DOCSLIB.ORG

Aquatic Habitats

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Aquatic Habitats: Lotic Habitats (Streams, Rivers) wintering habitats, and the continued activity by many deleteriously affect stream habitat if project managers are fishes during the winter, need to be considered when unaware of winter habitat requirements and stream making management decisions regarding fish habitat. How conditions. Maintenance of habitat complexity, at least at habitat is affected by land-use activity in stream catchments the scale of stream sub-basin, is recommended to ensure is discussed with reference to impacts from water the diversity of winter habitats for fish communities. withdrawal, varying discharge regimes, and erosion or © ProQuest sedimentation. Even stream enhancement practices can Lentic Habitats (Estuaries, Lakes, Ponds, Wetlands) 1576. Achieving restoration success: Myths in Descriptors: HGM/ hydrogeomorphic/ minimal effects/ bottomland hardwood forests. mitigation/ wetland functions/ wetlands/ agriculture/ Stanturf, J. A.; Schoenholtz, S. H.; Schweitzer, C. J.; and biodiversity/ geomorphology/ water levels Shepard, J. P. Abstract: Frequently a wetland in Kansas has been Restoration Ecology 9(2): 189-200. (2001) manipulated to improve farming operations or provide a NAL Call #: QH541.15.R45R515; ISSN: 10612971. reliable water source for livestock. When a wetland has Notes: doi: 10.1046/j.1526-100X.2001.009002189.x. been converted in violation of wetland provisions, Descriptors: afforestation/ functions/ Wetlands Reserve restoration or enhancement of the remaining wetland is the Program/ afforestation/ ecosystem function/ floodplain primary approach used to regain the lost wetland acreage forest/ restoration ecology/ United States and functional capacity units. In Kansas, the Natural Abstract: Restoration of bottomland hardwood forests is Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has adopted the the subject of considerable interest in the southern United Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Model procedure for assessing States, but restoration success is elusive. Techniques for wetland functions and values. Four interim HGM models establishing bottomland tree species are well developed, are being used for minimal effects determinations and for yet problems have occurred in operational programs. mitigations of converted wetlands. The Playa Depression Current plans for restoration on public and private land Model is used in the High Plains Playa region of Kansas. A suggest that as many as 200,000 hectares could be Depression Model is being applied to non-riverine type restored in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley alone. The depressions in the remainder of the state east of the playa ideal of ecological restoration is to reestablish a completely region boundary. A Slope Model is used for hillside seeps, functioning ecosystem. Although some argue that and a Riverine Model applies to wooded and herbaceous afforestation is incomplete restoration, it is a necessary and riverine settings. Structures are frequently constructed as a costly first step but not an easy task. The 1992 Wetlands component of wetland restoration and creation, and land Reserve Program in Mississippi, which failed on 90% of the entered into the Wetland Reserve Program or Conservation area, illustrates the difficulty of broadly applying our Reserve Program. The structural design may include a dike knowledge of afforestation. In our view, the focus for or other type of water impoundment structure. A water level ecological restoration should be to restore functions, rather control structure may be included in the design when the than specifying some ambiguous natural state based on objective is shallow water wetlands for wildlife. reference stands or pre-settlement forest conditions. We © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. view restoration as one element in a continuum model of sustainable forest management, allowing us to prescribe 1578. Agricultural chemicals and prairie pothole restoration goals that incorporate land-owner objectives. wetlands: Meeting the needs of the resource and the Enforcing the discipline of explicit terms of predicted values farmer - U.S. perspective. of functions, causal mechanisms and temproal response Grue, C. E.; Tome, M. W.; Messmer, T. A.; Henry, D. B.; trajectories, will hasten the development of meaningful Swanson, G. A.; and DeWeese, L. R. criteria for restoration success. We present our Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural observations about current efforts to restore bottomland Resource Conference 54: 43-58. (1989) hardwoods as nine myths, or statements of dubious origin, NAL Call #: 412.9 N814; ISSN: 0078-1355 and at best partial truth. Descriptors: agricultural activity/ prairie wetland © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ecosystems/ ecology/ agrichemicals/ semiaquatic habitat/ grassland/ chemical pollution/ United States, north central 1577. Addressing wetland issues: The Kansas NRCS region/ wetland conservation approach. © Thomson Reuters Scientific Soffran, L. M. and McDowell, J. L. In: Proceedings of the 2004 Self-Sustaining Solutions for 1579. Agricultural ponds support amphibian Streams, Wetlands, and Watersheds Conference. populations. D'Ambrosio J.L. (eds.) Knutson, Melinda G.; Richardson, William B.; St Paul, MN; pp. 215-220 ; 2004. Reineke, David M.; Gray, Brian R.; Parmelee, Jeffrey R.; Notes: Sponsors: American Society of Agricultural and Weick, Shawn E. Engineers, ASAE; Ohio State University; Ohio Department Ecological Applications 14(3): 669-684. (2004) of Natural Resources; EPA Great Lakes Grants Program; NAL Call #: QH540.E23; ISSN: 1051-0761 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; U.S. Enviromental Descriptors: wetlands/ Ambystoma tigrinum/ Caudata/ Protection Agency.; ISBN: 1892769441 agricultural ponds/ agriculture/ communities/ conservation/ 63 Effects of Agricultural Conservation Practices on Fish and Wildlife ecosystems/ freshwater ecology/ habitat management/ agricultural production, economic viability of farms, and the habitat use/ Minnesota, Houston County/ Minnesota, resulting wetland habitat quality for geese, in view of the Winona County/ land zones/ Minnesota/ nitrogen/ uncertainty concerning representation of farmers' land-use phosphorus/ ponds/ productivity/ reproduction/ reproductive decision making processes (management styles). We then success/ species diversity/ wildlife/ tiger salamander simulate shifts in land use, rice and cattle production, farm Abstract: In some agricultural regions, natural wetlands are profitability, and level of wetland habitat use by geese that scarce, and constructed agricultural ponds may represent might result from three alternative federal resource policy important alternative breeding habitats for amphibians. scenarios and three alternative farmers' management Properly managed, these agricultural ponds may effectively styles. We found changes in land-use allocation, rice and increase the total amount of breeding habitat and help to cattle production, and farm profitability resulting from the sustain populations. We studied small, constructed policy scenarios affected habitat use by geese. Policy agricultural ponds in southeastern Minnesota to assess financial incentives, market price for rice, level of rice their value as amphibian breeding sites. Our study production, and farm size were important factors that examined habitat factors associated with amphibian affected wetland habitat use by geese. The management reproduction at two spatial scales: the pond and the styles of farmers affected the quality of wetland habitat landscape surrounding the pond. We found that small when policy scenarios required rice to be grown with agricultural ponds in southeastern Minnesota provided conventional production methods. In this case, farmers, breeding habitat for at least 10 species of amphibians. particularly those who were concerned about maintaining Species richness and multispecies reproductive success farming as a way of life, continued rice production and were more closely associated with characteristics of the maintained wetland habitat for geese even when crop pond (water quality, vegetation, and predators) compared subsidies decreased over time. The public benefited from with characteristics of the surrounding landscape, but the decision making of these farmers because the individual species were associated with both pond and important indirect use value (wildlife habitat and water landscape variables. Ponds surrounded by row crops had quality) and existence value (biodiversity and cultural similar species richness and reproductive success history) of rice agriculture was maintained as an compared with natural wetlands and ponds surrounded by agroecosystem. non-grazed pasture. Ponds used for watering livestock had © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. elevated concentrations of phosphorus, higher turbidity, and a trend toward reduced amphibian reproductive 1581. Agricultural wetland management for success. Species richness was highest in small ponds, conservation goals: Invertebrates in California ponds with lower total nitrogen concentrations, tiger ricelands. salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum) present, and lacking O'Malley, Rachel Emerson fish. Multispecies reproductive success was best in ponds In: Invertebrates in freshwater wetlands of North America: with lower total nitrogen concentrations, less emergent Ecology and management/ Batzer, Darold P.; Rader, vegetation, and lacking fish. Habitat factors associated with Russell B.; and Wissinger, Scott A. higher reproductive success varied among individual
Recommended publications
  • Wetlands: an Overview of Issues

    Wetlands: an Overview of Issues

    Order Code RL33483 Wetlands: An Overview of Issues Updated November 25, 2008 Claudia Copeland Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Wetlands: An Overview of Issues Summary The 110th Congress, like earlier ones, considered numerous policy topics that involve wetlands. A few of the topics were new to this Congress, such as wetlands provisions in the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246), while most were examined but not resolved in earlier Congresses, such as applying federal regulations on private lands, wetland loss rates, and restoration and creation accomplishments. The 110th Congress also considered wetland topics at the program level, responding to legal decisions and administrative actions affecting the jurisdictional boundary limits of the federal wetland permit program in the Clean Water Act (CWA). Perhaps the issue receiving the greatest attention was determining which wetlands should be included and excluded from permit requirements under the CWA’s regulatory program, as a result of Supreme Court rulings in 2001 (in the SWANCC case) that narrowed federal regulatory jurisdiction over certain isolated wetlands, and in June 2006 (in the Rapanos-Carabell decision) that left the jurisdictional reach of the permit program to be determined on a case-by-case basis. In the 110th Congress, House and Senate committees held hearings on legislation intended to reverse the Court’s rulings (H.R. 2421, S. 1870). Wetland protection efforts continue to engender intense controversy over issues of science and policy. Controversial topics include the rate and pattern of loss, whether all wetlands should be protected in a single fashion, the effectiveness of the current suite of laws in protecting them, and the fact that 75% of remaining U.S.
  • Suisun Marsh Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model

    Suisun Marsh Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model

    Suisun Marsh Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model References In-Progress DRAFT October 27, 2010 Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, Restoration and Preservation Plan IN-PROGRESS DRAFT References / Suisun Marsh Plan Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model Adams, P.B., C.B. Grimes, J.E. Hightower, S.T. Lindley, and M.L. Moser. 2002. Status Review for North American Green Sturgeon, Acipenser medirostris. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. 49 pages. Adams, P.B. 1990. Saltmarsh Ecology. Cambridge University Press. 473 pp. Albertson, J.D., and J. Evens. 2000. California clapper rail. In: Olofson, P.R. (ed.): Baylands Ecosystem Species and Community Profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of key plants, fish, and wildlife. Goals Project (Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals), San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Oakland, California. Alberston, J. D. 1995. Ecology of the California clapper rail in South San Francisco Bay. M.S. Thesies, San Francisco State Univ. 200 pp. Allen. J.R.L. 2000. Morphodynamics of Holocene salt marshes: a review from the Atlantic and southern North Sea concepts of Europe. Quaternary Science Review 19(12):1155-1231. Allen, M.A. and T.J. Hassler. 1986. Species profiles: Life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (Pacific Southwest) - Chinook salmon. Allen, P.J. and J. Cech, Jr. 2006. Age/size effects on juvenile green sturgeon, Acipensermedirostris, oxygen consumption, growth, and osmoregulation in saline environments Environ Biol Fish 79:211–229. Applegarth, J. H. 1938. The ecology of the California clapper rail in the south arm of the San Francisco Bay.
  • Measuring Outcomes of Wetland Restoration, Enhancement, and Creation in Idaho—Assessing Potential Functions, Values, and Condition

    Measuring Outcomes of Wetland Restoration, Enhancement, and Creation in Idaho—Assessing Potential Functions, Values, and Condition

    Measuring outcomes of wetland restoration, enhancement, and creation in Idaho—Assessing potential functions, values, and condition in a watershed context Wildlife Bureau, Habitat Section Idaho Department of Fish and Game PO Box 25 Boise, Idaho 83707 Franklin Wetland Mitigation (left); Jewel Wetland (right) Chris Murphy Tim Weekley EPA Wetland Program 2012 Development Grant # CD – 00J006-01 ABSTRACT A wetland restoration monitoring and assessment program framework was developed for Idaho. The project goal was to assess outcomes of substantial governmental and private investment in wetland restoration, enhancement and creation. The functions, values, condition, and vegetation at restored, enhanced, and created wetlands on private and state lands across Idaho were retrospectively evaluated. Assessment was conducted at multiple spatial scales and intensities. Potential functions and values (ecosystem services) were rapidly assessed using the Oregon Rapid Wetland Assessment Protocol. Vegetation samples were analyzed using Floristic Quality Assessment indices from Washington State. We compared vegetation of restored, enhanced, and created wetlands with reference wetlands that occurred in similar hydrogeomorphic environments determined at the HUC 12 level. HUC 12s were classified using cluster analysis according to spatially derived hydrologic, geologic, soils, and climate data into watershed ecological groups. A primary outcome of this project was that stakeholders are better informed about how restoration benefits watershed processes, functions,
  • Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0

    Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0

    NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 115 Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0 October 1997 Seattle, Washington noaa NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment (ORCA) provides decisionmakers comprehensive, scientific information on characteristics of the oceans, coastal areas, and estuaries of the United States of America. The information ranges from strategic, national assessments of coastal and estuarine environmental quality to real-time information for navigation or hazardous materials spill response. Through its National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, ORCA uses uniform techniques to monitor toxic chemical contamination of bottom-feeding fish, mussels and oysters, and sediments at about 300 locations throughout the United States. A related NS&T Program of directed research examines the relationships between contaminant exposure and indicators of biological responses in fish and shellfish. Through the Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division (HAZMAT) Scientific Support Coordination program, ORCA provides critical scientific support for planning and responding to spills of oil or hazardous materials into coastal environments. Technical guidance includes spill trajectory predictions, chemical hazard analyses, and assessments of the sensitivity of marine and estuarine environments to spills. To fulfill the responsibilities of the Secretary of Commerce as a trustee for living marine resources, HAZMAT’s Coastal Resource Coordination program provides technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during all phases of the remedial process to protect the environment and restore natural resources at hundreds of waste sites each year.
  • Population Status of the Illinois Chorus Frog

    Population Status of the Illinois Chorus Frog

    ILLINOI S UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Large-scale Digitization Project, 2007. Population status of the Illinois chorus frog (Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis) in Madison County, Illinois: Results of 1994 surveys IDOT CONTRACT 1-5-90179 FINAL REPORT ON 1994 RESULTS John K. Tucker Center for Aquatic Ecology Illinois Natural History Survey 4134 Alby Street Alton, Illinois 62002 and David P. Philipp Center for Aquatic Ecology Illinois Natural History Survey 607 E. Peabody Champaign, Illinois 61781 December 1995 J. K. Tucker Dr. David P. Philipp Co-Principal Investigator Co-Principal Investigator Center for Aquatic Ecology Center for Aquatic Ecology Illinois Natural History Survey Illinois Natural History Survey DISCLAIMER The findings, conclusions, and views expressed herein are those of the researchers and should not be considered as the official position of the Illinois Department of Transportation. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SUPPORT This research (contract number 1-5-90179) was funded by the Illinois Department of Transportation. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A study of the biology of the Illinois chorus frog, Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis, is reported. Surveys of Madison County for choruses of the frogs located seven choruses. Choruses previously reported at Granite City and South Roxana were not relocated and are thought to be extirpated. We estimated population size to be 420 frogs in April 1994 with a juvenile survivorship of 4.5%. Mean distance for 20 recaptured frogs from point of initial capture was 0.52 km with a range of 0 to 0.9 km. Habitat preference for 48 frogs found on roads appeared to be for old field habitats in preference to areas of agriculture or lawns.
  • Calling Site Characteristics of the Illinois Chorus Frog (Pseudacris Streckeri Illinoensis) in Northeastern Arkansas

    Calling Site Characteristics of the Illinois Chorus Frog (Pseudacris Streckeri Illinoensis) in Northeastern Arkansas

    Herpetological Natural History, 9(2), 2006, pages 195–198. 195 ©2006 by La Sierra University CALLING SITE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ILLINOIS CHORUS FROG (PSEUDACRIS STRECKERI ILLINOENSIS) IN NORTHEASTERN ARKANSAS Malcolm L. McCallum1,2 Environmental Sciences Ph.D. Program, Arkansas State University, PO Box 847, State University, Arkansas 72467, USA Stanley E. Trauth, Charles McDowell, Robert G. Neal, and Tracey L. Klotz Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, PO Box 599, State University, Arkansas 72467, USA Proper management of wildlife populations We here characterize the calling perch selection by requires an in-depth knowledge of habitat require- male P. s. illinoensis as applied to the conservation ments for each species (Anderson 1985). and management of this subspecies. Microhabitat use has been largely uninvestigated in amphibians and reptiles. Without knowing how MATERIALS AND METHODS species utilize the unique matrices of microhabitats within a general habitat, a species numbers could We visited breeding choruses of P. s. illinoen- easily decline for seemingly unknown reasons. This sis located in Clay County, Arkansas on 18, 28 may be especially true if the microhabitat structure February and 4 March 2000; 13, 15, 24 February is involved in reproduction. 2001; 14, 19, 23 February and 1, 8, 15 March 2002. Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis is a highly fos- We counted calling males at selected ponds, and sorial (Brown 1978; Brown et al. 1972) hylid frog recorded abnormalities as observed. We noted endemic to sand areas from extreme northeastern amplectant and calling behaviors in 2001. Arkansas and southeastern Missouri to the Mississippi and Illinois rivers in central and south- Calling Sites ern Illinois (Smith 1966).
  • History and Status of the American Black Bear in Mississippi

    History and Status of the American Black Bear in Mississippi

    History and status of the American black bear in Mississippi Stephanie L. Simek1,5, Jerrold L. Belant1, Brad W. Young2, Catherine Shropshire3, and Bruce D. Leopold4 1Carnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA 2Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, 1505 Eastover Drive, Jackson, MS 39211, USA 3Mississippi Wildlife Federation, 517 Cobblestone Court, Suite 2, Madison, MS 39110, USA 4Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Aquaculture, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA Abstract: Historically abundant throughout Mississippi, American black bears (Ursus americanus) have declined due to habitat loss and overharvest. By the early 1900s, the bear population was estimated at ,12 individuals, and Mississippi closed black bear hunting in 1932. However, habitat loss continued and by 1980 suitable habitat was estimated at 20% (20,234 km2) of historic levels (101,171 km2) with the decline continuing. Although black bear abundance is currently unknown, a recent increase in occurrence reports and documented reproduction suggests the population may be increasing. There have been 21 reported nuisance complaints since 2006, of which 7 were apiary damage. Additionally, 31 bear mortalities were reported since 1972; 80% were human caused. Government and private organizations have emphasized education on bear ecology and human–bear coexistence, while habitat restoration through land retirement programs (e.g.,
  • Missouri's Toads and Frogs Booklet

    Missouri's Toads and Frogs Booklet

    TOADSMissouri’s andFROGS by Jeffrey T. Briggler and Tom R. Johnson, Herpetologists www.MissouriConservation.org © 1982, 2008 Missouri Conservation Commission Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Missouri Department of Conservation is available to all individuals without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. Questions should be directed to the Department of Conservation, P.O. Box 180, Jefferson City, MO 65102, (573) 751-4115 (voice) or 800-735-2966 (TTY), or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Federal Assistance, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop: MBSP-4020, Arlington, VA 22203. Cover photo: Eastern gray treefrog by Tom R. Johnson issouri toads and frogs are colorful, harmless, vocal and valuable. Our forests, prairies, rivers, swamps and marshes are Mhome to a multitude of toads and frogs, but few people know how many varieties we have, how to tell them apart, or much about their natural history. Studying these animals and sharing their stories with fellow Missourians is one of the most pleasurable and rewarding aspects of our work. Toads and frogs are amphibians—a class Like most of vertebrate animals that also includes amphibians, salamanders and the tropical caecilians, which are long, slender, wormlike and legless. frogs and Missouri has 26 species and subspecies (or toads have geographic races) of toads and frogs. Toads and frogs differ from salamanders by having an aquatic relatively short bodies and lacking tails at adulthood. Being an amphibian means that tadpole stage they live two lives: an aquatic larval or tadpole and a semi- stage and a semi-aquatic or terrestrial adult stage.
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK

    Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
  • Soil Carbon Protocol Development

    Soil Carbon Protocol Development

    Soil Carbon Protocols Public Scoping Meeting March 6, 2013 Sacramento, CA Agenda 1. Introductions 2. Overview of the Climate Action Reserve 3. Protocol development process 4. Soil carbon scoping a) Grasslands b) Peatlands 5. Feedback & discussion 2 Introductions . Climate Action Reserve − Max DuBuisson, Senior Policy Manager − Teresa Lang, Policy Manager − Sami Osman, Policy Manager . Attendees 3 CLIMATE ACTION RESERVE OVERVIEW 4 What We Do . Mission: to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by pioneering credible market-based policies and solutions . Development of high-quality, stakeholder-driven, standardized project protocols . Accredited offset project registry under the California cap- and-trade program . Serve compliance and voluntary carbon markets . Reputation for integrity and experience in providing best-in- class registry services for offset markets 5 Separation of Roles . Independent from the State of California . Reserve does not fund or develop projects . Does not take ownership of offsets . Is not an exchange . Is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization . Independent from third-party verification – Consistent with international standards – ANSI accreditation, training by Reserve or ARB 6 Serving Multiple Markets . Compliance market: – Compliance buyers under California’s cap-and-trade – Western Climate Initiative – CEQA compliance . Voluntary market: – Voluntary corporate buyers – LEED certification (USGBC) – Retail and individual buyers 7 CA Compliance Offsets . Early action: projects use Reserve protocols, and then move to compliance program through a desk verification . Compliance offsets: credits issued against compliance protocols . 4 Reserve protocols adopted for early action and adapted for compliance use – Forest, Urban Forest, Livestock, Ozone Depleting Substances . Additional protocols will be developed by ARB staff, building upon existing methodologies – Strong interest in agricultural protocols – Next up: Rice Cultivation, Coal Mine Methane – workshop in Sacramento March 28 8 Compliance Offset Market .
  • 2012 Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan – Table of Contents

    2012 Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan – Table of Contents

    Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan 2012 Brian Schweitzer, Governor Richard Opper, Director DEQ WQPBWPSTR-005 Prepared by: Water Quality Planning Bureau Watershed Protection Section Acknowledgements: The Watershed Protection Section would like to thank all of our partners and collaborators for their input and advice for this update to the Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan. Montana Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Planning Bureau 1520 E. Sixth Avenue P.O. Box 200901 Helena, MT 59620-0901 Suggested citation: Watershed Protection Section. 2012. Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan. Helena, MT: Montana Dept. of Environmental Quality. 2012 Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan – Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... v Nonpoint Source Management Plan Overview ............................................................................................ 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.0 Montana’s NPS Pollution Management Program Framework ............................................................ 1-1 1.1 Water Quality Standards and Classification ..................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Impaired Waterbodies and 303(d) List and Water Quality Assessment .........................................
  • APPENDIX B - Regulatory and Non-Regulatory Programs That Contain Bmps Applicable to Protecting and Restoring Waters Within the Basin

    APPENDIX B - Regulatory and Non-Regulatory Programs That Contain Bmps Applicable to Protecting and Restoring Waters Within the Basin

    Basin 11 Management Plan ANR June 2008 APPENDICIES APPENDIX A................................................................................................................................2 APPENDIX A.1 - Statutory Index.............................................................................................. 2 APPENDIX A.2 - Basin 11 Council Members and Technical Advisors.................................... 5 APPENDIX A.3 - Basin 11 Planning Partners ......................................................................... 10 APPENDIX A.4 - Public Meeting Held in Basin 11................................................................ 11 APPENDIX A.5 - Municipal Meetings Regarding Surface Water Classification and Typing 19 APPENDIX A.6 - Functions and Values of Selected Wetlands............................................... 20 APPENDIX A.7 - Summary of Physical, Chemical, and Biological Assessments of Basin 11 Completed or Underway................................................................................................... 23 APPENDIX A.8 - Threatened and Endangered Species in Basin 11 ....................................... 26 APPENDIX A.9 - Dams ........................................................................................................... 32 APPENDIX A.10 - Agriculture in Basin 11............................................................................. 35 APPENDIX A.11 - Maps of Basin 11 with Proposed Typing and Classification.................... 49 APPENDIX A.12 - Description of Proposed Water Management