DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Russell Cave National Monument

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Russell Cave National Monument National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Russell Cave National Monument Natural Resource Report NPS/RUCA/NRR—2019/1942 ON THIS PAGE View of the cave opening from the pedestrian walkway showing some of the restoration work being done to preserve the cave’s cultural history. Parts of the signs explaining the history and cultural significance are visible at the bottom edge of the photo. Image by J. W. Aber, MTSU Geospatial Research Center, 2017. ON THE COVER View of the main opening to Russell Cave from the pedestrian walkway. Image by J. W. Aber, MTSU Geospatial Research Center, 2017. Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Russell Cave National Monument Natural Resource Report NPS/RUCA/NRR—2019/1942 Jeremy Aber Kim Sadler Siti Nur Hidayati Patrick Phoebus Joshua Grinath Racha El Kadiri Clay Harris Henrique Momm Arthur Reed Alexis Perry Geospatial Research Center Department of Geosciences Middle Tennessee State University Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37132 June 2019 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review, which was provided by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data. The level and extent of peer review was based on the importance of report content or its potentially controversial or precedent- setting nature. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Natural Resource Condition Assessment Program website and the Natural Resource Publications Management website. If you have difficulty accessing information in this publication, particularly if using assistive technology, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Aber, J. W., K. Sadler, S. N. Hidayati, P. Phoebus, J. B. Grinath, R. El Kadiri, C. Harris, H. Momm. A. D. Reed, A. B. Perry. 2019. Natural resource condition assessment for Russell Cave National Monument. Natural Resource Report NPS/RUCA/NRR—2019/1942. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 414/154187, June 2019 ii Contents Page Figures .................................................................................................................................................. vii Tables .................................................................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................xiii Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................ xv List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................... xvii Chapter 1. NRCA Background Information .......................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Introduction and Resource Setting ....................................................................................... 5 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5 2.1.1. Enabling Legislation ........................................................................................................ 5 2.1.2. Geographic Setting .......................................................................................................... 5 2.1.3. Visitation Statistics .......................................................................................................... 8 2.2. Natural Resources .................................................................................................................. 10 2.2.1. Ecological Units and Watersheds .................................................................................. 10 2.2.2. Resource Descriptions ................................................................................................... 11 2.2.3. Resource Issues Overview ............................................................................................. 11 2.3. Resource Stewardship ........................................................................................................... 14 2.3.1. Management Directive and Planning Guidance ............................................................ 14 2.3.2. Status of Supporting Science ......................................................................................... 15 Chapter 3. Study Scoping and Design ................................................................................................. 17 3.1. Preliminary Scoping .............................................................................................................. 17 3.2. Study Design ......................................................................................................................... 17 3.2.1. Indicator Framework, Focal Study Resources and Indicators ....................................... 17 3.2.2. Reporting Areas ............................................................................................................. 22 3.2.3. General Approach and Methods .................................................................................... 22 Chapter 4. Natural Resource Conditions .............................................................................................. 25 4.1. Atmosphere............................................................................................................................ 25 iii Contents (continued) Page 4.1.1. Ozone ............................................................................................................................. 25 4.1.2. Ozone-Caused Foliar Injury .......................................................................................... 26 4.1.2. Sulfur and Nitrogen Deposition ..................................................................................... 29 4.1.3. Visibility ........................................................................................................................ 32 4.1.4. Weather and Climate ..................................................................................................... 34 4.2. Geology and Soil ................................................................................................................... 35 4.2.1. Geologic Resources ....................................................................................................... 36 4.2.2. Cave & Karst Features and Processes ........................................................................... 37 4.2.3. Soil Function and Dynamics ......................................................................................... 38 4.2.4. Paleontological Resources ............................................................................................. 40 4.3. Water Quality ........................................................................................................................ 40 4.3.1 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................. 41 4.3.2 Bacteria ........................................................................................................................... 42 4.4. Biological Integrity ................................................................................................................ 44 4.4.1. Freshwater Wetland Communities ................................................................................ 44 4.4.2. Forest Vegetation Communities .................................................................................... 50 4.4.3. Vascular Plants .............................................................................................................. 54 4.4.4. Non-vascular Plants ......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Land Snails and Soil Calcium in a Central Appalachian Mountain
    Freshwater Snail Inventory of the Fish River Lakes 2/2012 Report for MOHF Agreement Number CT09A 2011 0605 6177 by Kenneth P. Hotopp Appalachian Conservation Biology PO Box 1298, Bethel, ME 04217 for the Maine Outdoor Heritage Fund 37 Wiscasset Rd. Pittston, ME 04345 Freshwater Snail Inventory of the Fish River Lakes Abstract Freshwater snails were inventoried at the eight major lakes of the Fish River watershed, Aroostook County, Maine, with special attention toward pond snails (Lymnaeidae) collected historically by regional naturalist Olof Nylander. A total of fourteen freshwater snail species in six families were recovered. The pond snail Stagnicola emarginatus (Say, 1821) was found at Square Lake, Eagle Lake, and Fish River Lake, with different populations exhibiting regional shell forms as observed by Nylander, but not found in three other lakes previously reported. More intensive inventory is necessary for confirmation. The occurrence of transitional shell forms, and authoritative literature, do not support the elevation of the endemic species Stagnicola mighelsi (W.G. Binney, 1865). However, the infrequent occurrence of S. emarginatus in all of its forms, and potential threats to this species, warrant a statewide assessment of its habitat and conservation status. Otherwise, a qualitative comparison with the Fish River Lakes freshwater snail fauna of 100 years ago suggests it remains mostly intact today. 1 Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................ 1
    [Show full text]
  • Amblyopsidae, Amblyopsis)
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 412:The 41–57 Hoosier(2014) cavefish, a new and endangered species( Amblyopsidae, Amblyopsis)... 41 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.412.7245 RESEARCH ARTICLE www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research The Hoosier cavefish, a new and endangered species (Amblyopsidae, Amblyopsis) from the caves of southern Indiana Prosanta Chakrabarty1,†, Jacques A. Prejean1,‡, Matthew L. Niemiller1,2,§ 1 Museum of Natural Science, Ichthyology Section, 119 Foster Hall, Department of Biological Sciences, Loui- siana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803, USA 2 University of Kentucky, Department of Biology, 200 Thomas Hunt Morgan Building, Lexington, KY 40506, USA † http://zoobank.org/0983DBAB-2F7E-477E-9138-63CED74455D3 ‡ http://zoobank.org/C71C7313-142D-4A34-AA9F-16F6757F15D1 § http://zoobank.org/8A0C3B1F-7D0A-4801-8299-D03B6C22AD34 Corresponding author: Prosanta Chakrabarty ([email protected]) Academic editor: C. Baldwin | Received 12 February 2014 | Accepted 13 May 2014 | Published 29 May 2014 http://zoobank.org/C618D622-395E-4FB7-B2DE-16C65053762F Citation: Chakrabarty P, Prejean JA, Niemiller ML (2014) The Hoosier cavefish, a new and endangered species (Amblyopsidae, Amblyopsis) from the caves of southern Indiana. ZooKeys 412: 41–57. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.412.7245 Abstract We describe a new species of amblyopsid cavefish (Percopsiformes: Amblyopsidae) in the genus Amblyopsis from subterranean habitats of southern Indiana, USA. The Hoosier Cavefish, Amblyopsis hoosieri sp. n., is distinguished from A. spelaea, its only congener, based on genetic, geographic, and morphological evi- dence. Several morphological features distinguish the new species, including a much plumper, Bibendum- like wrinkled body with rounded fins, and the absence of a premature stop codon in the gene rhodopsin.
    [Show full text]
  • Reptiles and Amphibians of Otago
    Society for Research on Amphibians and Reptiles in New Zealand (SRARNZ) presents Reptiles and Amphibians of Otago Otago is a large (31,251 km2) and lightly populated region of the southern South Island of Aotearoa New Zealand, stretching from the eastern coastline west to the Southern Alps. The earliest humans, of East Polynesian origin, arrived about 700 years ago. The largest settlement today is the coastal city of Dunedin (pop. >127,000), which grew from a Scottish influx in the 1800s. The Otago Regional Council administers the region, and tribal authority (mana whenua) rests with the iwi of Ngāi Tahu. Climates in the Otago region (roughly 45°– leiopelmatid frogs survive elsewhere in 47°S) range from changeable, cool- New Zealand. Two species of introduced temperate conditions near the coast to frogs are present, but there are no the near-continental climates (baking hot crocodilians, salamanders, terrestrial summers, freezing winters) of the interior. snakes or turtles. Marine turtles (mainly The region provides varied habitats for leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea) herp species, including sand-dunes, visit the coastal waters of Otago but do grasslands, shrublands, wetlands, forests, not nest here. rock structures and scree slopes, some occupied to at least 1900 m above sea level. Today’s herpetofauna is dominated by lizards (solely geckos and skinks), including about 10 described species. A further 12 or more undescribed taxa are recognised Otago by tag names for conservation purposes, and we follow that approach here. All lizards in Otago are viviparous and long- lived, and remain vulnerable to ongoing habitat loss and predation by introduced mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Inventory at Stones River National Battlefield
    Fish Inventory at Stones River National Battlefield Submitted to: Department of the Interior National Park Service Cumberland Piedmont Network By Dennis Mullen Professor of Biology Department of Biology Middle Tennessee State University Murfreesboro, TN 37132 September 2006 Striped Shiner (Luxilus chrysocephalus) – nuptial male From Lytle Creek at Fortress Rosecrans Photograph by D. Mullen Table of Contents List of Tables……………………………………………………………………….iii List of Figures………………………………………………………………………iv List of Appendices…………………………………………………………………..v Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...……..2 Methods……………………………………………………………………………...3 Results……………………………………………………………………………….7 Discussion………………………………………………………………………….10 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...14 Literature Cited…………………………………………………………………….15 ii List of Tables Table1: Location and physical characteristics (during September 2006, and only for the riverine sites) of sample sites for the STRI fish inventory………………………………17 Table 2: Biotic Integrity classes used in assessing fish communities along with general descriptions of their attributes (Karr et al. 1986) ………………………………………18 Table 3: List of fishes potentially occurring in aquatic habitats in and around Stones River National Battlefield………………………………………………………………..19 Table 4: Fish species list (by site) of aquatic habitats at STRI (October 2004 – August 2006). MF = McFadden’s Ford, KP = King Pond, RB = Redoubt Brannan, UP = Unnamed Pond at Redoubt Brannan, LC = Lytle Creek at Fortress Rosecrans……...….22 Table 5: Fish Species Richness estimates for the 3 riverine reaches of STRI and a composite estimate for STRI as a whole…………………………………………………24 Table 6: Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores for three stream reaches at Stones River National Battlefield during August 2005………………………………………………...25 Table 7: Temperature and water chemistry of four of the STRI sample sites for each sampling date…………………………………………………………………………….26 Table 8 : Total length estimates of specific habitat types at each riverine sample site.
    [Show full text]
  • American Smoketree (Cotinus Obovatus Raf.)
    ACADBJIY OJl'· SCIBNCm FOR 1M2 11 o AMERICAN SMOKETREE (COTINUS OBOVATUS RAP.), ONE OF OKLAHOMA'S RAREST TREE SPECIES ELBERT L. LITTLE, IlL, Forest Senlee United States DepartmeDt of J.grlealture, Washington, D. C. Though the American Smoketree was discovered in Oklahoma by Thomu Nuttall in 1819, only one more collection of this rare tree species within the state has been reported. This article summarizes these records, add8 a third Oklahoma locality, and calle attention to the older lClenttf1c name, Cotfftu ob0'V4tu Ral, which 8hould replace the one In ue, Coth," (lm.en. eo".. Hutt. II PROCDDINGS OJ' THE OKLAHOMA Nattall (1821), the flnt botaDl8t to mit what 11 now Okahoma, men­ tlODed In hie journal for July 18, 1819, the dl8covery, to his great 81U'Prlse, of thla new, Jarp Ihrub, aearcely dlltlnet from BA.. cot'"'' of Europe. He deIcrlbed the location as on l1mestone clUb of the Grand (or Neosho) RITer near a bend called the Eagle'e Neat more tban thirty miles north of the confluence of the Grand and Arkanlla8 River.. The place probably ..... alODC the 8&lt bank of the river In eoutheastern Mayes County, at the weetern edge of the Ozark Plateau in northeastern Oklahoma. It 11 hoped that Oklahoma botaDleti w1ll revisit the type locality and a1eo die. COTer other etatloD•. Thll Dew species was Dot mentioned In Nuttall'. (1837) unfinished publication on his collections of the flora of Arkansas Territory. Torrey aD4 Gray (1888) IDcluded Nuttall's frultfng specimens doubtfully under the related European species, then known as Rhu coUnu L., with Nuttall's upubllehed herbariUM Dame, Bh., coUnoUles Nutt., as a synonym.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Management Activities and Practices
    WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES AND PRACTICES COMPREHENSIVE WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLANNING GUIDELINES for the Gulf Prairies and Marshes Ecological Region Revised April 2010 The following Texas Parks & Wildlife Department staff have contributed to this document: Kirby Brown, Private Lands and Habitat Program Director (Retired) Gary Homerstad, Technical Guidance Biologist (Retired) Matt Wagner, Technical Guidance Biologist – College Station Jim Dillard, Technical Guidance Biologist – Mineral Wells (Retired) Linda Campbell, Program Director, Private Lands and Public Hunting Program -- Austin Linda McMurry, Private Lands and Public Hunting Program Assistant -- Austin With Additional Contributions From: Terry Turney, Rare Species Biologist, San Marcos Trey Carpenter, Manager -- Granger Wildlife Management Area Dale Prochaska, Private Lands Biologist – Kerr Wildlife Management Area Nathan Rains, Private Lands Biologist – Cleburne TABLE OF CONTENTS Comprehensive Wildlife Management Planning Guidelines Gulf Prairies and Marshes Ecological Region INTRODUCTION Specific Habitat Management Practices, by Activities HABITAT CONTROL EROSION CONTROL PREDATOR CONTROL PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL WATER PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL SHELTER CENSUS APPENDICES APPENDIX A: General Habitat Management Considerations, Recommendations, and Intensity Levels APPENDIX B: Determining Qualification for Wildlife Management Use APPENDIX C: Wildlife Management Plan Overview APPENDIX D: Livestock Management Recommendations APPENDIX E: Vegetation Management
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Aesculus Flava (Yellow Buckeye, Sweet Buckeye) Aesculus Flava Is a Medium to Large Deciduous Tree
    Aesculus flava (Yellow buckeye, sweet buckeye) Aesculus flava is a medium to large deciduous tree. The palmate compound leaves turn yellow in the fall. Large yellow flower appears in mid spring. Do not use this specimen as a street tree because of the litter produced by the falling leaves. Used as a shade tree. Landscape Information Pronounciation: ESS-kew-lus FLAY-vuh Plant Type: Tree Heat Zones: 5, 6, 7, 8 Hardiness Zones: 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Uses: Screen, Specimen, Shade Size/Shape Growth Rate: Moderate Tree Shape: oval Canopy Symmetry: Symmetrical Canopy Density: Dense Canopy Texture: Coarse Height at Maturity: Over 23 Spread at Maturity: 8 to 10 meters Time to Ultimate Height: More than 50 Years Plant Image Aesculus flava (Yellow buckeye, sweet buckeye) Botanical Description Foliage Leaf Arrangement: Opposite Leaf Venation: Pinnate Leaf Persistance: Deciduous Leaf Type: Palmately Compound Leaf Blade: 5 - 10 cm Leaf Shape: Oval Leaf Margins: Serrate Leaf Textures: Coarse Leaf Scent: No Fragance Color(growing season): Green Color(changing season): Yellow Flower Flower Showiness: True Flower Size Range: 7 - 10 Flower Type: Panicle Flower Image Flower Sexuality: Monoecious (Bisexual) Flower Scent: No Fragance Flower Color: Yellow Seasons: Spring Trunk Trunk Has Crownshaft: False Trunk Susceptibility to Breakage: Generally resists breakage Number of Trunks: Single Trunk Trunk Esthetic Values: Not Showy Fruit Fruit Type: Nut Fruit Showiness: True Fruit Size Range: 1.5 - 3 Fruit Colors: Brown Seasons: Spring Aesculus flava (Yellow buckeye, sweet
    [Show full text]
  • A SUMMARY of the LIFE HISTORY and DISTRIBUTION of the SPRING CAVEFISH, Chologaster ]Gassizi, PUTNAM, with POPULATION ESTIMATES for the SPECIES in SOUTHERN ILLINOIS
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship Repository A SUMMARY OF THE LIFE HISTORY AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE SPRING CAVEFISH, Chologaster ]gassizi, PUTNAM, WITH POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR THE SPECIES IN SOUTHERN ILLINOIS PHILIP W. SMITH -NORBERT M. WELCH Biological Notes No.104 Illinois Natural History Survey Urbana, Illinois • May 1978 State of Illinois Department of Registration and Education Natural History Survey Division A Summary of the life History and Distribution of the Spring Cavefish~ Chologasfer agassizi Putnam~ with Population Estimates for the Species in Southern Illinois Philip W. Smith and Norbert M. Welch The genus Chologaster, which means mutilated belly various adaptations and comparative metabolic rates of in reference to the absence of pelvic fins, was proposed all known amblyopsids. The next major contribution to by Agassiz ( 1853: 134) for a new fish found in ditches our knowledge was a series of papers by Hill, who worked and rice fields of South Carolina and described by him with the Warren County, Kentucky, population of spring as C. cornutus. Putnam (1872:30) described a second cave fish and described oxygen preferences ( 1968), food species of the genus found in a well at Lebanon, Tennes­ and feeding habits ( 1969a), effects of isolation upon see, naming it C. agassizi for the author of the generic meristic characters ( 1969b ), and the development of name. Forbes ( 1881:232) reported one specimen of squamation in the young ( 1971). Whittaker & Hill Chologaster from a spring in western Union County, ( 1968) described a new species of cestode parasite, nam­ Illinois, and noted that it differed from known specimens ing it Proteocephalus chologasteri.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [Show full text]
  • Report Format WITHOUT PHOTOS
    LIZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN WAKANUI CREEK REALIGNMENT 28 FEBRUARY 2018 LIZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN WAKANUI CREEK REALIGNMENT PREPARED BY: DYLAN VAN WINKEL BIORESEARCHES GROUP LTD 68 BEACH ROAD, AUCKLAND [email protected] FOR: AECOM NEW ZEALAND LIMITED PO BOX 4241 SHORTLAND ST AUCKLAND 1140 DATE: 28 FEBRUARY 2018 REFERENCE: BIORESEARCHES (2017). LIZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN: WAKANUI CREEK REALIGNMENT COVER ILLUSTRATION: OLIGOSOMA AFF. POLYCHROMA Level 4, 68 Beach Road, Auckland 1010; PO Box 2727, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140. T: (09) 379-9417; www.bioresearches.co.nz CONTENTS Page 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 2 LIZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................................... 2 2.1 Context of the lizard management plan .............................................................. 2 2.2 Project area and area of affected habitat ........................................................... 2 2.3 Local lizard populations ....................................................................................... 5 2.4 Management of resident lizards .......................................................................... 5 3 LIZARD SALVAGE AND RELOCATION ................................................................................. 6 3.1 Lizard capture ...................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Active Searches .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (Annelida : Clitellata) on Freshwater Crayfish in Croatia
    Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim. 2006, 42 (4), 251-260 Occurrence of Branchiobdellida (Annelida : Clitellata) on freshwater crayfish in Croatia G.I.V. Klobucar√1*, I. Maguire1, S. Gottstein1, S. R. Gelder2 1 Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Rooseveltov trg 6, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia 2 Department of Science and Math, University of Maine at Presque Isle, 181 Maine Street, Maine 04769, USA There is very little information on the genus Branchiobdella and the species relationships with their freshwater crayfish hosts in Croatia. Therefore, a base-line study was needed so that future changes in available habitat brought about by urban development and the probable introduction of non-native species can be accurately assessed. This investigation used preserved freshwater crayfish collected from across Croatia between 1995 and 2005 as its source of the ectosymbionts. Crayfish species included Astacus astacus, A. leptodactylus, Austropotamobius pallipes, A. torrentium, and the allochtonous North American species, Orconectes limosus. Only native European species of branchiobdellids were found: Branchiobdella astaci, B. parasita, B. pentodonta, B. hexodonta, B. italica, and B. balcanica, and this is the first report on the occurrence of these species, apart from B. italica, in Croatia. The distribution of these branchiobdellidans is compared with climatic and river drainage systems, and literature reports of populations in other countries in the region. Keywords: Branchiobdellidans, distribution, epibionts, freshwater crayfish, Croatia. Introduction stated the name balcanica due to its seniority over Pop’s (1965) proposed orientalis. At the higher taxonomic Branchiobdellidans are ectosymbiotic clitellate anne- level we have followed the common naming convention lids living primarily on freshwater astacoidean crayfish used in Brinkhurst and Gelder (2001) that uses bran- (Brinkhurst & Gelder 2001).
    [Show full text]