SREL Reprint #2603

 

 

 

An assessment of hydrocarbon contamination derived from roofing material coverboards

Kristi Minahan1, Gary Mills2, Susan Hayden2, and J. Whitfield Gibbons1

1Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Drawer E, Aiken, South Carolina 29802, USA
2Advanced Analytical Center for Environmental Sciences, University of Georgia, Drawer E, Aiken,
South Carolina 29802, USA

Introduction: Coverboards have been a standard sampling tool for herpetologists for over a decade. Although wooden or tin coverboards are useful in augmenting time-constrained sampling (Grant et al. 1992), they also can be cumbersome and awkward to carry to sampling sites, thus restricting their use in field sites that are not easily road-accessible. An alternative material that has proven effective and cost-efficient is heavy-grade rolled roofing material. Confirmation that this material is environmentally safe for sampling could ease concerns regarding its use for capturing reptiles and amphibians.
Roofing material is a less costly and more convenient alternative to wood or tin coverboards (Table 1). Weighing approximately 2.7 kg per 90 cm2 sheet, roofing coverboards are considerably lighter and easier to transport than particle board, which weighs 7.1 kg per coverboard, and are approximately equal in weight to plywood. Although tin is lighter, weighing 1.8 kg per coverboard, it, like wood, is difficult to carry because of its rigidity. One roll of roofing material weighs 34.7 kg and yields twelve 90 cm2 pieces. Depending on a person's strength, a whole or half roll can be hoisted over a shoulder, carried into the field, and cut into sections on site using a carpet knife. . . .

SREL Reprint #2603

Minahan, K., G. L. Mills, S. Hayden, and J. W. Gibbons. 2002. An assessment of hydrocarbon contamination derived from roofing material coverboards. Herpetological Review 33:36-38.

To request a reprint

 

 
http://srel.uga.edu www.uga.edu