DOCSLIB.ORG

BIRCH, WILLOW, and LOST CREEK

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BIRCH, WILLOW, and LOST CREEK United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service BIRCH CREEK Beaverhead- Deerlodge WILLOW CREEK National Forest LOST CREEK Dillon Ranger District WATERSHED ASSESSMENT May 2008 Birch, Willow, Lost Creek Watershed Assessment The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Cover Photo: Baldy Mountain, Dillon District Files 2 Birch, Willow, Lost Creek Watershed Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 5 A. Background and Document Overview.................................................................. 5 1. Purpose ............................................................................................................. 5 2. Watershed Analysis as a Planning Tool ........................................................... 6 3. Methods ............................................................................................................ 7 B. Landscape Setting ................................................................................................ 7 II. RESOURCE AREAS............................................................................................... 9 A. Soils and Geology................................................................................................. 9 1. Characterization................................................................................................ 9 2. Current Condition........................................................................................... 10 3. Reference Conditions ..................................................................................... 11 4. Synthesis and Interpretation ........................................................................... 11 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 12 B. Watersheds, Streams and Aquatic Habitat......................................................... 13 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 13 2. Current Conditions ......................................................................................... 17 3. Reference Conditions ..................................................................................... 26 4. Synthesis and Interpretation ........................................................................... 26 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 27 C. Vegetation........................................................................................................... 30 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 30 2. Current Condition........................................................................................... 35 3. Reference Condition....................................................................................... 41 4. Synthesis and Interpretation ........................................................................... 46 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 49 D. Fire and Fuels .................................................................................................... 52 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 52 2. Current Condition........................................................................................... 54 3. Reference Condition....................................................................................... 60 4. Synthesis and Interpretation ........................................................................... 62 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 65 E. Wildlife ............................................................................................................... 67 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 67 2. Current Condition........................................................................................... 69 3. Reference Condition....................................................................................... 74 4. Synthesis and Interpretation ........................................................................... 75 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 75 3 Birch, Willow, Lost Creek Watershed Assessment F. Recreation Resources......................................................................................... 76 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 76 2. Current Condition........................................................................................... 79 3. Reference Conditions ..................................................................................... 86 4. Syntheses And Interpretation.......................................................................... 87 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 88 G. Heritage Resources ............................................................................................ 91 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 91 2. Current Conditions ......................................................................................... 93 3. Reference Conditions ..................................................................................... 94 4. Synthesis And Interpretation .......................................................................... 94 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 94 H. Livestock Grazing............................................................................................... 97 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 97 2. Current Conditions ......................................................................................... 97 3. Reference Conditions ..................................................................................... 98 4. Synthesis And Interpretation .......................................................................... 99 5. Recommendations .......................................................................................... 99 I. Timber Management .......................................................................................... 99 1. Characterization.............................................................................................. 99 2. Current Condition......................................................................................... 100 3. Reference Condition..................................................................................... 100 4. Synthesis and Interpretation ......................................................................... 100 5. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 101 III. INTEGRATED RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 103 IV. MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES ........................................................................ 107 V. PARTICIPANTS .............................................................................................. 111 VI. REFERENCES................................................................................................. 112 VII. MAPS............................................................................................................... 119 .APPENDIX A – ROAD AND TRAIL ANALYSIS........................................................... 121 .APPENDIX B .-INDIAN QUEEN MINE REPORT ........................................................ 129 . 4 . BIRCH, WILLOW, and LOST CREEK . WATERSHED ASSESSMENT Dillon Ranger District Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest 2008 I. INTRODUCTION This watershed assessment consists of four sub-watersheds situated on the east side of the Pioneer Mountains on the Dillon Ranger District. See Map 1, Vicinity. These sub- watersheds are referred to as 6th code Hydrologic Code Units (HUCs). See Map 2 for a perspective of sub-watersheds compared to watersheds or sub-basins. The sub- watersheds are BIRCH, WILLOWUP, WILLOWLOW, and LOST-PIONEER. The LOST- PIONEER is part of the Big Hole at Melrose watershed while BIRCH, WILLOWUP, and WILLOWLOW are part of the Lower Big Hole watershed. All are part
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shifts in Forest Composition in the Eastern United States T ⁎ Jonathan A
    Forest Ecology and Management 433 (2019) 176–183 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Ecology and Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foreco Shifts in forest composition in the eastern United States T ⁎ Jonathan A. Knotta, Johanna M. Despreza, Christopher M. Oswaltb, Songlin Feia, a Purdue University, Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, West Lafayette, IN 47906, United States b USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station, Knoxville, TN 37919, United States ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Forest ecosystems in the United States (U.S.) are facing major challenges such as climate change, exotic species Forest dynamics invasions, and landscape fragmentation. It is widely believed that forest composition in the eastern U.S. is Fire tolerance transitioning from shade-intolerant, fire-tolerant species to shade-tolerant, fire-intolerant species, but most Shade tolerance evidence is anecdotal or localized. No comprehensive studies exist to quantify the shifts in forest composition Mesophication across multiple genera at a regional scale. Here, we examined the genus-level compositional changes in eastern Quercus U.S. forests to: (1) quantify the extent and magnitude of this transition, and (2) assess the influence of shade and Acer fire tolerance traits on abundance change. Genus-level data were compiled from the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) database across 37 states in the eastern U.S. for the last three decades. We analyzed shifts in forest composition with three metrics—stem density, basal area, and importance value—for 10 of the most abundant genera (Acer, Betula, Carya, Fraxinus, Nyssa, Pinus, Populus, Prunus, Quercus, and Ulmus). In addition, we esti- mated density-weighted fire and shade tolerances for each genus using species-level published data, assessed the shifts in spatial patterns of these traits, and analyzed the associations between these traits and county-level abundance changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Porphyry and Other Molybdenum Deposits of Idaho and Montana
    Porphyry and Other Molybdenum Deposits of Idaho and Montana Joseph E. Worthington Idaho Geological Survey University of Idaho Technical Report 07-3 Moscow, Idaho ISBN 1-55765-515-4 CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Molybdenum Vein Deposits ...................................................................... 2 Tertiary Molybdenum Deposits ................................................................. 2 Little Falls—1 ............................................................................. 3 CUMO—2 .................................................................................. 3 Red Mountain Prospect—45 ...................................................... 3 Rocky Bar District—43 .............................................................. 3 West Eight Mile—37 .................................................................. 3 Devil’s Creek Prospect—46 ....................................................... 3 Walton—8 .................................................................................. 4 Ima—3 ........................................................................................ 4 Liver Peak (a.k.a. Goat Creek)—4 ............................................. 4 Bald Butte—5 ............................................................................. 5 Big Ben—6 ................................................................................. 6 Emigrant Gulch—7 ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tree Growth and Mortality , Reproductive Patterns, and Soil Characteristics in a 27 Year-Old Maple-Basswood Forest Restoration Project
    St. Olaf College Local Ecology Research Papers Tree growth and mortality , reproductive patterns, and soil characteristics in a 27 year-old maple-basswood forest restoration project Robby Holmes 2017 © Robby Holmes, 2017 “​Tree growth and mortality, reproductive patterns, and soil characteristics in a 27 year-old maple-basswood forest restoration project​” by Robby Holmes is licensed under a ​Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License​. Holmes 1 Tree growth and mortality, reproductive patterns, and soil characteristics in a 27 year-old maple-basswood forest restoration project Robby Holmes Advisor: Dr. Kathleen Shea Biology Department, St. Olaf College Northfield MN, 55057 Fall 2017 Holmes 2 Abstract Forests have been on the decline since the rise of agriculture and urbanization in the last few centuries. The maple-basswood forest, a unique forest type found in southeastern Minnesota, is no exception. Keeping these forests healthy, or restoring them to health, is important in order to preserve high levels of biodiversity to facilitate ecosystem resilience. In this study, we measured over 2000 trees at St. Olaf College in Northfield, Minnesota, to assess their health and compare tree growth among four sections in two adjacent fields. We also gathered seedling and sapling data as well as soil data to assess the overall health and growth of the forests. The restoration project is dominated by white ash, with black walnut, maples, and oaks being the next most common. Sections one and two had the trees with the largest diameter, lead by red oak, white oak, and basswood, while sections three and four had higher levels of moisture and organic matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Are Evergreen Leaves So Contrary About Shade?
    Opinion Why are evergreen leaves so contrary about shade? Christopher H. Lusk1*, Peter B. Reich2*, Rebecca A. Montgomery2, David D. Ackerly3 and Jeannine Cavender-Bares4 1 Department of Biological Science, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia 2 Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA 3 Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 4 Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA Leaf mass per area (LMA) is one of the most widely spectrum (low photosynthetic capacity and respiration measured of all plant functional traits. In deciduous rates, low nitrogen concentrations and long leaf lifespan) forests, there is similarity between plastic and evolution- are not only found in inherently slow-growing species (e.g. ary responses of LMA to light gradients. In evergreens, many evergreen conifers such as Podocarpus and Picea) however, LMA is lower in shaded than sunlit individuals [7,9,10] but are often also expressed within species when of the same species, whereas shade-tolerant evergreens grown in environments unfavorable for rapid growth have higher LMA than light-demanders grown under the [10,11]. For example, leaf lifespan is often longer in shaded same conditions. We suggest that this pattern of ‘coun- individuals than in those grown in brighter light [12,13], ter-gradient variation’ results from some combination of just as it tends to be longer in shade-tolerant species (i) close evolutionary coordination of LMA with leaf adapted to late-successional habitats than in light- lifespan, (ii) selection for different leaf constitutions demanding species, which normally establish under open (relative investment in cell walls versus cell contents) conditions [11,14,15].
    [Show full text]
  • Contract for Deed Billings Montana
    Contract For Deed Billings Montana Dell remains unargued: she castaways her knitter waste too charmingly? Dresden Howie unthread some socage and feudalize his toiletry so barometrically! Moral and congested Alfred quartersaw almost presentably, though Hadleigh exteriorize his sandbag outsell. Must be a graduate within an accredited law school. Borders thousands of acres of BLM lands. One line you support do harm to provide sure that utilize tax bills are edge to you directly from possible tax collector. Which types of real estate cases so should handle water often? House hunting made easy. Montana foreclosed home auctions and Montana bank owned properties. Crow Agency, requesting that the Graham leases be canceled. Owners of exempted mobile homes will be notified by the department when they receive his property classification and appraisal notices. Never miss an opportunity remains a cheap home, by saving your searches. Are you spin you enough to delete this alert? The movies The Re. The petition was directed to the Billings Area Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs. This is Yellowstone Country! Contact us to side working and one concept our agents to land access to power entire island of homes available. It was violent enough and had just want others to collect when something works. Since forfeiture often beside the concern remedy, notice form name be used in access all cases where a default is imminent. DISMISSED and the decision of the Acting Area Director is AFFIRMED. Did the District Court err in finding that question First Citizens Bank of Billings had no obligation to terrain that thirst the required deeds were placed in escrow by Double S Investors? The Departmentis charged with the responsibility of the management of bay trust obligations inthe best play of Indian beneficiaries.
    [Show full text]
  • A Shade Tolerance Index for Common Understory Species of Northeastern North America
    Ecological Indicators 7 (2007) 195–207 This article is also available online at: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind A shade tolerance index for common understory species of northeastern North America Lionel Humbert *, Daniel Gagnon, Daniel Kneeshaw, Christian Messier Groupe de Recherche en E´cologie Forestie`re Interuniversitaire (GREFi), De´partement des Sciences Biologiques, Universite´ du Que´bec a` Montre´al, Case Postale 8888, Succursale Centre-Ville, Montre´al, Qc., Canada H3C 3P8 Received 12 June 2005; received in revised form 29 November 2005; accepted 2 December 2005 Abstract Since Baker’s [Baker, F.S., 1949. A revised tolerance table. J. For. 47, 179–181] classic contribution, shade tolerance indices have not been much modified for North American plant species. While many common tree and shrub species are included in the shade tolerance index, much less is known about this characteristic for the abundant and rich understory vascular and nonvascular plant layers. The classification of the shade tolerance is widely used to compare relative growth and survival among plant species under closed canopies and is also fundamental to an understanding of stand development following small and large scale disturbances. Although qualitative, it is frequently used both in research and management implications. Here we provide a significant revision to Baker’s shade tolerance table to include the most common forest understory plant species found in northeastern North America forests. Our index is based on: (1) the compilation of the opinions of five experts, (2) a comparison with Ellenberg’s index from Europe as well as, (3) information from current literature. For most of the 347 plant species investigated, a consistent and robust shade tolerance index, ranging between 1 (very tolerant) and 9 (very intolerant), was found.
    [Show full text]
  • MAP SHOWING LOCATIONS of MINES and PROSPECTS in the DILLON Lox 2° QUADRANGLE, IDAHO and MONTANA
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MAP SHOWING LOCATIONS OF MINES AND PROSPECTS IN THE DILLON lox 2° QUADRANGLE, IDAHO AND MONTANA By JeffreyS. Loen and Robert C. Pearson Pamphlet to accompany Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1803-C Table !.--Recorded and estimated production of base and precious metals in mining districts and areas in the Dillon 1°x2° guadrangle, Idaho and Montana [Production of other commodities are listed in footnotes. All monetary values are given in dollars at time of production. Dashes indicate no information available. Numbers in parentheses are estimates by the authors or by those cited as sources of data in list that follows table 2. <,less than; s.t., short tons] District/area Years Ore Gold Silver Copper Lead Zinc Value Sources name (s. t.) (oz) (oz) (lb) (lb) (lb) (dollars) of data Idaho Carmen Creek 18 70's-190 1 (50,000) 141, 226 district 1902-1980 (unknown) Total (50,000) Eldorado 1870's-1911 17,500 (350 ,000) 123, 226 district 1912-1954 (13,000) (8,000) (300,000) Total (650,000) Eureka district 1880's-1956 (13 ,500) 12,366 (2,680,000) 57,994 (4,000) ( 4,000 ,000) 173 Total (4,000,000) Gibbonsville 1877-1893 (unknown) district 1894-1907 (83,500) (1,670,000) 123, 226 1908-1980 ( <10 ,000) 123 Total (2,000,000) Kirtley Creek 1870's-1890 2,000 40,500 173 district 1890's-1909 (<10,000) 1910-1918 24,300 (500 ,000) 123 1919-1931 (unknown) 1932-1947 2,146 (75 ,000) 173 Total (620,000) McDevitt district 1800's.-1980 (80,000) Total (80,000) North Fork area 1800's-1980 (unknown) Total ( <10 ,000) Pratt Creek 1870's-1900 (50 ,000) district Total (50,000) Sandy Creek 1800 's-1900 (unknown) district 1901-1954 19,613 4,055 4,433 71,359 166,179 (310,000) 17 3, 200 Total (310 ,000) Montana Anaconda Range 1880's-1980 (<100,000) area Total (<100,000) Argenta district 1864-1901 (1 ,500 ,000) 1902-1965 311,796 72,241 562,159 604,135 18,189,939 2,009,366 5,522,962 88 Total (7,000,000) Baldy Mtn.
    [Show full text]
  • FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN for the Tobey Hill Town Forest
    FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN for the Tobey Hill Town forest. Weare, New Hampshire Mapped Acres: 53.5 One of the many stone walls found on the Tobey Hill Forest. Prepared for: Prepared by: The town of The Ecosystem Management Company Meadowsend Timberlands, Ltd. Weare, NH PO Box 966 New London, NH 03357 (603) 526-8686 May, 2016 mtlforests.com Management Plan prepared by The Ecosystem Management Co., New London, NH 6/20/2016 PLAN INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................6 PROPERTY LOCATION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................7 GREATER LANDSCAPE PERSPECTIVE .................................................................................................................7 LANDOWNER OBJECTIVES .....................................................................................................................................8 WOODLOT HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................9 FOREST INVENTORY PROCEDURES .....................................................................................................................9 GEOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES .................................................................................................................................. 12 Physiographic Regions ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • In Cooperation with Our Watershed Partners
    Prepared By The Watershed Restoration Coalition For The Upper Clark Fork River In Cooperation With Our Watershed Partners December 13, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary 2 2. Introduction 2 Location and Overview ………………………………………………………………….2 History……………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Council Goals & Objectives……………………………………………………………..6 Management Strategies Developed to Achieve the Councils Objective…………...7 Priority Resource Issues………………………………………………………………...7 3. Existing Watershed Assessments 8 Upper Clark Fork River Sediment, Metals and Temperature TMDLs and Frame Work for Water Quality…………………………………………………….8 Landowner Surveys……………………………………………………………………. 10 WRC Priority Tributary Summaries……………………………………………………10 4. Additional Technical and Financial Resource Needs 11 5. Five Year Plan 12 6. Measurable Accomplishments on Priority Tributaries 13 Browns Gulch…………………………………………………………………………...14 Cottonwood Creek……………………………………………………………………... 15 Race Track Creek……………………………………………………………………… 16 Dempsey Creek………………………………………………………………………... 17 Gold Creek……………………………………………………………………………… 17 Little Blackfoot River…………………………………………………………………... 18 Lost Creek………………………………………………………………………………. 19 Peterson Creek………………………………………………………………………… 19 Tin Cup Joe Creek…………………………………………………………………….. 20 Warm Springs Creek………………………………………………………………….. 20 Willow Creek…………………………………………………………………………… 21 Cross Cutting Issues………………………………………………………………….. 22 Board Operation ……………………………………………………………………… 22 Funding & Fund Raising……………………………………………………….22 Outreach & Education ………………………………………………………..
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Hemlock (Tsuga) Species and Hybrids for Resistance to Adelges Tsugae (Hemiptera: Adelgidae) Using Artificial Infestation
    PLANT RESISTANCE Evaluation of Hemlock (Tsuga) Species and Hybrids for Resistance to Adelges tsugae (Hemiptera: Adelgidae) Using Artificial Infestation 1 2 2 MICHAEL E. MONTGOMERY, S. E. BENTZ, AND RICHARD T. OLSEN J. Econ. Entomol. 102(3): 1247Ð1254 (2009) ABSTRACT Hemlock (Tsuga) species and hybrids were evaluated for resistance to the hemlock woolly adelgid, Adelges tsugae Annand (Hemiptera: Adelgidae). The adelgid was accidentally intro- duced from Asia to the eastern United States, where it is causing widespread mortality of the native hemlocks, Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrie`re and Tsuga caroliniana Engelm. These two native species plus the Asian species Tsuga chinensis (Franch.) E. Pritz and T. dumosa (D.Don) Eichler and Tsuga sieboldii Carrie`re, and the hybrids T. chinensis ϫ T. caroliniana and T. chinensis ϫ T. sieboldii, were artiÞcially infested with the crawler stage of A. tsugae in the early spring 2006 and 2007. After 8 or 9 wkÑwhen the spring (progrediens) generation would be matureÑcounts were made of the adelgid. In both years, the density of A. tsugae was highest on T. canadensis, T. caroliniana, and T. sieboldii; lowest on T. chinensis; and intermediate on the hybrids. On T. chinensis and the T. chinensis hybrids, fewer adelgids settled, fewer of the settled adelgids survived, and the surviving adelgids grew slower. Thus, the nature of the host resistance is both nonpreference (antixenosis) and adverse effects on biology (antibiosis). Tree growth (height) was associated with resistance, but no association was found between time of budbreak and resistance that was independent of the taxa. Many of the hybrids grow well, have attractive form, and are promising as resistant landscape alternatives for the native hemlocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA)
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 01/01/2019 to 03/31/2019 Custer Gallatin National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact R1 - Northern Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) Group Ten Metals, Stillwater - Minerals and Geology In Progress: Expected:08/2019 09/2019 Dan Seifert West Phase 2 project Plan of Comment Period Public Notice 406-446-2103 Operations for mineral 11/16/2018 [email protected] exploration Description: Exploratory core drilling for locatable minerals at 35 sites over the course of seven years in the Iron Mountain and EA Chrome Mountain area of the East Boulder Plateau on Beartooth and Yellowstone Ranger Districts. *NEW LISTING* Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=55033 Location: UNIT - Beartooth Ranger District, Yellowstone Ranger District. STATE - Montana. COUNTY - Stillwater, Sweet Grass. LEGAL - Drill site locations are at T4S, R13E, Sections 33, 34; T5S, R13E, Sections 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13 and 14; T5S, R14E, Sections 7 and 18. Iron Mountain and Chrome Mountain area of the East Boulder Plateau on Beartooth and Yellowstone Ranger Districts. Threemile Restoration and - Forest products In Progress: Expected:06/2019 05/2020 Mark Slacks Resiliency Project - Vegetation management Comment Period Public Notice 406-255-1450 EA (other than forest products) 12/07/2018 [email protected] *UPDATED* - Fuels management Description: Manage this fire adapted ecosystem towards a mosaic of forest, woody draw, & grassland vegetation that restores & improves ecosystem resiliency.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Infestations on Forest
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Tennessee, Knoxville: Trace University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Public Health Publications and Other Works Education, Health, and Human Sciences 4-19-2017 A Little uB g with a Big Bite: Impact of Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Infestations on Forest Ecosystems in the Eastern USA and Potential Control Strategies Amanda Letheren University of Tennessee, Knoxville Stephanie Hill University of Tennessee, Knoxville Jeanmarie Salie University of Tennessee, Knoxville James Parkman University of Tennessee, Knoxville Jiangang Chen University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_publichealth Recommended Citation Letheren, Amanda, Stephanie Hill, Jeanmarie Salie, James Parkman, and Jiangang Chen. “Little uB g with a Big Bite: Impact of Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Infestations on Forest Ecosystems in the Eastern USA and Potential Control Strategies.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14, no. 4 (2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14040438. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Education, Health, and Human Sciences at Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Health Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. International Journal
    [Show full text]