DOCSLIB.ORG

An Inventory of the Natural Areas of Dare County, North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Inventory of the Natural Areas of Dare County, North Carolina AN INVENTORY OF THE NATURAL AREAS OF DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Bruce A. Sorrie Inventory Biologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Land and Water Stewardship Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC Funding provided by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Trust Fund July 2014 Cover photograph: Buxton Woods, Maritime Shrub Swamp (Dogwood Subtype) taken by Bruce A. Sorrie. AN INVENTORY OF THE NATURAL AREAS OF DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Bruce A. Sorrie Inventory Biologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Land and Water Stewardship Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC Funding provided by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Trust Fund July 2014 ABSTRACT This inventory of the natural areas, biological communities, and rare species of Dare County was funded by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Trust Fund. The inventory identifies the most significant natural areas in the county, describes their features, and documents all natural communities and rare species of plants and animals associated with them. Habitat conditions, natural processes, and threats are also described. The inventory is intended to provide guidance for land use decisions by county, state, and federal governments, conservation and land management organizations, and interested citizens. Field work was carried out by Bruce A. Sorrie of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program during 2012 and 2013. The inventory identifies 34 areas of outstanding ecological significance as determined by criteria established by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many individuals and agencies contributed to the planning, progress, and completion of this inventory. Jame Amoroso, Misty Buchanan, John Finnegan, Harry LeGrand, Janine Nicholson, and Linda Rudd reviewed the draft report and maps and assisted in the production of the final copy. I am particularly indebted to the following public agencies and personnel: Linda Pearsall, Laura Robinson, Steve Hall, and Mike Schafale of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program; Jeff Beane and Alvin Braswell of the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences; Debo Cox and Ed Corey of the NC Division of Parks and Recreation; Alexander Krings of North Carolina State University; Sara Strickland of the National Park Service; Dennis Stewart and Wendy Stanton of the US Fish and Wildlife Service; Judy Roughton of the US Army Corps of Engineers Research Facility; and Robert Montgomery, Range Biologist with Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. Private individuals and agencies that contributed significantly are: Aaron McCall of The Nature Conservancy; Todd Miller of the North Carolina Coastal Federation; Claudia Jones of the North Carolina Coastal Reserve Program; Alicia Jackson of J.H. Carter, III, and Associates; and John Fussell of Morehead City. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ..................................................................................... 6 Dare County ................................................................................................................................ 6 Climate ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Topography and Physiography .................................................................................................... 6 General Vegetation .................................................................................................................... 10 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 11 Land Use ................................................................................................................................... 11 Dare County and Sea Level Rise ............................................................................................... 12 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 15 Natural Areas ............................................................................................................................. 15 Natural Communities ................................................................................................................ 19 Natural Community Descriptions – Mainland Dare .............................................................. 20 Natural Community Descriptions – Outer Banks .................................................................. 24 Flora and Fauna ......................................................................................................................... 39 LANDOWNER PROTECTION INITIATIVES .......................................................................... 54 BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS AND ENDANGERED SPECIES LAWS ........................................ 55 Federal Law ............................................................................................................................... 55 State Law ................................................................................................................................... 56 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 57 SITE DESCRIPTIONS ................................................................................................................. 59 ALLIGATOR RIVER REFUGE - SOUTHEAST MARSHES ................................................ 61 ALLIGATOR RIVER/SOUTH LAKE SWAMP FOREST ..................................................... 65 ALLIGATOR RIVER SWAMP FOREST ............................................................................... 69 BODIE ISLAND LIGHTHOUSE POND ................................................................................. 73 BODIE ISLAND PONDS, MARSHES, AND DUNES ........................................................... 77 BUXTON WOODS ................................................................................................................... 81 CAPE HATTERAS POINT ...................................................................................................... 85 CLAM SHOAL ......................................................................................................................... 89 DARE COUNTY POCOSIN .................................................................................................... 91 DURANT ISLAND ................................................................................................................... 95 FAIRCLOTH ROAD POND PINE POCOSIN ........................................................................ 99 FORT RALEIGH MARITIME FOREST ............................................................................... 103 GULL ISLAND ....................................................................................................................... 107 HATTERAS INLET BIRD NESTING ISLANDS ................................................................. 109 HATTERAS ISLAND MIDDLE SECTION .......................................................................... 113 HATTERAS SAND FLATS ................................................................................................... 117 JOCKEY’S RIDGE STATE PARK ........................................................................................ 121 KITTY HAWK BAY ISLANDS ............................................................................................ 125 KITTY HAWK WOODS ........................................................................................................ 127 MASHOES MARSHES .......................................................................................................... 131 MASHOES POCOSIN ............................................................................................................ 135 iii MOTHER VINEYARD NATURAL AREA .......................................................................... 139 NAGS HEAD WOODS/RUN HILL ....................................................................................... 143 OREGON INLET/ROANOKE SOUND BIRD NESTING ISLANDS .................................. 147 PEA ISLAND NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ................................................................ 151 PINE ISLAND/CURRITUCK CLUB NATURAL AREA .................................................... 155 PINE ROAD SWAMP ............................................................................................................ 159 ROANOKE ISLAND JUNCUS MARSH .............................................................................. 161 ROANOKE/STUMPY POINT MARSHES AND POCOSIN ................................................ 165 SOUTHERN SHORES CYPRESS SWAMP ......................................................................... 169 TAYLOR ROAD NATURAL AREA .................................................................................... 173 TURTLE POND AND (CAPE HATTERAS) LIGHTHOUSE POND .................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fifty Non-Flowering Pitcher Plants with Rosette Diameters > 8 Cm Were
    Gotelli & Ellison Food-web models predict abundance PROTOCOL S1 EXPERIMENTAL MANIPULATIONS The study was conducted at Moose Bog, an 86-ha peatland in northeastern Vermont, USA [1]. Fifty non-flowering pitcher plants with rosette diameters > 8 cm were haphazardly chosen at the start of the study (15 May 2000). All plants were located in the center of the Sphagnum mat, in full sun, at least 0.75 m from the nearest neighbor. Plants were assigned randomly to one of 5 experimental treatments: 1) Control. Diptera larvae and pitcher liquid were removed and censused, and then returned to leaf. 2) Trophic removal. All diptera larvae and pitcher liquid were removed and censused, and the leaf was refilled with an equal volume of distilled water. 3) Habitat expansion. All diptera larvae and pitcher liquid were removed and censused, and then returned to the leaf. The leaf was then topped up with to the brim with additional distilled water as needed. 4) Habitat expansion & trophic removal. All diptera larvae and pitcher liquid were removed and censused. The leaf was then filled to the brim with distilled water. 5) Habitat contraction & trophic removal. All diptera larvae and pitcher liquid were removed and censused. These treatments mimicked changes in habitat volume (treatments 3, 4, and 5) and removal of top trophic levels from the food web (treatments 2, 4, and 5). Changes in habitat volume also affect the food chain base, because average Sarracenia prey capture was highest in treatments 3 and 4 (habitat expansion) and lowest in treatment 5 (habitat
    [Show full text]
  • Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge Refuge Facts ■ Endangered and threatened ■ Established: April 12, 1938. species include loggerhead sea turtles and piping plovers. Both ■ Size: Originally: 5,915 acres species nest on the refuge. (land), 25,700 acres (Proclamation Boundary Waters). Currently: Financial Impacts 4,655 acres. ■ Administered by Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge. Pea ■ Administered by Alligator River Island has no assigned staff or National Wildlife Refuge. budget. photo: USFWS photo: ■ Located on the north end of ■ One employee reports for duty Hatteras Island, a coastal barrier to Pea Island National Wildlife island and part of a chain of islands Refuge on a daily basis. known as the Outer Banks. ■ Numerous volunteers devote ■ Approximately 13 miles long (north approximately 25,000 hours each to south) and ranges from a quarter year to Pea Island. mile to one mile wide (from east to west). ■ 2.7 million visitors annually. ■ Location: 10 miles south of Nags ■ Known as a “Birder’s Paradise”; Head, NC on NC Highway 12. birders are among the most photo: USFWS photo: affluent eco-tourists. Other visitors ■ The Comprehensive Conservation include paddlers, fishermen, and Plan for Pea Island National photographers. Wildlife Refuge was completed July 17, 2006. Refuge Goals ■ Protect, maintain, and enhance Natural History healthy and viable populations ■ Area was historically used for of indigenous migratory birds, market waterfowl hunting, hunt wildlife, fish, and plants including clubs, commercial fishing, farming, federal and state threatened and and livestock operations. photo: USFWS photo: endangered species. ■ Refuge is comprised of ocean ■ Restore, maintain, and enhance the beach, dunes, upland, fresh and health and biodiversity of barrier brackish water ponds, salt flats, and island upland and wetland habitats salt marsh.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Years of Sand Bypassed from Oregon Inlet to Pea Island)
    0058423 Impacts of Dredging and Inlet Bypassing on the Inter-tidal Ecology of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge (12 Years of Sand Bypassed from Oregon Inlet to Pea Island) Dennis Stewart US Fish and Wildlife Service and Robert Dolan University of Virginia 1 0058424 2 0058425 3 0058426 4 0058427 5 0058428 6 0058429 • Cape Hatteras National Seashore • Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge • National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 • Compatibility Determination 7 0058430 Fundamental Questions • Anticipated physical impacts to beach? • What are the ecological implications? • Compatible with mission and purpose? 8 0058431 9 0058432 Table 1. Statistical Summary Location Sand Size S.D. Heavy Minerals Percent Fine Sand (In mm) (Dark Minerals) (‹0.25mm) Pea Island Swash zone 0.57mm 1.3 2.5% 32% Oregon Inlet 0.26mm 2.4 11% 50% Spit Ocean Bar 0.45mm 3.3 6% 33% Oregon Inlet 0.22mm 2.0 10% 60% Channel 10 0058433 11 0058434 Significant Impacts • 1. Burial (>4cm without wave runup) • 2. Finer grains & high % heavy mineral • Degree of impact correlated with: – Frequency – Volume –Placement Trend in mean grain size from 1990-2002, mid swash zone, Pea Island, NC. 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 R = 0.68 2 0.4 R = 0.46 0.3 0.2 Average mean grain size (mm) size meanAverage grain 0.1 0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Dredge Disposal Data 3 1200000 Hopper Dredge 1000000 Pipeline Dredge 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 Volume of sand deposited y Volume deposited sand of 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 12 0058435 Trend in heavy mineral content of the Mid-Swash Zone 1992-2002 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 R = 0.81 8.00 R2 = 0.65 6.00 Mineral Abundance (%) 4.00 2.00 0.00 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Dredge Disposal Data ) 3 1200000 Hopper Dredge 1000000 Pipeline Dredge 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Volume of sand deposited (y Trend of decline in Emerita counts taken from 1990-2002 along Pea Island, NC.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Inlet Opened in 1846 As Water Rushed from the Sound to the Ocean
    Oregon Inlet opened in 1846, when a big hurricane along the Outer Banks caused water to rush from the sound to the ocean. Since that time, the inlet has migrated steadily south at a rate of around 100 feet per year. A good measure of the inlet’s journey is the Bodie Island Lighthouse, which once stood at the margin of the inlet but is now 3 miles away. In 1962, the Bonner Bridge replaced the ferry that shuttled people and cars across Oregon Inlet. Construction of the bridge, with its high fixed-span, instantly stopped the long history if inlet migration. But sand continued to pour into the inlet from the north, the driving force behind the inlet’s southerly migration, creating ever-expanding navigation and dredging problems. After 40 years, the Bonner Bridge is rapidly deteriorating and two possible replacement alternatives are being evaluated: A bridge immediately parallel to the current bridge and a 17 mile-long bridge that would extend into Pamlico Sound, run along the backside of Pea Island and connect to Hatters Island at Rodanthe. The initial cost of constructing the Pamlico Sound Bridge is much higher than that of the Parallel Bridge. But the overall long-term costs of a Parallel Bridge greatly exceed those of the Pamlico Sound Bridge. This is because the Parallel Bridge requires the continued protection and maintenance of State Highway 12 on Pea Island. Over time, as the shoreline erodes back in response to a rising sea level, the cost of stabilizing Pea Island will become higher. Construction impacts to wetlands and sea grass beds are essentially the same for each bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Assessment for the Kansan Spikerush Leafhopper (Dorydiella Kansana Beamer)
    Conservation Assessment For The Kansan spikerush leafhopper (Dorydiella kansana Beamer) USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region January 11, 2005 James Bess OTIS Enterprises 13501 south 750 west Wanatah, Indiana 46390 This document is undergoing peer review, comments welcome This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on the subject taxon or community; or this document was prepared by another organization and provides information to serve as a Conservation Assessment for the Eastern Region of the Forest Service. It does not represent a management decision by the U.S. Forest Service. Though the best scientific information available was used and subject experts were consulted in preparation of this document, it is expected that new information will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if you have information that will assist in conserving the subject taxon, please contact the Eastern Region of the Forest Service - Threatened and Endangered Species Program at 310 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 580 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................ 1 NOMENCLATURE AND TAXONOMY ..................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometro
    Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, & Noctuoidea) Biodiversity Inventory of the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab Hugo L. Kons Jr. Last Update: June 2001 Abstract A systematic check list of 489 species of Lepidoptera collected in the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab is presented, including 464 species in the superfamilies Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, and Noctuoidea. Taxa recorded in Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, and Thyrididae are also included. Moth taxa were collected at ultraviolet lights, bait, introduced Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), and by netting specimens. A list of taxa recorded feeding on P. notatum is presented. Introduction The University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Laboratory (NATL) contains 40 acres of natural habitats maintained for scientific research, conservation, and teaching purposes. Habitat types present include hammock, upland pine, disturbed open field, cat tail marsh, and shallow pond. An active management plan has been developed for this area, including prescribed burning to restore the upland pine community and establishment of plots to study succession (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/natl.htm). The site is a popular collecting locality for student and scientific collections. The author has done extensive collecting and field work at NATL, and two previous reports have resulted from this work, including: a biodiversity inventory of the butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea & Papilionoidea) of NATL (Kons 1999), and an ecological study of Hermeuptychia hermes (F.) and Megisto cymela (Cram.) in NATL habitats (Kons 1998). Other workers have posted NATL check lists for Ichneumonidae, Sphecidae, Tettigoniidae, and Gryllidae (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/insect.htm).
    [Show full text]
  • The Taxonomy, Larva and Ecology of Agrotis Buchholzi (Noctuidae) with a New Sibling Species from North Carolina
    JOURNAL OF LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY Volume 58 2004 Number 2 JOlt rnal of the Lepidopterists' Society 51> (2 ), 2004, 0.5-74 THE TAXONOMY, LARVA AND ECOLOGY OF AGROTIS BUCHHOLZI (NOCTUIDAE) WITH A NEW SIBLING SPECIES FROM NORTH CAROLINA D ALE F. SCHWEITZER NalureServe & The Nature Conselvency, 1761 Main Street, POJi Norris, New Jersey 08349, USA AND TIMOTHY L. MCCABE New York State Museum, Albany, New York 12230, USA ABSTRACT. Agrotis huchholz.i is one of four Lepidoptera species believed to be endemic to the New Jersey Pine Barrens. It occurs primarily in recently burned or exceptionally xelic or sterile areas where its sole hl1val foodplant, Pyxidanthera barbu/ata (Diapensiaceae), occurs in open­ ings in the shrub layer. Adults can be quite common locally. There are two broods approximately two months apart with the first staliing about late May. Hibernation is as prepupal larvae in the sand. The la,va is similar to that of other species of Agrotis. Adults are very active and feed hut their natural f()od sourees are not known. A sibling species, Agrotis carolina, new species, is closely associated with P. barbu/ata in south­ eastern North Carolina. Its range resembles that 0[' another ende mic, Hemipachnobia subporphyrea. The combined ranges of thcse two Agro­ tis an, veIl similar to those of an unnamed C"clophora (Geometridae) and Spartiniphaga carterae Sehweitzer (Noduidae) and their habitats commonly overlap in both states. Fire is a crucial factor in forming and maintaining habitat f,)r all of these species. A buchho/zi may become imperiled hecause of a decline of wildfires.
    [Show full text]
  • The Canadian Botanical Association Bulletin De L'association Botanique
    Contents Table des matières The CanadianBotanical Plant Canada 2007 Page 45 AssociationBulletin Call for nominations Page 46 Association news Page 47 Section News Page 48 Bulletin de l’Association Rejuvenation of the Conservation Committee Botanique du Canada Dianne Fahselt Page 50 December/Décembre 200 Volume6 • 39 No. 3 /No 3 Book Review Page 52 Plant Canada 2007 Obituary George Ledingham Page 53 Saskatoon, June 10th-14th. Establishing agreement on expectations and responsibilities Arthur R. Davis, Vice President / Vice-présidente between supervisor and graduate student. Dept. of Biology, University of Saskatchewan, Kate Frego 112 Science Place Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E2. Page 55 Tel:(306)966-4732, Fax(306)966- 4461 Activities at Plant Canada 2007 You are cordially invited to Saskatoon to attend the PLANT CANADA 2007 Page 56 meeting which will be held from June 10-14, 2007. As well as the Canadian Botanical Association/L'Association Botanique du Canada, the other five member societies of Plant Canada (the Canadian Phytopathological Society, the Canadian Society of Horticultural Science, the Canadian Society of Plant Botanical research at Physiologists, the Canadian Society of Agronomy, and the Canadian Weed Acadia University Science Society) will be well represented. Accordingly, this meeting will provide Rodger Evans a significant opportunity for Canadian plant scientists from various disciplines, Page 57 both pure and applied, to meet together and share their newest discoveries. Planning for next year's meeting continues to proceed, with regular meetings of the local organizing committee. The theme is "Growing for the Future" ("Le Position available Véé g tal de Demain"), and plenary symposia include "Natural Plant Products: Page 59 Biology, Chemistry and Application" and "Plant Health Network: Quarantine and Invasive Issues".
    [Show full text]
  • Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Bodie Island Life Saving Station & Boat House, Historic Structure Report
    Cape Hatteras National Seashore Bodie Island Life- Saving Station & Boat House Historic Structure Report 2005 For Cultural Resources, Southeast Region National Park Service By Joseph K. Oppermann - Architect, P.A. P.O. Box 10417, Salem Station Winston- Salem, NC 27108 336/721- 1711 FAX 336/721- 1712 [email protected] The historic structure report presented here exists in two formats. A traditional, printed version is available for study at the park, the Southeastern Regional Office of the NPS (SERO), and at a variety of other repositories. For more widespread access, the historic structure report also exists in a web- based format through ParkNet, the website of the National Park Service. Please visit www.nps.gov for more information. Cultural Resources Southeast Region National Park Service 100 Alabama St. SW Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 562-3117 2005 Historic Structure Report Bodie Island Life- Saving Station & Boat House Cape Hatteras National Seashore Manteo, NC LCS#: Life- Saving Station #07243 Boat House #091897 Cover image: Bodie Island Life- Saving Station, before 1900. (Outer Banks History Center, North Carolina Division of Archives and History) BODIE ISLAND LIFE-SAVING STATION/BOAT HOUSE HISTORIC STRUCTURE REPORT Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Nags Head, NC Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Team………………………………………………………………...…………………7 Executive Summary…………………………………………...……………………………….9 Administrative Data……………………………………………...…………………………………….……...13 PART I – DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY A. Historical Background and Context……………………………………………...…….I.A.1 Forces of Nature…………………………………………………………….I.A.1 What’s in a Name? Bodie Island…………………………………………... I.A.3 The Graveyard of the Atlantic……………………………………………... I.A.4 A National Life-Saving Service…………………………………….……… I.A.4 Getting Organized: 1871………………...…………………………………. I.A.5 Expanding the Service………………………………………………………I.A.6 Bodie Island Life-Saving Station………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Settling the Albemarle Sound 91 and George Took out Some of the Earliest Deeds in the Area
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________SettlingSettling thethe _ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Albemarle Pamlico Estuarine Study
    1991 Project No. 89-09 Classification of Pamlico Sound Nursery Areas: Recommendations for Critical Habitat Criteria ALBEMARLE PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY -·,' .. ·. ~J~~ ~t;; Funding Provided By North Carolina Department of Natural Enviro nmental Protection Agency Resources and Communi ty Development National Estuary Program NC DENR LIBRARY C1 1610MSC RAlEtGK.NC 27699•1610 509:C61 919-715-4161 CLASSIFICATION OF PAMLICO SOUND ~1JRSERY AREAS: RECOMMENDATIOXS FOR CRITICAL HABITAT CRITERIA By Elizabeth B. Noble and Dr. Robert J. Monroe North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Marine Fisheries P.O. Box 769 Morehead City, NC 28557 February 1991 "The research on which the report is based was financed, in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, through the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study." "Contents of the publication do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the United States Environmental Protection Agency , the ~orth Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, nor does mention of trade names of commercial products constitute their endorsement by the United States or North Carolina Government." A/P Project Number 89·09 r ( ........ .. · -- ....._ ··-······· · · · ··· -····· ................. ···-· The authors would like to thank M. Street for his encouragement and review, P. Phalen for his assistance with programming, statistics, and brain-storming, and also L. Mercer for her comprehensive review. Thanks to reviewers M. \Jolff, B. Burns, J. Ross, R. Holman, and anonymous external reviewers for their contribution to the quality of the manuscript. Thanks also to D. \Jillis and D. Tooele for manuscript preparation, and T.
    [Show full text]