DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft AIS Plan for SC 08/09/2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft AIS Plan for SC 08/09/2007 South Carolina Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan Prepared in coordination with the South Carolina Aquatic Invasive Species Task Force by the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources August, 2007 Table of Contents Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. 2 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary.......................................................................................................... 5 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 6 Purpose and Scope ........................................................................................................ 6 Interaction with Other Plans ....................................................................................... 8 Define “aquatic invasive species” ................................................................................ 8 Problem Description ......................................................................................................... 9 Background ................................................................................................................... 9 Species Introductions.................................................................................................. 13 Invasive Species of Concern....................................................................................... 15 Freshwater Plants ................................................................................................... 15 Freshwater Animals.................................................................................................... 26 Mammals ................................................................................................................. 27 Reptiles..................................................................................................................... 27 Fishes........................................................................................................................ 28 Insects....................................................................................................................... 34 Crustaceans ............................................................................................................. 35 Mollusks................................................................................................................... 36 Marine/Estuarine Animals......................................................................................... 41 Fishes........................................................................................................................ 41 Crustaceans ............................................................................................................. 42 Pathways of Introduction............................................................................................... 49 Stocking........................................................................................................................ 52 Aquascaping (water gardens, plant nurseries)......................................................... 53 Aquarium/ Pet releases and escapes.......................................................................... 54 Shipping (Maritime) ................................................................................................... 54 Bait Releases................................................................................................................ 56 Aquaculture................................................................................................................. 56 Fish, shellfish and shrimp diseases............................................................................ 58 Hitchhikers (boating).................................................................................................. 59 Other Pathways........................................................................................................... 59 Jurisdictions and Responsibilities ................................................................................. 59 State Entities................................................................................................................ 59 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) ............................ 59 Department of Plant Industry, Clemson University............................................ 61 South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control ................. 63 Federal Entities ........................................................................................................... 63 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (USDA APHIS PPQ)...................................... 63 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service .................................................. 64 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service..................................... 67 U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service................................ 68 Electric Power and Water Utilities............................................................................ 69 2 Santee Cooper - need information........................................................................ 69 South Carolina Electric and Gas........................................................................... 69 Duke Energy............................................................................................................ 71 Management Goal and Objectives ................................................................................ 73 Goal:............................................................................................................................. 73 Objectives: ................................................................................................................... 73 Proposed Management Actions and Legislative Initiatives ........................................ 74 Implementation Table .................................................................................................... 77 Monitoring and Evaluation............................................................................................ 84 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 85 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms................................................................................. 89 Appendices....................................................................................................................... 91 APPENDIX A. MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES TASK FORCE ...................................................................... 92 APPENDIX B. STATE PROHIBITED SPECIES.................................................. 93 Aquatic and Wetland Plants on the South Carolina Noxious Weed List .......... 93 South Carolina Prohibited Fish............................................................................. 94 APPENDIX C. FEDERAL PROHIBITED SPECIES............................................ 95 Aquatic and Wetland Plants on the Federal Noxious Weed List (as of June 30, 2006) ......................................................................................................................... 95 Federal Prohibited Fish, Mollusks, and Crustaceans.......................................... 95 APPENDIX D. NON-INDIGENOUS SPECIES IN SOUTH CAROLINA .......... 97 USGS-NAS - Nonindigenous Aquatic Species List .............................................. 97 APPENDIX E. SUMMARY OF SOUTH CAROLINA STATE LAWS, PROGRAMS, AND REGULATIONS RELEVANT TO AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES.................................................................................................................... 102 TITLE 46 - AGRICULTURE.............................................................................. 102 TITLE 49 – WATERS, WATER RESOURCES AND DRAINAGE............... 110 TITLE 50 – FISH, GAME AND WATERCRAFT............................................ 112 APPENDIX F. SUMMARY OF FEDERAL LAWS, PROGRAMS, AND REGULATIONS RELEVANT TO AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES............... 117 APPENDIX G. SUMMARY OF INTERNATIONAL LAWS AND TREATIES RELEVANT TO AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES ............................................. 131 APPENDIX H. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED AND RESPONSES ......... 136 3 Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 Introduction It is well documented and acknowledged that non-native aquatic invasive species cause serious ecological and economic harm to water resources in many regions of the country. Congress first addressed this concern by passing the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, which targeted the control of zebra mussels in the Great Lakes. Later it passed the National Invasive Species Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-332), which greatly expanded nationwide recognition and coordination of aquatic invasive species. This law established the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force and made it responsible for developing voluntary national guidelines for ballast water management. It also charged the ANS Task Force with national coordination of aquatic invasive species through regional panels. Section 1204 of the Act specifically authorized the development of comprehensive state
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fish Consumption Guidelines: Rivers & Creeks
    FRESHWATER FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDELINES: RIVERS & CREEKS NO RESTRICTIONS ONE MEAL PER WEEK ONE MEAL PER MONTH DO NOT EAT NO DATA Bass, LargemouthBass, Other Bass, Shoal Bass, Spotted Bass, Striped Bass, White Bass, Bluegill Bowfin Buffalo Bullhead Carp Catfish, Blue Catfish, Channel Catfish,Flathead Catfish, White Crappie StripedMullet, Perch, Yellow Chain Pickerel, Redbreast Redhorse Redear Sucker Green Sunfish, Sunfish, Other Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout, Alapaha River Alapahoochee River Allatoona Crk. (Cobb Co.) Altamaha River Altamaha River (below US Route 25) Apalachee River Beaver Crk. (Taylor Co.) Brier Crk. (Burke Co.) Canoochee River (Hwy 192 to Ogeechee River) Chattahoochee River (Helen to Lk. Lanier) (Buford Dam to Morgan Falls Dam) (Morgan Falls Dam to Peachtree Crk.) * (Peachtree Crk. to Pea Crk.) * (Pea Crk. to West Point Lk., below Franklin) * (West Point dam to I-85) (Oliver Dam to Upatoi Crk.) Chattooga River (NE Georgia, Rabun County) Chestatee River (below Tesnatee Riv.) Conasauga River (below Stateline) Coosa River (River Mile Zero to Hwy 100, Floyd Co.) Coosa River <32" (Hwy 100 to Stateline, Floyd Co.) >32" Coosa River (Coosa, Etowah below Thompson-Weinman dam, Oostanaula) Coosawattee River (below Carters) Etowah River (Dawson Co.) Etowah River (above Lake Allatoona) Etowah River (below Lake Allatoona dam) Flint River (Spalding/Fayette Cos.) Flint River (Meriwether/Upson/Pike Cos.) Flint River (Taylor Co.) Flint River (Macon/Dooly/Worth/Lee Cos.) <16" Flint River (Dougherty/Baker Mitchell Cos.) 16–30" >30" Gum Crk. (Crisp Co.) Holly Crk. (Murray Co.) Ichawaynochaway Crk. Kinchafoonee Crk. (above Albany) Little River (above Clarks Hill Lake) Little River (above Ga. Hwy 133, Valdosta) Mill Crk.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Consumption Guidelines: Rivers & Creeks
    FRESHWATER FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDELINES: RIVERS & CREEKS NO RESTRICTIONS ONE MEAL PER WEEK ONE MEAL PER MONTH DO NOT EAT NO DATA Bass, LargemouthBass, Other Bass, Shoal Bass, Spotted Bass, Striped Bass, White Bass, Bluegill Bowfin Buffalo Bullhead Carp Catfish, Blue Catfish, Channel Catfish,Flathead Catfish, White Crappie StripedMullet, Perch, Yellow Chain Pickerel, Redbreast Redhorse Redear Sucker Green Sunfish, Sunfish, Other Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout, Alapaha River Alapahoochee River Allatoona Crk. (Cobb Co.) Altamaha River Altamaha River (below US Route 25) Apalachee River Beaver Crk. (Taylor Co.) Brier Crk. (Burke Co.) Canoochee River (Hwy 192 to Lotts Crk.) Canoochee River (Lotts Crk. to Ogeechee River) Casey Canal Chattahoochee River (Helen to Lk. Lanier) (Buford Dam to Morgan Falls Dam) (Morgan Falls Dam to Peachtree Crk.) * (Peachtree Crk. to Pea Crk.) * (Pea Crk. to West Point Lk., below Franklin) * (West Point dam to I-85) (Oliver Dam to Upatoi Crk.) Chattooga River (NE Georgia, Rabun County) Chestatee River (below Tesnatee Riv.) Chickamauga Crk. (West) Cohulla Crk. (Whitfield Co.) Conasauga River (below Stateline) <18" Coosa River <20" 18 –32" (River Mile Zero to Hwy 100, Floyd Co.) ≥20" >32" <18" Coosa River <20" 18 –32" (Hwy 100 to Stateline, Floyd Co.) ≥20" >32" Coosa River (Coosa, Etowah below <20" Thompson-Weinman dam, Oostanaula) ≥20" Coosawattee River (below Carters) Etowah River (Dawson Co.) Etowah River (above Lake Allatoona) Etowah River (below Lake Allatoona dam) Flint River (Spalding/Fayette Cos.) Flint River (Meriwether/Upson/Pike Cos.) Flint River (Taylor Co.) Flint River (Macon/Dooly/Worth/Lee Cos.) <16" Flint River (Dougherty/Baker Mitchell Cos.) 16–30" >30" Gum Crk.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream-Temperature Charcteristics in Georgia
    STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Prepared in cooperation with the GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA By T.R. Dyar and S.J. Alhadeff ______________________________________________________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 Prepared in cooperation with GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Atlanta, Georgia 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130 Denver Federal Center Peachtree Business Center Box 25286 Atlanta, GA 30360-2824 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and scope . 2 Previous investigations. 2 Station-identification system . 3 Stream-temperature data . 3 Long-term stream-temperature characteristics. 6 Natural stream-temperature characteristics . 7 Regression analysis . 7 Harmonic mean coefficient . 7 Amplitude coefficient. 10 Phase coefficient . 13 Statewide harmonic equation . 13 Examples of estimating natural stream-temperature characteristics . 15 Panther Creek . 15 West Armuchee Creek . 15 Alcovy River . 18 Altamaha River . 18 Summary of stream-temperature characteristics by river basin . 19 Savannah River basin . 19 Ogeechee River basin. 25 Altamaha River basin. 25 Satilla-St Marys River basins. 26 Suwannee-Ochlockonee River basins . 27 Chattahoochee River basin. 27 Flint River basin. 28 Coosa River basin. 29 Tennessee River basin . 31 Selected references. 31 Tabular data . 33 Graphs showing harmonic stream-temperature curves of observed data and statewide harmonic equation for selected stations, figures 14-211 .
    [Show full text]
  • Satilla River Basin Dissolved Oxygen Tmdls
    Satilla River Basin Dissolved Oxygen TMDLs Submitted to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Atlanta, Georgia Submitted by: Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Department Atlanta, Georgia December 2001 Satilla River Basin Dissolved Oxygen TMDLs Ochlockonee Rive Finalr Table of Contents Section Title Page TMDL Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 3 1.0 Introduction ...............................................................................................................6 2.0 Problem Understanding............................................................................................. 7 3.0 Water Quality Standards.......................................................................................... 11 4.0 Source Assessment .................................................................................................. 12 5.0 Summary of Technical Approach............................................................................ 16 6.0 Loading Capacity..................................................................................................... 30 7.0 Waste Load and Load Allocations........................................................................... 32 8.0 Margin of Safety...................................................................................................... 32 9.0 Seasonal Variation................................................................................................... 33 10.0
    [Show full text]
  • New Campaign Focuses on Industrial Stormwater Pollution
    Summer 2013 A publication of Chattahoochee Riverkeeper (CRK) RiverCHAT www.chattahoochee.org NEW CAMPAIGN FOCUSES ON INDUSTRIAL STORMWATER POLLUTION ook no further than Proctor Creek, a general permit under the starting in downtown Atlanta, for the National Pollutant Discharge Limpact of industrial stormwater pollu- Elimination System (NPDES) tion on nearby streams and neighborhoods. every five years that sets Recently selected as one of 11 waterways in out requirements for best the nation to participate in the EPA’s Urban management practices, Waters Federal Partnership, this tributary inspections, water quality to the Chattahoochee has long been plagued monitoring and reporting. by polluted runoff from sources such as CRK participated as the sole landfills, auto salvage yards, chemical and environmental representa- concrete plants. tive in the stakeholder group that negotiated and helped Controlling industrial stormwater runoff is a strengthen the permit, which daunting challenge throughout the Chat- was issued in 2012. tahoochee River basin. Our watershed is home to thousands of industrial facilities With thousands of industrial that operate equipment and store materials facilities across the state CRK’s Jess Sterling samples runoff from an industrial site in the Proctor Creek watershed. outside, which are exposed to precipitation. currently managed by a single Clean Water Act, or that it may be failing to In fact, state and federal environmental state employee, EPD is woe- meet the terms of the permit. regulatory agencies have identified the fully understaffed to ensure compliance and pollutants of concern from more than 28 enforce the permit. CRK has been told that Since last fall, we have communicated with types of industrial activities.
    [Show full text]
  • June 22-28, 2014
    Department of Natural Resources Law Enforcement Division Field Operations Weekly Report June 22-28, 2014 This report is a broad sampling of events that have taken place in the past week, but does not include all actions taken by the Law Enforcement Division. Region I- Calhoun (Northwest) FANNIN COUNTY On June 26th, Cpl. James Keener and RFC Joe Hill patrolled Rock Creek on Blue Ridge WMA for trout fishermen. The Rangers issued two citations for fishing without a trout license. On June28th, RFC Cody Jones was patrolling campsites along Blue Ridge Lake. When Officer Jones encountered two men in a campsite, one of the men immediately put his hands into his pockets. Concerned with officer safety, Officer Jones asked the man to remove his hands from his pockets. Due to the person’s nervous demeanor, he asked the man for consent to search him. The men consented to the search. Officer Jones found two knives, a glass smoking pipe containing marijuana, and a small bag containing marijuana. The knives were moved to a safe location and the marijuana and pipe were seized for evidence. The subject was cited for possession of marijuana and possession of drug related objects. MURRAY COUNTY On June 23rd, Cpl. Casey Jones and RFC Cody Jones were patrolling the Conasauga River along the Whitfield and Murray County line. The officers encountered two adult males and a juvenile fishing from a jon boat. The jon boat did not have a motor and was being propelled by paddling. While checking the vessel the officers observed a car battery attached to cables and chains.
    [Show full text]
  • Barge Traffic on Georgia's Ln.Land Waterways, 1958-1968 and Some Development Potentials
    The Development of Barge Traffic on Georgia's ln.land Waterways, 1958-1968 and Some Development Potentials by Robert E. Van Geuns INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Project E-400-500 1970 Engineering Experiment Station GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECI-iNOLOGY Atlanta, Georgia Project E-400-500 THE DEVELOPMENT OF BARGE TRAFFIC ON GEORGIA'S INLAND WATERWAYS 1958-1968 AND SOME DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALS by Robert E. Van Geuns Industrial Development Division Engineering Experiment Station GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY August 1970 Table of Contents Foreword i Acknowledgments ii Surrunary iii Introduction v FRE I GHT TRAFFIC ON GEORGIA'S INLAND WATERWAYS DURING THE 1958-1968 PERIOD 1 General Discussion 1 Total Barge Traffic on the Georgia Atlantic Coast Inland Waterways 3 Brunswick Harbor 4 Savannah Harbor 6 St . Marys River 7 Savannah River below Augusta, Georgia 7 Altamaha River 8 Satilla River 9 Gulf Coast Area: Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers 9 Columbus, Georgia, and Phenix City, Alabama, Area 10 PRESENT AND FUTURE BARGING PRACTICES ON GEORGIA'S I NLAND WATERWAYS 12 Barge Lines Operating on the Georgia Inland Waterways and Types of Tows 12 LASH Vessels and Inland Waterway Transportation 14 Fishybacking by Barge 16 ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL TRAFFIC ON EXISTING AND PROPOSED GEORGIA INLAND WATERWAYS 19 Commodities Transported on the Georgia Inland Waterways 19 Traffic Potentials of Some Proposed Georgia Inland Waterways 21 ILLUSTRATIVE MATERIAL 27 Graphs 1. U. S. Resident Population, 1958-1968 28 2. Traffic on the U. S. Inland Waterways (exclusive of the Great Lakes) and Gross National Product, Constant (1958) Dollars, 1958-1968 29 Page GraEhs (continued) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • PROPOSED Atlantic Sturgeon Critical Habitat Rivers in the Southeast U.S. 30°N Florida 80°W 75°W Table 1
    80°W 75°W Virginia Ü 0 25 50 100 150 200 Miles C1 North Carolina C2 C3 35°N 35°N CU1 C4 South Carolina Carolina DPS Units C1 Roanoke River, NC CU2 C5 C6 C2 Tar-Pamlico River, NC Georgia C3 Neuse River, NC C4 Cape Fear River, NC Northeast Cape Fear River, NC SA1 SAU1 CU1 Cape Fear River, NC C7 C5 Pee Dee River, SC Waccamaw River, SC SA2 South Atlantic DPS Units Bull Creek, SC SA3 SA1 Edisto River, SC C6 Black River, SC SA4 North Fork Edisto River, SC C7 Santee River, SC South Fork Edisto River, SC Rediversion Canal, SC SA5 North Edisto River, SC North Santee River, SC South Edisto River, SC South Santee River, SC SA2 Combahee River, SC Tailrace Canal-W Cooper River, SC Salkehatchie, River, SC Cooper River, SC SA6 SA3 Savannah River, SC/GA CU2 Wateree River, SC SAU1 Savannah River, SC/GA Congaree River, SC SA4 Ogeechee River, GA Broad River, SC SA5 Altamaha River, GA Santee River, above L Marion, SC Oconee River, GA Lake Marion, SC SA7 Ocmulgee River, GA Diversion Canal, SC SA6 Satilla River, GA Lake Moultrie, SC SA7 St. Marys, GA/FL Rediversion Canal, SC 30°N PROPOSED Atlantic Sturgeon Critical Habitat Rivers in the Southeast U.S. 30°N Florida 80°W 75°W Table 1. Proposed Critical Habitat Units and Extents of the Units. Critical Habitat Unit Name DPS Nomenclature Water Body State Upper extent River kilometers River miles Roanoke Carolina Unit 1 (C1) Roanoke River North Carolina Roanoke Rapids Dam 213 132 Tar ‐ Pamlico Carolina Unit 2 (C2) Tar ‐ Pamlico River North Carolina Rocky Mount Mill Pond Dam 199 124 Neuse Carolina Unit 3 (C3) Neuse River North Carolina Milburnie Dam 345 214 Cape Fear Carolina Unit 4 (C4) Cape Fear River North Carolina Lock and Dam #2 151 94 Northeast Cape Fear River North Carolina Upstream side of Rones Chapel Road Bridge 218 136 Cape Fear Unoccupied Carolina Unoccupied Unit 1 (CU1) Cape Fear River North Carolina Huske Lock and Dam (a.k.a.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Savannah River Watershed
    Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Savannah River Watershed Suggested Citation: Crist, P.J., R. White, M. Chesnutt, C. Scott, R. Sutter, E. Linden, P. Cutter, and G. Dobson. Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Savannah River Watershed. 2019. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. IMPORTANT INFORMATION/DISCLAIMER: This report represents a Regional Coastal Resilience Assessment that can be used to identify places on the landscape for resilience-building efforts and conservation actions through understanding coastal flood threats, the exposure of populations and infrastructure have to those threats, and the presence of suitable fish and wildlife habitat. As with all remotely sensed or publicly available data, all features should be verified with a site visit, as the locations of suitable landscapes or areas containing flood hazards and community assets are approximate. The data, maps, and analysis provided should be used only as a screening-level resource to support management decisions. This report should be used strictly as a planning reference tool and not for permitting or other legal purposes. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government, or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s partners. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation or its funding sources. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION DISCLAIMER: The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of NOAA or the Department of Commerce.
    [Show full text]
  • June 2Th, Game Wardens Adam Loudermilk and Mitchel Crump Responded to a Boating Accident on Lake Lanier
    Field Operations Weekly Report May 27– June 02, 2018 This report is a broad sampling of events that have taken place in the past week, but does not include all actions taken by the Law Enforcement Division. Region I- Acworth (Northwest) No activity to report. Region II- Gainesville (Northeast) HALL COUNTY On May 27th, Game Wardens Adam Loudermilk and Chris Hall patrolled Lake Lanier. During the patrol they issued citations to an individual for spearing game fish. The individual had speared 9 bass. The individual was also cited for being a non resident fishing on a resident license. Another individual was issued citations for taking game fish with a cast net and operating a vessel without PFD’s. On June 2th, Game Wardens Adam Loudermilk and Mitchel Crump responded to a boating accident on Lake Lanier. Upon arriving on scene they learned that the operator of the vessel had fled the scene on foot. With the assistance of Dawson County Sheriffs deputies, the operator was located a short distance from the scene. Upon investigation it was determined that the individual was under the influence of alcohol. The subject was arrested for the violation. Region III- Thomson (East Central) ELBERT COUNTY On May 28th Sgt. Brian Carter, Cpl. Julian Wilkins, and Gwfc. Tim Butler patrolled Richard B. Russell State Park. One person was cited for consuming alcohol on a state park. On June 2nd Cpl. Mark Patterson and Gwfc. Phillip Nelson conducted a vessel patrol of Lake Russell and Richard B. Russell State Park. Violations addressed during this patrol were violation of 100-foot rule, operating a vessel without completing boater education, and failure to obey regulatory marker.
    [Show full text]
  • GDOT Bridge Projects
    GDOT Bridge Projects PROJECT ID DESCRIPTION COUNTIES CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION PRELIMINARY PRELIMINARY RIGHT OF RIGHT OF WAY FUNDING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING WAY SOURCE YEAR AMOUNT YEAR AMOUNT YEAR AMOUNT 532290- CR 536/ZOAR ROAD @ BIG SATILIA CREEK TRIBUTARY Appling TBD TBD TBD TBD LOCL $14,850.00 0013818 SR 64 @ SATILLA RIVER 6 MI E OF PEARSON Atkinson 2020 $3,300,000.00 2016 $500,000.00 2019 $250,000.00 Federal 0015581 Bridge Replacement of CR 180 (Liberty Church Road) over Little Hurricane Creek. This Bacon N/A N/A 2019 $250,000.00 N/A N/A Federal bridge is structurally deficient and requires posting as cross bracing has been added at each intermediate bent, some have been replaced and concrete is spalling under deck and exposing rebar. 570720- CR 159 @ LITTLE HURRICANE CREEK NW OF ALMA Bacon TBD TBD TBD TBD LOCL $29,700.00 0007154 The proposed project would consist of replacing the bridge on SR 216 at Baker 2017 $6,454,060.87 2007 $667,568.36 2016 $290,000.00 Federal Ichawaynochaway Creek by closing the existing roadway & maintaining traffic on an off- site detour of approximately 40 miles. this project is located 12.7 miles northwest of Newton, Georgia and is 0.16 miles in length. Bridge ID: 007-0007-0 0007153 This project is the replacement of the existing bridge on SR 200@ Ichawaynochaway Baker 2018 $4,068,564.69 2012 $766,848.95 2017 $70,000.00 State Creek. The current bridge sufficency rating is 55.63 and will be replaced with a wider bridge that meets current GDOT guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • CONFLUENCE Working Together for Healthy Rivers Letter to the Editor - Protect Georgia’S Okefenokee Swamp Excerpted from Northside Neighbor
    December 2020 CONFLUENCE Working Together for Healthy Rivers Letter to the Editor - Protect Georgia’s Okefenokee Swamp Excerpted from Northside Neighbor ear Editor, Since 2018, when Twin Pines Minerals LLC first proposed mining for Dtitanium along Trail Ridge adjacent to the Okefenokee Swamp, advocates from across the nation called on science to inform federal and state decisions about the proposal. Of course, mining next to one of Georgia’s seven natural wonders, a 438,000- acre expanse of wilderness, is inherently a bad idea, especially when the sought after mineral is neither rare nor hard to obtain. It is a common mineral that is readily available elsewhere, but the Okefenokee Swamp is uncommon—the largest blackwater wetland in North America and one that has been named a Wetland of International Importance. If you are going to dig 50-foot pits in the ridge next to the swamp that regulates water levels in this natural treasure, you should understand how that activity might impact it. You gain that understanding through scientific study and inquiry. Since 1972, the federal Clean Water Act has allowed us to use science to guide such decisions, but earlier this year, the Trump Administration knee-capped that federal law. It implemented a new rule that greatly reduced the kinds of streams and wetlands that are protected. The rule changed tossed science to the dumpster. And at the proposed Twin Pines mining site, it did so with potentially devastating effects. Roughly 400 acres that were previously protected under the Clean Water Act were suddenly removed from protection. Gov.
    [Show full text]