

26



Conclusions 

Whatever the scale, from making decisions at a site-plan review, to developing a town open 

space plan, or setting watershed protection goals, the key steps to conserving biodiversity 

resources are as follows: 

1) identify resources 

2) prioritize resources 

3) plan, protect, and manage resources. 

The Moodna Creek Watershed Plan is a tool that residents, municipalities, conservation groups, 

county agencies, and other stakeholders can use to learn about the rich diversity of plants and 

animals that live in the watershed, and set priorities so that implementation efforts are effective 

and efficient, and reflect community values. It also can be used to identify gaps in information 

and set goals for future study and research. Finally, it can provide a planning framework to 

protect the biodiversity of the Moodna watershed, so that future generations will be able to live 

in healthy, quality communities and enjoy their natural heritage for a long time to come. 

Many of the recommendations outlined here reflect general conservation principles for 

protecting biodiversity. They include (adapted from Kiviat and Stevens 2001): 

• Consider habitat and biodiversity concerns early in the planning process. 

• Direct human uses toward the least sensitive areas, and minimize alteration of natural 

features, including vegetation, soils, bedrock, and waterways. 

• Protect large, contiguous, and unaltered tracts of habitats wherever possible. 

• Protect contiguous habitat areas in large, circular or broadly-shaped configurations within 

the larger landscape. 

• Preserve links between habitats on adjacent properties via broad connections, not narrow 

corridors. 

• Create, restore, and maintain broad buffer zones of natural vegetation along streams, 

along shores of other water bodies and wetlands, and at the perimeter of other sensitive 

habitats. 

• Maintain buffer zones between development and land intended for habitat. 

• Prioritize higher-quality habitats for protection, as degraded habitats decrease the 

biological value of the larger ecological landscape. 

• Preserve natural processes such as forest fires, floodplain flooding, and beaver flooding 

to maintain the diversity of habitats and species dependent on such processes. 

• Preserve farmland potential. 

27



• Protect habitats associated with resources of special economic, public health, or aesthetic 

importance to the community. These include aquifers or other sources of drinking water, 

active farms, and scenic views. 

• In general, encourage development of altered land instead of unaltered land. 

• Concentrate development along existing roads; discourage construction of new roads in 

undeveloped areas. 

• Promote clustered and pedestrian-centered development wherever possible, to maximize 

extent of unaltered land and minimize expanded vehicle use. 

• Minimize extent of impervious surfaces (roofs, roads, parking lots, etc.), and maximize 

onsite groundwater infiltration. Minimize areas of disturbance. 

Municipalities in the watershed might consider including similar principles in their 

comprehensive plans or in future intermuncipal agreements. If followed by communities in the 

Moodna watershed, these general guiding principles may contribute to the realization of the 

watershed plan’s goals for smart growth, water resource protection, and biodiversity 

conservation. 

28



Literature Cited 

Allan, B.F., F. Keesing, and R.S. Ostfeld. 2003. Effect of forest fragmentation on Lyme disease 

risk. Conservation Biology 17:267-272. 

Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. 2004. Riparian Buffer Preservation. New Publications. 

Available at: http://www.alliancechesbay.org/pubs.cfm 

Calhoun, A. J. K. and P. deMaynadier. 2004. Forestry habitat management guidelines for vernal 

pool wildlife. MCA Technical Paper No. 6, Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife 

Conservation Society, Bronx, New York. 

Calhoun, A. J., K. and M. W. Klemens. 2002. Best Development Practices (BDPs): Conserving 

Pool-Breeding Amphibians in Residential and Commercial Developments in the Northeastern 

United States. MCA Technical Paper No. 5. Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife 

Conservation Society, Bronx, New York. 

Compton, B.W., J.M. Rhymer, and M. McCollough. 2002. Habitat selection by wood turtle 

(Clemmys insculpta): An application of paired logistic regression. Ecology 83(3): 833-843. 

Crawford, J.A. and R.D. Semlitsch. 2007. Estimation of core terrestrial habitat for streambreeding 

salamanders and delineation of riparian buffers for protection of biodiversity. 

Conservation Biology 21(1):152-158. 

Dunkle, S.W. 2000. Dragonfiles Through Binoculars: A Field Guide to Dragonflies of North 

America. Oxford University Press, New York. 

Edinger, G.J., D.J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T.G. Howard, D.M. Hunt, and A.M. Olivero (editors). 

2002. Ecological Communities of New York State. Second Edition. A revised and expanded 

edition of Carol Reschke's Ecological Communities of New York State. (Draft for review). New 

York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 

Albany, NY. 

Ewers, R. M. and R. K. Didham. 2007. The effect of fragment shape and species’ sensitivity to 

habitat edges on animal population size. Conservation Biology 21(4):926-936. 

Daniels, R. A. 1999. Why Biological Inventories are Important. In, Biological Diversity: The 

Oldest Human Heritage, by E.O. Wilson, pg. 28-29. Educational Leaflet 34. The New York 

State Biodiversity Research Institute, New York State Museum. Available at: 

http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/bri/publications/wilson.html. 

Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG) 2001. Stream Corridor 

Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices. By the Federal Interagency Stream 

Restoration Working Group (FISRWG)(15 Federal agencies of the US gov't). GPO Item No. 

0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2:EN 3/PT.653. ISBN-0-934213-59-3. Available at: 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Technical/stream_restoration/. 

29



Findlay, S., D. Strayer, M. Bain, and W. C. Neider. 2006. Ecology of Hudson River Submerged 

Aquatic Vegetation. Final Report to the New York State Department of Environmental 

Conservation. 

Kiviat, E. and G. Stevens. 2001. Biodiversity Assessment Manual for the Hudson River Estuary 

Corridor. Hudsonia Ltd., Annandale, New York. 

Limburgh, K.E. and R.E. Schmidt. 1990. Patterns of Fish Spawning in Hudson River Tributaries: 

Response to an Urban Gradient? Ecology 71(4): 1238-1245. 

Hartwig, T. and G. Stevens. 2007. Significan Habitats in Selected Areas in the Town of 

Marbletown, Ulster County, New York. Hudsonia Ltd., Annandale, New York. 

Helzer, C.J. and D.E. Jelinski. 1999. The relative importance of patch area and perimeter-area 

ratio to grassland breeding birds. Ecological Applications 9:1448-1458. 

Herkert, J. R. 1991. Prairie birds of Illinois: population response to two centuries of habitat 

change. Illinois Natural History Survey Bulletin 34:393-399. 

Highlands Coalition. 2005. The Highlands: Our Backyard Paradise – 2005 Update. The 

Highlands Coalition, Titusville, New York. 

LaBruna, D. T. and M. W. Klemens. 2007. Northern Wallkill Biodiversity Plan: Balancing 

Development and Environmental Stewardship in the Hudson River Estuary Watershed. MCA 

Technical Paper No. 13, Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society, 

Bronx, New York. 

McElfish, J. M., R. L. Kihslinger, and S. S. Nichols. 2008. Planner’s Guide to Wetland Buffers 

for Local Governments. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. 

Miller, N. A., M. W. Klemens, and J. E. Schmitz. 2005. Southern Wallkill Biodiversity Plan: 

Balancing development and the environment in the Hudson River Estuary Watershed. MCA 

Technical Paper No. 8, Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society, 

Bronx, New York. 

Mitchell, J. C., A. R. Breisch, and K. A. Buhlmann. 2006. Habitat Management Guidelines for 

Amphibians and Reptiles of the Northeastern United States. Partners in Amphibian and Reptile 

Conservation, Technical Publication HMG-3, Montgomery, Alabama. 

New York Natural Heritage Program. 2008. Online Conservation Guide for Myotis sodalis. 

Available from: http://guides.nynhp.org/guide.php?id=7405. Accessed April 14 th , 2008. 

New York State Museum Fish Collection Database. Surveys conducted 1936, Orange County, 

New York State. Accessed on: May 19, 2007. Available at: 

http://collections.nysm.nysed.gov/fish/database.html. 

Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (NECIA). 2006. Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast: 

A Report of the Northeast Climate Impact Assessment. Union of Concerned Scientists, October, 

2006. Available at: http://www.northeastclimateimpacts.org/. 

30



Raleigh, R. 1982. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Brook Trout. FWS/OBS-82/10.24. U. S. 

Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Rosgen, D. 1994. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, Colorado. 

Schuler, T. R. 1994. The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques 1: 

100-111. 

Schmidt, R. E. and S. Cooper. 1996. A catalog of barriers to upstream movement of migratory 

fishes in Hudson River tributaries. Report to the Hudson River Foundation. Hudsonia Ltd., 

Annandale, New York. 

Shirer, R. and T. Tear. 2005. Identifying Conservation Priorities in the Hudson River Estuary 

Watershed: Linking Perspectives Across Multiple Scales. Initial Draft for Review. The Nature 

Conservancy, Troy, New York. 

Spackman, S.C. and J.W. Hughes. 1995. Assessment of minimum stream corridor width for 

biological conservation: Species richness and distribution along mid-order streams in Vermont, 

USA. Biological Conservation 71: 325-332. 

Stainbrook, K.M., K.E. Limburg, R.A. Daniels, and R.E. Schmidt. 2006. Long-term changes in 

ecosystem health of two Hudson Valley watersheds, New York, USA, 1936-2001. 

Hydrobiologia (2006) 571:313–327. 

Stauffer, D.F. annd L.B. Best. 1980. Habitat selection by birds of riparian communities: 

Evaluating effects of habitat alterations. Journal of Wildlife Management. 44(1):1. 

Wang, L., J. Lyons, P. Kanehl, and R. Bannerman. 2001. Environmental Management 28(2): 

255-266. 

Wenger, S. 1999. A Review of the Scientific Literature on Riparian Buffer Width, Extent and 

Vegetation. Office of Public Service & Outreach, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia. 

Revised Version. March 5, 1999. 

31



Additional Publications on Biodiversity in the Moodna Creek Watershed 

Bridges, J. & E. Kiviat. 1988. Significant habitats of the Stewart International Airport Properties, 

Orange County, New York. Report to the Stewart Park and Reserve Coalition, 21 p. Hudsonia 

Ltd., Annandale, NY. 

Kiviat, E. and R.E. Schmidt. 2001. Vegetation and fish sampling in six Hudson River tidal 

marshes, 1999. Report to Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve and NY State 

Dept. Environmental Conservation. 

Kiviat, E. 1990. Stewart Airport Properties: Comments on biology, Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement. Report to Stewart Park and Reserve Coalition, 18 p. Hudsonia Ltd., Annandale, NY. 

Mitchell, R. 2002. Skirting Schunnemunk. New York Flora Association Newsletter. 13(4):1-3. 

Samanns E and Zacharias S. 2004. Mitigating potential impacts of herpetile habitat loss and 

fragmentation from new roadway construction in Southern New York state. IN: Proceedings 

of the 2003 International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, Eds. Irwin CL, Garrett 

P, McDermott KP. Center for Transportation and the Environment, North Carolina State 

University, Raleigh, NC: pp. 450-466. 

Schmidt, R.E. and T.R. Lake. 2000. Alewives in Hudson River tributaries, two years of 

sampling. Report to Hudson River Foundation, NY. 37p. 

Schmidt, R.E. and K.E. Limburg. 1989. Fishes spawning in non-tidal portions of Hudson River 

tributaries. Report to Hudson River Foundation, 74p. 

Stevens, G., R.E. Schmidt, D.R. Roeder, J.S. Tashiro & E. Kiviat. 1994. Baseline assessment of 

tributaries to the Hudson (BATH): Water quality, fishes, macroinvertebrates, and diatoms in 

Fishkill Creek, Quassaic Creek, and Moodna Creek. Report to the Hudson River Improvement 

Fund, 2 vols. Hudsonia Ltd., Annandale, NY. 

Wildlife Conservation Society, 2000. Biological Surveys of the Stewart State Forest: A Report to 

the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation by the Metropolitan 

Conservation Alliance. June. 14pp. 

32


The following wildlife species represent the diversity of habitats in the Moodna Creek watershed. In many cases, conservation of these species will 

contribute to conservation of other plants and animals with similar habitat needs. Information on recommended habitat and buffer sizes, important 

temporal considerations, and additional conservation concerns are included. (Note that many of these species use a complex of different habitats, in 

addition to the priority habitat group listed here.) 

Common Name 

Least Bittern 

Botaurus lentiginosus 

Priority Habitat 

Group 

Hudson River 

Shoreline 

Habitat Needs 

Shallow or deep emergent marshes and 

freshwater tidal marshes, with stands of 

cattails or bulrush with bur-reed, sedges, or 

common reed. Cattail stands are often 

interspersed with pools of open water or slowmoving 

channels and some woody vegetation. 

Large marshes (>12 ac or 5 ha) are important 

breeding areas for this species. 

Conservation Considerations 

Loss of suitable habitat and invasive species (e.g., purple 

loosestrife) are major threats. Chemical contamination, 

siltation, eutrophication, and other forms of pollution degrade 

marshes, and recreational boating may disturb nesting bitterns. 

Marsh habitats and associated wildlife benefit from substantial 

buffers which can minimize impacts listed above, as well as 

allow for inland migration of marshes that will likely be 

necessary due to climate change and rising water levels. When 

managing large wetland complexes for waterfowl, consider 

retaining areas with cattails and bulrush. Nesting and fledgling 

activity occurs in May through September. 

Bald eagle 

Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus 

American eel 

Anguilla rostrata 

Hudson River 

Shoreline 

Hudson River 

Shoreline 

Undisturbed, wooded areas near large bodies 

of water, such as bays, rivers, and lakes, with 

healthy populations of fish and waterfowl, their 

primary food source. Large deciduous or 

coniferous trees are used for nesting and 

roosting. 

Habitat loss or alterations are probably the most significant 

threats. Areas with development or other human disturbances 

are likely unsuitable for nesting and wintering bald eagles. It 

may be beneficial to post signs and restrict access to areas 

when breeding or wintering eagles are present. Nesting and 

fledgling activity occurs in March through June. A minimum 

1600 ft (500 m) buffer around nest sites and minimum buffer of 

800-975 ft (250-300 m) for perch and feeding sites is 

recommended. 

There is much to learn about American eels, and studies are 

American eels are born in the Atlantic Ocean, 

ongoing in Hudson River tributaries to help understand why 

and after about a year, arrive to Hudson River 

there has been an overall decline throughout their range. While 

tributaries. Eels live throughout the Hudson 

eels are reknowned for their ability to move over land and 

watershed in brackish tidewater and in 

overcome barriers, their habitat, especially for juveniles, can be 

freshwater ponds, lakes, and streams, but after 

limited by dams, culverts, and other obstacles; "eel ladders" 

reaching sexual maturity, they leave the 

can help mitigate this problem and enable upstream migration. 

Hudson and return to the Sargasso Sea to 

Chemical contaminants and disease from polluted waters may 

spawn and die. 

also pose a threat.






Common Name 

Northern red 

salamander 

Pseudotriton ruber 


Group 

Streams and 

Riparian Corridors 

Habitat Needs 


Because of their use of both aquatic and terrestrial habitat in 

Forests near low-gradient, sluggish sections of 

the stream corridor, riparian buffers are especially important to 

small streams, springs, and seeps with 

maintain water quality and provide adequate adjacent uplands. 

abundant decaying organic matter. Juveniles 

Buffers of at least 160 ft (50 m) on either side of the stream is 

are aquatic for first 3.5 years. Adults spend 

recommended to conserve habitat for northern red and other 

summer and early fall beneath logs, stones, 

stream salamanders. (Crawford and Semlitsch 2007) Adults 

and leaf litter in forested habitat, and the rest of 

migrate from the stream to terrestrial habitats on warm rainy 

the year in the water. 

nights in early April. 

Wood turtle 

Clemmys insculpta 

Streams and 


Wood turtles have large home ranges that 

include river and streamside habitats bordered 

by forests or meadows. Stream microhabitats 

include open pools, undercut banks, and logs. 

Nesting occurs in sunny, well-drained areas 

that are not prone to flooding. 

Nesting season is May through early July, with hatching 

occuring in September and October. Females travel up to 0.6 

mi (1 km) to nest. Road mortality is a major threat during 

overland movements. Habitat loss in riparian zones and illegal 

collection are additional threats to this declining species. A 

minimum of 650 ft (200m) of buffer from the core stream 

habitat is recommended. 

Louisiana waterthrush 

Seiurus motacilla 

Brook trout 

Salvelinus fontinalis 

Streams and 


Streams and 


Nest placed in small hollow or cavity on stream bank, under 

fallen log, or within roots of an upturned tree. Nesting and 

This migratory warbler breeds along gravelbottomed, 

unpolluted streams flowing through 

fledgling activity occurs in April through July. Louisiana 

waterthrush nests are frequently parasitized by brown-headed 

ravines or hilly, deciduous or mixed forests with 

cowbird. Riparian buffers of at least 300 ft (90 m) are 

moderate to sparse undergrowth. 

recommended to ensure clean stream water, adequate upland 

habitat, and reduced nest predataion and parisitism. 

Cold, clear streams that are well-shaded, with 

good water quality and high dissolved oxygen, 

overhead cover, and gravel substrates needed 

for reproduction. 

Stocking has expanded the species' distribution to less optimal 

habitat, but in these cases brook trout are often outcompeted 

by the nonnative brown trout (also stocked in NY), which may 

ultimately restrict viable populations to headwater streams. 

Barriers such as culverts, dams, and streams can be mitigated 

to reduce stream fragmentation and increase fish habitat. 

Riparian buffers of 100 ft (30m) with 80% well vegetated or 

stable rocky banks is recommended. (Raleigh 1982)






Common Name 

Red-shouldered hawk 

Buteo lineatus 


Group 

Forests 

Habitat Needs 

Varies from bottomland hardwoods and 

riparian areas to upland deciduous or mixed 

deciduous-conifer forest, and almost always 

includes some form of water, such as a 

swamp, marsh, river, or pond. Breeds in 

extensive forested habitat; a minimum of 620 

ac (250 ha) of floodplain forest may be 

necessary for successful breeding. Habitat 

overlaps with barred owl's. 


May be especially sensitive to fragmentation of forested habitat. 

Disturbances from humans in the form of off-road vehicles, 

hunters, and horseback riders may be restricting redshouldered 

hawks to the deepest, wildest areas left. Redshouldered 

hawk usually nests below the canopy in deciduous 

or mixed forest, often near a pond, stream, or swamp. Nesting 

and fledgling activity occurs in March through July. 

Cerulean warbler 

Dendroica cerulea 

Forests 

Extensive deciduous forests, composed of Forest fragmentation and habitat loss is major threat to 

structurally mature hardwoods near streams, cerulean warbler; conservation efforts should focus on 

wetlands, and the Hudson River. Specific protecting large, contiguous tracts of forest with substantial 

forest types vary throughout the species’ range interior habitat. Unfragmented forest patches of 100+ ac (40+ 

and include bottomland hardwood and riparian ha) are recommended to support breeding by some forestinterior 

breeding birds in a 50-60% forested landscape. Nest 

forests (especially with tall sycamores or 

cottonwoods), dry ridgetops with mature oaks parasitism by brown-headed cowbird may also be contributing 

and hickorys, mesic cove forests with tulippoplar 

and other southern hardwoods, red- 

trees, most often oaks, elms, and American sycamore. Nesting 

to population declines. Cerulean warblers nest in a variety of 

maple swamps, and lake margins. 

and fledgling activity occurs from May to July. 

Jefferson salamander 

Ambystoma 

jeffersonianum 

Forests 

Lives in upland, deciduous and mixed forests 

with abundant stumps, logs, and leaf litter on 

the forest floor. Small mammal burrows 

provide critical microhabitat. Breeds in 

intermittent woodland pools that are typically 

isolated, dry by summer, and fishless. 

Jefferson salamander, and other species in the group of "mole 

salamanders" (spotted, marbled, and blue-spotted) are 

threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation that prevents 

movement from forest habitat to breeding pools. Because 

woodland pools are small, they are often overlooked and do not 

receive adequate protection. Buffer zones of 525-820 ft (160- 

250 m) should be preserved around pools to ensure adequate 

terrestrial habitat and intact connectivity for breeding 

migrations. The mole salamanders migrate to pools in early 

March through April on rainy nights, with Jefferson being the 

earliest breeder, often when pools are still partially covered in 

ice; the one exception is marbled salamander, which breeds in 

the fall. Road mortality is a threat during spring migrations and 

may be minimized by posting signage or engaging volunteers to 

shepard salamanders across roads.






Common Name 

Northern cricket frog 

Acris c. crepitans 


Group 

Wetlands 

Habitat Needs 

This tiny frog uses permanent, open water 

wetlands, typically with water lilies and floating 

vegetation mats. Sometimes found in slowmoving 

streams and ponds, and upland areas 

surrounding its aquatic habitat. Overwintering 

habitat includes terrestrial areas. 


Emerge from overwintering habitat in late March or early April, 

and return in October and November. Northern cricket frogs 

from several locations within New York are known to migrate at 

least 750 ft (230 m) from their summer wetland habitats. 

Threats include inadequate habitat connectivity and buffers, 

pesticides and other chemical exposure, and possibly the 

effects of beaver activity on water level. Buffering core 

wetlands with at least 300 ft (90 m) of natural vegetation will 

help ensure populations will remain healthy. Because it's at the 

northern limit of its range, this frog may need to migrate 

northward as temperatures increase due to climate change. 

Bog turtle 

Clemmys muhlenbergii 

Wetlands 

Fens and calcerous wet meadows, often within 

larger wetland complexes that include swamps 

and other wetland habitats. Important features 

include calcareous groundwater seepage, soft 

sediments, low vegetation (






Common Name 


Group 

Habitat Needs 


American woodcock 

Scolopax minor 

Grassland, 

Shrubland, and 

Farmland 

While woodcocks are considered a resident of Woodcock decline is attributed to loss of early-successional 

forests, where they forage for earthworms and habitat from changes in forest structure, fire suppression, and 

nest in young, early-successional woodlands, shifts in agricultural practices. Management may be necessary 

they also require open field habitats. Nighttime to maintain the habitat complex needed for woodcock: 

roosting occurs in nearby old fields, at least 1 shrublands or young forests with moist productive soils, second 

ac (0.4 ha) in size, and woodcocks engage in growth hardwoods for nesting, and openings or fields for 

courtship in shrublands and old fields in early singing grounds and night roosting. Nesting and fledgling 

spring. 

activity occurs from March through August. 

Bobolink 

Dolichonyx oryzivorus 

Grassland, 

Shrubland, and 

Farmland 

Grassland birds, including the bobolink, are threatened by 

habitat loss due to development, changes in agricultural 

practices, and the return of grassland to forest. While bobolink 

Breeds in open grasslands and hay fields. has one of the smallest area requirements for successful 

Bobolink will breed in grasslands of 10-75 breeding, other grassland species need larger areas and have 

acres (4-30 ha), but larger areas are better and varying requirements for open patches, density of vegetation, 

are more likely to support other specis of etc. Where possible, restoration or conservation of grasslands 

grassland birds that have greater habitat of at least 100 acres (40 ha) is encouraged, with management 

requirements. 

appropriate to the breeding species present on the site. 

Grassland birds are ground-nesters; mowing activity should be 

restricted during the breeding season. Bobolink nesting and 

fledgling activity occurs from May through July. 

Timber rattlesnake 

Crotalus horridus 


Mountainous or hilly deciduous or mixed 

forests, often with rocky outcroppings, steep 

ledges, and rock slides. Dens, or hibernacula, 

are often located on south-facing slopes, in 

talus or rock fractures that provide retreats for 

overwintering. Rattlesnakes use open canopy, 

rocky areas for basking, shedding, gestating, 

and birthing. Foraging areas are generally 

located within forested habitat surrounding the 

den, but may also include old fields and 

wetlands. 

Timber rattlesnakes emerge from winter dens in April or early 

May, and return to den areas in mid-September, with most 

snakes in the hibernacula by late October. During their active 

months, rattlesnakes can travel great distances and use large 

areas of habitat, traveling 3300-7900 ft (1000-2400 m) to 

forage, bask, breed, nest, and hibernate. Illegal collection and 

and unnecessary killing are serious threats to the species. 

Increasing habitat fragmentation from development is also a 

concern, and may increase the likelihood of human-snake 

interactions.






Common Name 

Indiana bat 

Myotis sodalis 


Group 


Habitat Needs 

Unless otherwise noted, the following sources were used for development of the table: 


The Indiana bat hibernates in mines and 

caves, but during the warmer months of the 

year roosts in crevices and under the bark of Human disturbance in caves and mines where Indiana bat and 

trees, particularly hardwoods greater than 5 in other species are overwintering is the most major threat, 

(12.5 cm) in diameter with loose, flaky bark particularly in light of recent, unexplained die-offs. Spelunkers 

(e.g., shagbark hickory). Female Indiana bats and other cave visitors can cause stress to hibernating bats, 

form maternity colonies, giving birth and raising and possibly transmit disease. Restrictions or closures of 

their young in tree roosts. In New York, Indiana important hibernacula caves and mines may be warranted in 

bats were found to travel between 12 and 40 some areas. Hibernation can begin as early as September and 

miles from hibernacula to roost locations on extend nearly to June. Loss of roosting and foraging habitat, 

their foraging grounds. Bats forage primarily in and pesticide exposure are also concerns. 

riparian forests, and around water and 

wetlands. 

Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2008. All About Birds. Available at: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/AllAboutBirds/BirdGuide/. 

Kiviat, E. and G. Stevens. 2001. Biodiversity Assessment Manual for the Hudson River Estuary Corridor. Hudsonia Ltd., Annandale, NY. 

Gibbs. J, A. Breisch, P. Ducey, G. Johnson, J. Behler, and R. Bothner. 2007. The Amphibians and Reptiles of New York State. Oxford University Press, NY. 

Hartwig, T. and G. Stevens. 2007. Significant Habitats in Selected Areas in the Town of Marbletown, Ulster County, New York. Hudsonia Ltd., Annandale, NY. 

Kennedy, C., J. Wilkinson, and J. Balch. 2003. Conservation Thresholds for Land Use Planners. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D. C. 

Mitchell, J. C., A. R. Breisch, and K. A. Buhlmann. 2006. Habitat Management Guidelines for Amphibians and Reptiles of the Northeastern United States. 

Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Technical Publication HMG-3, Montgomery, Alabama. 

New York Natural Heritage Program. 2008. Online Conservation Guides. Available at: http://guides.nynhp.org/. 

NYS Breeding Bird Atlas Handbook for Workers. 2004 update. 

Table created by L. Heady, NYS DEC Hudson River Estuary Program and Cornell University.

Appendix B. Birds of Conservation Concern in the Moodna Creek Watershed 

The following species were observed during the 2000-05 NYS Breeding Bird Atlas, in Altas blocks that were at least 50% within the watershed boundary. 

Within this area, the Atlas documented 133 species, both rare and common; this list includes only those that are considered Audubon "Responsibility 

Species of the Hudson Valley." Sixty percent of species listed were "confirmed" breeders in at least one Atlas block. The list is sorted by general habitat 

grouping (last column). (Note: Bald eagle and least bittern were not documented in the Atlas area included in this analysis; however, they are species 

of conservation concern reported in the watershed and are discussed elsewhere in the plan.) 

Common Name Scientific Name State Listing NYNHP Listing SGCN General Habitat Grouping 

Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Endangered Active Inventory x Cliff nesting birds 

Purple Finch Carpodacus purpureus Coniferous/deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Black-and-white Warbler Mniotilta varia Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Blackburnian Warbler Dendroica fusca Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Cerulean Warbler Dendroica cerulea Special Concern Watch List x Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Hooded Warbler Wilsonia citrina Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Louisiana Waterthrush Seiurus motacilla x Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Special Concern Watch List x Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea x Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina x Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Worm-eating Warbler Helmitheros vermivorus x Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons Deciduous/mixed forest breeding birds 

Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens Watch List Deciduous/mixed forest/riparian breeding birds 

Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens Deciduous/mixed forest/riparian breeding birds 

Veery Catharus fuscescens Deciduous/mixed forest/riparian breeding birds 

American Woodcock Scolopax minor x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Blue-winged Warbler Vermivora pinus x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Eastern Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Golden-winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera Special Concern Watch List x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus Special Concern Watch List x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii x Early successional forest/shrubland birds 

Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus Forest breeding raptors 

Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperii Special Concern Watch List x Forest breeding raptors 

Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Special Concern Watch List x Forest breeding raptors 

Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus Special Concern Watch List x Forest breeding raptors 

Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus Special Concern Watch List x Forest breeding raptors 

Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus x Forest edge/grove/thicket breeding birds 

Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus Forest edge/open woodland nesting birds 

Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula Forest edge/orchards 

Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus Forest edge/orchards 

Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus Freshwater and brackish marsh nesting birds 

American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus Special Concern Watch List x Freshwater marsh nesting birds 

Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris Freshwater marsh nesting birds 

Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps Threatened Active Inventory x Freshwater marsh nesting birds 

Virginia Rail Rallus limicola Freshwater marsh nesting birds

Appendix B. Birds of Conservation Concern in the Moodna Creek Watershed 

The following species were observed during the 2000-05 NYS Breeding Bird Atlas, in Altas blocks that were at least 50% within the watershed boundary. 

Within this area, the Atlas documented 133 species, both rare and common; this list includes only those that are considered Audubon "Responsibility 

Species of the Hudson Valley." Sixty percent of species listed were "confirmed" breeders in at least one Atlas block. The list is sorted by general habitat 

grouping (last column). (Note: Bald eagle and least bittern were not documented in the Atlas area included in this analysis; however, they are species 

of conservation concern reported in the watershed and are discussed elsewhere in the plan.) 

Common Name Scientific Name State Listing NYNHP Listing SGCN General Habitat Grouping 

American Kestrel Falco sparverius Grassland birds 

Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus x Grassland birds 

Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna x Grassland birds 

Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris Special Concern Watch List x Grassland birds 

Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus Threatened Active Inventory x Grassland birds 

Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Grassland birds 

Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Human-modified habitats 

Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Active Inventory Nests colonially in trees, often by water 

Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon Nests near open water and streams with banks 

Osprey Pandion haliaetus Special Concern Watch List x Nests near open water 

American Black Duck Anas rubripes x Wetland breeding waterfowl 

Northern Parula Parula americana Watch List Wet woodland or swamp, river margins 

NYNHP Active Inventory: Includes species currently tracked in NY Natural Heritage Program database; for the most part, these are the most rare or most imperiled species in NY. 

NYNHP Watch List: Includes species that could become imperiled enough in the future to warrant being actively inventoried, or for which there is insufficient data to determine 

whether they should be actively inventoried. 

SGCN are Species of Greatest Conservation Need, as designated in the NYS Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Plan. 


Appendix C. Reptiles and Amphibians of Conservation Concern in the Moodna Creek Watershed 

The following species were observed during the 1990-1998 NYS Amphibian and Reptile ("Herp") Atlas Project within the 

watershed boundary. The Atlas documented 45 amphibian and reptile species in the watershed; only those that are 

a NYS Species of Greatest Conservation Need were included here. The list is sorted by general habitat grouping (last column). 

Common Name Scientific Name State Listing NYNHP Listing General Habitat Grouping 

Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Endangered Active Inventory Fens/wet meadows 

Eastern ribbon snake Thamnophis sauritus Ponds/marshes/swamps 

Northern red salamander Pseudotriton r. ruber Stream salamanders 

Wood turtle Clemmys insculpta Special Concern Watch List Streams/woodlands/grassland 

Northern cricket frog Acris c. crepitans Endangered Active Inventory Vegetated ponds 

Blue-spotted salamander Ambystoma laterale Vernal pool breeder 

Marbled salamander Ambystoma opacum Special Concern Watch List Vernal pool breeder 

Jefferson salamander Ambystoma jeffersonianum Vernal pool breeder 

Spotted turtle Clemmys guttata Special Concern Watch List Vernal pool/wetland/woodland 

Eastern box turtle Terrapene c. carolina Special Concern Watch List Woodland/grassland 

Black rat snake Elaphe o. obsoleta Woodland/rocky outcrop/grassland 

Eastern hognose snake Heterodon platirhinos Special Concern Watch List Woodland/grassland snakes 

Eastern racer Coluber constrictor Woodland/rocky outcrop/grassland 

Northern copperhead Agkistrodon contortrix mokasen Watch List Woodland/rocky outcrop 

Smooth greensnake Liochlorophis vernalis Grassland 

Timber rattlesnake Crotalus horridus Threatened Active Inventory Woodland/rocky outcrop 

Fowler’s toad Bufo fowleri Woodland/marshes 

Common five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus Watch List Woodland/talus slope 

NYNHP Active Inventory: Includes species currently tracked in NY Natural Heritage Program database; for the most part, these are the most rare or most imperiled species in NY. 

NYNHP Watch List: Includes species that could become imperiled enough in the future to warrant being actively inventoried, or for which there is insufficient data to determine 

whether they should be actively inventoried. 

SGCN are Species of Greatest Conservation Need, as designated in the NYS Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Plan.

Biodiversity of the Moodna Creek Watershed - Orange County Water ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?