DOCSLIB.ORG

FY 2007 Monitoring Report As Conversions Are Completed and Data Is Available

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FY 2007 Monitoring Report As Conversions Are Completed and Data Is Available 100 Years of Caring for the Land and Serving People The Ouachita National Forest celebrated the forest centennial in 2007. The Ouachita National Forest, originally called the Arkansas National Forest, was created through an executive order issued by President Theodore Roosevelt on December 18, 1907. At first, the Arkansas National Forest consisted solely of reserved public domain lands (part of the Louisiana Purchase) south of the Arkansas River. The 1911 Weeks Law, which authorized Federal purchase of forest lands in the eastern part of the United States, was later used to add thousands of acres of cutover or farmed out lands to the national forest. The largest increases in national forest ownership occurred from 1933 to 1941. In April 1926, President Coolidge changed the name of the Arkansas National Forest to the Ouachita National Forest. He also proposed expanding the national forest and fulfilled this proposal in December 1930 by extending the Ouachita National Forest into Oklahoma. Today, the Ouachita National Forest consists of nearly 1.8 million acres located in thirteen Arkansas counties and two Oklahoma counties. It is the largest and oldest national forest in the Southern Region of the United States. The Forest includes 60 recreation areas, 6 wilderness areas, 2 national wild and scenic rivers, 700 miles of trails, several scenic byways, many special interest (botanical, scenic) areas, abundant historic and prehistoric resources, and habitat for nine federally listed and hundreds of other plant and animal species. It also provides timber and other forest products to the Nation; offers diverse hunting and fishing opportunities; and is the source of high quality drinking water for hundreds of thousands of people in Arkansas and Oklahoma. Fiscal Year 2007 Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the Land and Resource Management Plan Ouachita National Forest Arkansas Counties: Ashley, Garland, Hot Spring, Howard, Logan, Montgomery, Perry, Pike, Polk, Saline, Scott, Sebastian, Yell Oklahoma Counties: Leflore, McCurtain United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service July 2008 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (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 to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. TABLE OF CONTENTS MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORT SUMMARY.................................................................. 1 PART 1 - TERRESTRIAL, RIPARIAN, AND AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS (INCLUDING AIR QUALITY)..................................................................................................................................................... 9 PART 2 – STRATEGIC DIRECTION ....................................................................................................... 80 PART 3 - DESIGN CRITERIA AND IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................... 94 PART 4 - RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................... 96 APPENDIX A – LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS AND PREPARERS ........................................................ 100 APPENDIX B – CONSERVATION EDUCATION ACTIVITIES.......................................................... 101 APPENDIX C – APPROVED COMMUNICATION SITES .................................................................. 106 APPENDIX D – PROPOSED AND PROBABLE ACTIVITIES.............................................................. 107 APPENDIX E – IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING REVIEW ....................................................... 109 Fiscal Year 2007 Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the Land and Resource Management Plan Ouachita National Forest Introduction The 2005 Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) for the Ouachita National Forest provides broad, strategic direction for managing the land and its resources. The Forest Plan direction provides a framework to guide future management decisions and actions. Over time it is necessary to assess progress toward achieving the desired conditions, meeting the objectives, and adhering to the design criteria in the Forest Plan. A cycle of adaptation is formed when management direction in the Forest Plan is implemented, reviewed, and then adjusted in response to knowledge gained through monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring is conducted by Forest Service resource specialists; Forest Service research scientists; universities; state, federal, and resource agencies; and other cooperators. Persons who contributed data, assisted in compilation of data, or helped to prepare this Monitoring and Evaluation Report (M&E Report) are listed in Appendix A. Purpose of the Monitoring and Evaluation Report The 2005 Forest Plan was completed under the 1982 National Forest Management Act planning regulations (36 CFR 219). These regulations specify that forest plan “implementation shall be evaluated on a sample basis to determine how well objectives have been met and how closely management standards and guidelines have been applied. Based upon this evaluation, the interdisciplinary team shall recommend to the Forest Supervisor such changes in management direction, revisions, or amendments to the forest plan as are deemed necessary.” Thus, the purpose of the M&E Report is to identify needed changes to management on the Ouachita National Forest (Ouachita NF) utilizing the results of monitoring and evaluation. The M&E Report combines the results of the evaluations that occur throughout the year into a summary document. Based on the data gathered during monitoring, trends can be established and management corrections made, as necessary. Monitoring helps to track progress toward achievement of Desired Conditions (Plan, pages 6 - 43) and Plan Objectives (Plan, pages 58 - 69); implementation of Design Criteria (Plan, pages 73 - 122); and occurrence of environmental effects as predicted. Monitoring indicates whether Ouachita NF management is addressing plan priorities. The evaluation of monitoring results allows the Forest Supervisor to initiate actions to improve compliance with management direction where needed, improve cost effectiveness, and determine if any amendments to the Forest Plan are needed to improve resource management. About every five years, all of the information collected in the M&E reports is accumulated into a comprehensive evaluation report that results in periodic updates of the Forest Plan. Organization of the Monitoring and Evaluation Report The Monitoring Report is structured similarly to the Forest Plan because the M&E Report evaluates implementation and effectiveness of the Forest Plan. The Monitoring Report is prefaced by a Summary of the four main parts to the Report. Monitoring of desired conditions, including actions, outcomes, or resources to be measured and the frequency of measurement and reporting, is included in Part 1 of the Plan and in the M&E Report. Performance indicators to be monitored against Forest Plan objectives, including the frequency of measurement and reporting, are presented in Part 2 of the M&E Report. Project-level adaptation, triggered by reviews of selected projects, is focused on the effectiveness of project design criteria and is presented in Part 3 of the M&E Report. Part 4 of the M&E Report contains specific recommendations for the next fiscal year (FY). 1 Monitoring and Evaluation Report Summary Part I: Desired Conditions Monitoring of desired conditions allows the Ouachita NF to accumulate data annually that are then used to establish trends and assess progress towards achievement of the desired condition statements set out by the forest plan. Through repeated measurement, trend lines may be established and used to determine if programs should be adjusted or if changes in Forest Plan direction are needed. Annual monitoring results are reported each year in the M & E Report and every five years a comprehensive review is conducted. Monitoring of desired conditions for terrestrial ecosystems; riparian and aquatic ecosystems; proposed, threatened, endangered and sensitive species; geologic resources; landownership pattern; heritage resources; public use and enjoyment; facility operation and maintenance; commodity, commercial, and special uses; and fire (community protection and safety) for FY 2007 are summarized below. Desired Conditions for Terrestrial Ecosystems The Ouachita NF continues to transition to new vegetation inventory databases and activity tracking systems that will allow monitoring and analysis of the effects of fire and silvicultural treatments to the vegetation communities. Silvicultural treatments were applied to 14,800 acres within the Pine-Oak Forest ecosystem, 319 acres within the Pine-Oak Woodland ecosystem; and 2,231 acres within the Shortleaf Pine, Bluestem Grass ecosystem. Salvage
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fishing Opportunities Ouachita National Forest
    FISHING OPPORTUNITIES Page 1 of 27 IN THE RA-24 OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST FISHING OPPORTUNITIES Page 2 of 27 IN THE RA-24 OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST This page intentionally left blank FISHING OPPORTUNITIES Page 3 of 27 IN THE RA-24 OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST RIVERS ....................................Page • Ouachita........................................................3 • Fourche LaFave ...........................................4 • South Fork Fourche LaFave.......................4 • Little Missouri ..............................................5 • Poteau............................................................6 • Glover............................................................6 • Caddo ............................................................7 • Cossatot.........................................................7 • Mountain Fork .............................................8 • Petit Jean.......................................................9 LAKES/PONDS ………………Page…..Location (Quad) • Dry Fork Lake..............................................10....................C-15 • Cedar Lake ...................................................11....................C-3 • Hunter's Pool ...............................................12....................K-3 • Lake Sylvia ...................................................13....................C-18 • Moss Creek Pond .........................................14....................A-11, A-12* • Rock Creek Lake..........................................14....................B-17 • Little Bear Creek
    [Show full text]
  • FISHING OPPORTUNITIES in the OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST Page 1 of 24
    FISHING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST Page 1 of 24 FISHING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST FISHING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST Page 2 of 24 RIVERS Ouachita Fourche LaFave South Fork Fourche LaFave Little Missouri Poteau Glover Caddo Cossatot Mountain Fork Petit Jean LAKES-PONDS Quad Map Location Dry Fork Lake ..............................................C-15 Cedar Lake ...................................................C-3 Hunter's Pool ...............................................K-3 Lake Sylvia ...................................................C-18 Moss Creek Pond .........................................A-11, A-12* Rock Creek Lake ..........................................B-17 Little Bear Creek Lake ................................C-16 Cove Creek Lake ..........................................B-16 Huston Lake .................................................B-17 Macedonia Pond ...........................................D-10 North Fork Lake ..........................................E-10 Shady Lake ...................................................G-8 Caddo Pond ..................................................F-12, F-13, G-12* Crooked Branch Lake .................................C-3 John Burns Pond ..........................................D-11 Mauldin Ponds ............................................E-11 Old Forester Pond ........................................C-10 Story Pond ....................................................D-12 Cedar Creek Lake
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003
    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Fatmucket (Lampsilis Powellii I
    Arkansas Fatmucket (Lampsilis powellii I. Lea, 1852) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Arkansas Ecological Services Field Office Conway, Arkansas 5-YEAR REVIEW Arkansas Fatmucket (Lampsilis powellii I. Lea, 1852) I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Methodology used to complete review Public notice of the initiation of this 5-year review was given in the Federal Register on September 8, 2006 (71 FR 53127-53129) and a 60 day comment period was opened. During the comment period, we did not receive any additional information about Arkansas fatmucket (Lampsilis powelllii) other than specific information from biologists familiar with the species. This review was completed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Arkansas Field Office. Arkansas fatmucket only occurs in the state of Arkansas. Literature and documents on file at the Arkansas Field Office were used for this review. All recommendations resulting from this review are a result of thoroughly reviewing the best available information on the Arkansas fatmucket and the reviewer’s expertise as one of the leading authorities on this species. Comments and suggestions regarding the review were received from Arkansas Field Office supervisors and peer reviews from outside the Service (see Appendix A). No part of the review was contracted to an outside party. B. Reviewers Lead Region – Southeast Region: Nikki Lamp, (404) 679-7118 Lead Field Office – Conway, Arkansas: Chris Davidson, (501) 513-4481 C. Background 1. Federal Register Notice initiating this review: September 8, 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 5-Year Review of 14 Southeastern Species. (71 FR 53127) 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Arkansas Fishes Thomas M
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 27 Article 11 1973 Checklist of Arkansas Fishes Thomas M. Buchanan University of Arkansas – Fort Smith Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Population Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Buchanan, Thomas M. (1973) "Checklist of Arkansas Fishes," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 27 , Article 11. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol27/iss1/11 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 11 Checklist of Arkansas Fishes THOMAS M.BUCHANAN Department ot Natural Science, Westark Community College, Fort Smith, Arkansas 72901 ABSTRACT Arkansas has a large, diverse fish fauna consisting of 193 species known to have been collected from the state's waters. The checklist is an up-to-date listing of both native and introduced species, and is intended to correct some of the longstanding and more recent erroneous Arkansas records.
    [Show full text]
  • 502642 Tulane Zoology & Botany Book.Indd
    A NEW DARTER OF SUBGENUS OLIGOCEPHALUS, GENUS ETHEOSTOMA, FROM SOUTHEASTERN TEXAS AND SOUTHWESTERN LOUISIANA ROYAL D. SUTTKUS Tulane University Biodiversity Research Institute, Belle Chasse, LA 70037-3098 HENRY L. BART, JR. Tulane University Biodiversity Research Institute, Belle Chasse, LA 70037-3098 AND DAVID A. ETNIER University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996-1610 ABSTRACT A new species of darter of subgenus Oligocephalus, genus Etheostoma, is herein de- scribed relative to three similar and geographically proximal Oligocephalus – E. aspri- gene (Forbes), E. collettei Birdsong & Knapp, and E. swaini (Jordan) – largely con- fined to the Gulf Coastal Plain and the Central Lowlands of the eastern United States. The new species occurs in the Neches, Sabine and Calcasieu river systems of east Tex- as and western Louisiana. It is most closely related to E. asprigene. It differs from all of the above species primarily in having a longer spinous dorsal fin base and a narrow- er transpelvic width. Nuptial males of the new species differ in breeding coloration and have significantly shorter snouts and caudal peduncles, and narrower bodies than nuptial males of E. asprigene and other Oligocephalus compared. The new species is most similar to E. aprigene in physiognomy and body pigmentation. Keywords: New species, Etheostoma asprigene, Oligocephalus, Neches River, Sabine River, Calcasieu River INTRODUCTION In this paper we describe a new species of darter of subgenus Oligocephalus, genus Etheostoma, and diagnose it relative to three similar and geographically proxi- mal Oligocephalus–E. asprigene (Forbes), E. collettei Birdsong & Knapp, and E. swaini (Jordan). We compare meristic and morphometric data of the new species with that of E.
    [Show full text]
  • Life History and Population Biology of the State Special Concern Ouachita Creekshell, Villosa Arkansasensis (I
    Final Report Life History and Population Biology of the State Special Concern Ouachita Creekshell, Villosa arkansasensis (I. Lea 1862) Principal Investigator: Alan D. Christian, Ph.D., Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, P.O. Box 599. State University, AR 72467; mailto:[email protected]; Phone: (870)-972-3296; Fax: (870) -972-2638 Co-Principal Investigators: Jerry L. Farris, Ph.D., Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, P.O. Box 599. State University, AR 72467. John L. Harris, Ph. D., Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, P. O. Box 599, State University, AR 72467; [email protected] ; Phone: (501) 569-2282 Graduate Student Researcher Sara E. Seagraves, Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, P.O. Box 599. State University, AR 72467 Submitted to: William R. Posey II Malacologist / Commercial Fisheries Biologist Arkansas Game and Fish Commission P.O. Box 6740 Perrytown, AR 71801 11 February 2007 Villosa arkansasensis Report This is the final report to the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission on the Life History and Population Biology of the state special concern Ouachita creekshell, Villosa arkansasensis (Lea 1862). The information within this report belongs to both the principle investigators and the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission and should not be used in publication without the consent of both parties. The purpose of this research is to: 1. Initiate studies of the status of the Ouachita creekshell mussel (Villosa arkansasensis) within its known range to include its relative abundance, population demographics, and habitat use; 2. Identify the suitable host fish for the Ouachita creekshell mussel (Villosa arkansasensis) to include timing of reproduction and identification of host fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Montgomery County News PO Box 187
    Local coverage since 1951 See Benefit Bass MONTGOMERY Tournament winners COUNTY NEWS Page 9 USPS 361 - 700 • 75¢ • Vol. 66 • Issue 14 • Thursday, April 6, 2017 • 1 Section • 10 Pages • Published in Mount Ida, Arkansas Local Briefs A place to rest your weary bones struct 12 new shelter along 120 miles on the western end of the trail. They would Extension Office to join nine trails already in use along the trail. Members of FoOT received the go ahead offer healthy eating to proceed following the completion of the class necessary reviews and studies. The first shelter, built just off Highway 71 on the The Montgomery County Ex- Foran Gap Trailhead, was completed in tension, Jenn’s Gourmet Special- March 2013. ties, abd the Alzheimer’s Associ- The twelfth and final shelter was com- ation present a cooking class for pleted November 2016 on top of Suck those wanting to eat healthier. Mountain. The class will be held at Robert Cavanaugh, a Vice President of Jenn’s Gourmet Galley on Mon- FoOT, stated that volunteers learned alot day, April 17 from 9 a.m. - 1 p.m. as they worked their way through the Registration is $35. construction of 12 shelters. He explained the class is limited to 12 par- that the first one took four and a half days ticipants. Register by calling the to complete and by the time they finished Extension Office at 870-867-2311 the shelter on Suck Mountain they had by Monday, April 10. shortened the construction time to two and a half days.
    [Show full text]
  • The Caddo Indian Burial Ground (3MN386), Norman, Arkansas
    Volume 2003 Article 21 2003 The Caddo Indian Burial Ground (3MN386), Norman, Arkansas Ann M. Early Arkansas Archaeological Survey Mary Beth D. Trubitt Arkansas Archeological Survey, HSU Research Station, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Early, Ann M. and Trubitt, Mary Beth D. (2003) "The Caddo Indian Burial Ground (3MN386), Norman, Arkansas," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2003, Article 21. https://doi.org/10.21112/.ita.2003.1.21 ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2003/iss1/21 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Caddo Indian Burial Ground (3MN386), Norman, Arkansas Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2003/iss1/21 The Caddo Indian Burial Ground (3MN386), Norman, Arkansas Ann M.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    Gage, Hannah From: Casey Vickerson <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 8:57 AM To: Gage, Hannah Cc: Lester, Guy; Stephen Cain Subject: 316(b) 122.21(r) Final Reports Attachments: McClellan Final 122.21r Information Document - 6-27-16.pdf; Fitzhugh Final 122.21r Information Document - 6-28-16.pdf; Bailey Final 122.21r Information 6-27-16 (1).pdf Good morning, Hannah, Please see the attached 316(b) 122.21(r) Final Reports to comply with permit requirements for AECC’s Bailey facility (Permit No. AR0000400, Part II.13), Fitzhugh facility (Permit No. AR001759, Part II.14), and McClellan facility (Permit No. AR0000841, Part II.13). Thanks, Casey Vickerson Environmental Engineer II Arkansas Electric Coop. Corp. 501.570.2102 1 John L . McClellan Generating Station 316(b) 122.21(r) Information Final Report, May , 20 1 6 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) prepared this report with the assistance of t he following individuals and organizations, under contract to t he Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) : Mr. David Bailey Ron Ulman and Associates 8819 Trafalgar C t. Springfield, VA 22151 Mr. Dan Bigbee EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. PBC 221 Sun Valley Boulevard, Suite D Lincoln, NE 68521 Mr. Kent Dixon EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. PBC 221 Sun Valley Boulevard, Suite D Lincoln, NE 68521 Mr. Nate Olken Alden Research Laboratory Inc. 30 Shrewsbury St., Holden, MA 01520 - 1843 iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document is submitted in compliance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) new f inal §316(b) regulations (“Rule”) for existing facilities that bec a me effective on October 14, 2014 for Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation ’s ( AECC ) John L.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana
    Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings Volume 1 Number 61 2021 Article 3 March 2021 Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana Michael H. Doosey University of New Orelans, [email protected] Henry L. Bart Jr. Tulane University, [email protected] Kyle R. Piller Southeastern Louisiana Univeristy, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Biodiversity Commons Recommended Citation Doosey, Michael H.; Bart, Henry L. Jr.; and Piller, Kyle R. (2021) "Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana," Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings: No. 61. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings/vol1/iss61/3 This Original Research Article is brought to you for free and open access by Volunteer, Open Access, Library Journals (VOL Journals), published in partnership with The University of Tennessee (UT) University Libraries. This article has been accepted for inclusion in Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings by an authorized editor. For more information, please visit https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings. Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana Abstract Since the publication of Freshwater Fishes of Louisiana (Douglas, 1974) and a revised checklist (Douglas and Jordan, 2002), much has changed regarding knowledge of inland fishes in the state. An updated reference on Louisiana’s inland and coastal fishes is long overdue. Inland waters of Louisiana are home to at least 224 species (165 primarily freshwater, 28 primarily marine, and 31 euryhaline or diadromous) in 45 families. This checklist is based on a compilation of fish collections records in Louisiana from 19 data providers in the Fishnet2 network (www.fishnet2.net).
    [Show full text]