DOCSLIB.ORG

Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Table of Contents ATUR F N AL O R T E N S E O U M R T C R E A S STATE OF MICHIGAN P E DNR D M ICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Michigan State Forest Management Plan 2008 DRAFT FOREST, MINERAL, AND FIRE MANAGEMENT and WILDLIFE DIVISIONS www.michigan.gov/dnr/ This page was intentionally left blank. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOREST, MINERAL, AND FIRE MANAGEMENT and WILDLIFE DIVISIONS DRAFT January 2008 Michigan State Forest Management Plan David L. Price, Editor MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) MISSION STATEMENT “The Michigan Department of Natural Resources is committed to the conservation, protection, management, use and enjoyment of the State’s natural resources for current and future generations.” NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION (NRC) STATEMENT The Natural Resources Commission, as the governing body for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, provides a strategic framework for the DNR to effectively manage your resources. The NRC holds monthly, public meetings throughout Michigan, working closely with its constituencies in establishing and improving natural resources management policy. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES NON DISCRIMINATION STATEMENT The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) provides equal opportunities for employment and access to Michigan’s natural resources. Both State and Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, disability, age, sex, height, weight or marital status under the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 as amended (MI PA 453 and MI PA 220, Title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, and the Americans with Disabilities Act). If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire additional information, please write: HUMAN RESOURCES Or MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS Or OFFICE FOR DIVERSITY AND CIVIL RIGHTS MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CADILLAC PLACE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE PO BOX 30028 3054 W. GRAND BLVD., SUITE 3-600 4040 NORTH FAIRFAX DRIVE LANSING MI 48909-7528 DETROIT MI 48202 ARLINGTON VA 22203 ATUR F N AL O R T E For information or assistance on this publication, contact the MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, S N E O U M R T C Fisheries Division, PO BOX 30446, LANSING, MI 48909, or call 517-373-1280. R E A S P E DNR D TTY/TDD: 711 (Michigan Relay Center) M ICHIGAN Suggested Citation Format Michigan Department of Natural Resources. 2008. Draft Michigan state forest management plan. D.L. Price, editor. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division and Wildlife Division, Lansing. ii Draft Michigan State Forest Management Plan January 2008 Table of Contents List of Figures ...........................................................................................................vii List of Tables ........................................................................................................... viii List of Appendices...................................................................................................... x Preface and Acknowledgements................................................................................xi Executive Summary..................................................................................................xii Components of the State Forest Management Plan .................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose and Use of the Plan......................................................................................... 1 1.2 Plan Organization and Relationship to other Plans ....................................................... 3 1.3 DNR State Forestland Management System................................................................. 5 1.4 Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goals for the State Forest.............................................. 6 1.4.1 Mission and Vision for the State Forest................................................................... 6 1.4.2 Strategic Goals........................................................................................................ 7 Ecological Goals ........................................................................................................... 7 Social-Economic Goals ................................................................................................. 7 1.5 Statewide Ownerships and Management Unit Boundaries ........................................... 8 1.6 Plan Implementation and Communications ................................................................... 8 Figures................................................................................................................................. 9 Tables ................................................................................................................................ 11 Forest History .......................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Pre-European Settlement History (Glaciation to 1800s).............................................. 12 2.2 Post-European Settlement History (1600s to 1900) .................................................... 14 2.3 Contemporary History (1900 to the present) ............................................................... 17 Figures............................................................................................................................... 21 Tables ................................................................................................................................ 26 Current Forest Conditions, Uses, and Trends.......................................................... 29 3.1 General Land Cover and Forest Resource Base......................................................... 30 3.1.1 Statewide Forest Conditions and Trends .............................................................. 30 3.1.2 DNR-Owned Forestland Conditions and Trends ................................................... 33 Aspen Association....................................................................................................... 34 Northern Hardwoods ................................................................................................... 34 Jack Pine..................................................................................................................... 35 Red Pine ..................................................................................................................... 36 Mixed Swamp Conifers ............................................................................................... 37 Oak Association .......................................................................................................... 37 Cedar Swamp ............................................................................................................. 38 White Pine................................................................................................................... 39 Hemlock ...................................................................................................................... 39 Lowland Hardwoods.................................................................................................... 40 Grasslands .................................................................................................................. 40 3.1.3 Timber Harvest Trends.......................................................................................... 41 Aspen ..........................................................................................................................41 iii Draft Michigan State Forest Management Plan January 2008 Jack Pine..................................................................................................................... 42 Northern Hardwoods................................................................................................... 42 Red Pine ..................................................................................................................... 43 Oak.............................................................................................................................. 43 Minor Cover Types...................................................................................................... 43 3.2 Forest Health Conditions and Trends.......................................................................... 44 3.2.1 Cervid Herbivory.................................................................................................... 45 3.2.2 Emerald Ash Borer ................................................................................................ 46 Quarantine Considerations ......................................................................................... 47 3.2.3 Beech Bark Disease.............................................................................................. 47 3.2.4 Eastern Larch Beetle and Larch Caseborer .......................................................... 48 3.2.5 Gypsy Moth ........................................................................................................... 48 3.2.6 Oak Wilt................................................................................................................. 48 3.2.7 Red-Headed Pine Sawfly ...................................................................................... 49 3.2.8 Jack Pine Budworm..............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Indiana Species April 2007
    Fishes of Indiana April 2007 The Wildlife Diversity Section (WDS) is responsible for the conservation and management of over 750 species of nongame and endangered wildlife. The list of Indiana's species was compiled by WDS biologists based on accepted taxonomic standards. The list will be periodically reviewed and updated. References used for scientific names are included at the bottom of this list. ORDER FAMILY GENUS SPECIES COMMON NAME STATUS* CLASS CEPHALASPIDOMORPHI Petromyzontiformes Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio lamprey lampreys Ichthyomyzon castaneus chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon fossor northern brook lamprey SE Ichthyomyzon unicuspis silver lamprey Lampetra aepyptera least brook lamprey Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey Petromyzon marinus sea lamprey X CLASS ACTINOPTERYGII Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser fulvescens lake sturgeon SE sturgeons Scaphirhynchus platorynchus shovelnose sturgeon Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula paddlefish paddlefishes Lepisosteiformes Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus oculatus spotted gar gars Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus shortnose gar Amiiformes Amiidae Amia calva bowfin bowfins Hiodonotiformes Hiodontidae Hiodon alosoides goldeye mooneyes Hiodon tergisus mooneye Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel freshwater eels Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris skipjack herring herrings Alosa pseudoharengus alewife X Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense threadfin shad Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum central stoneroller
    [Show full text]
  • Data Sheets on Quarantine Pests
    EPPO quarantine pest Prepared by CABI and EPPO for the EU under Contract 90/399003 Data Sheets on Quarantine Pests Oligonychus perditus IDENTITY Name: Oligonychus perditus Pritchard & Baker Synonyms: Oligonychus chamaecyparisae Ma & Yuan Taxonomic position:Arachnida: Acarina: Prostigmata: Tetranychidae Common names: Byakushin-hadani (Japanese) Notes on taxonomy and nomenclature: O. perditus is very closely related to the cosmopolitan and morphologically variable O. ununguis (Jacobi), but Mitrofanov et al. (1975) did not regard it as part of the "ununguis complex". Bayer computer code: OLIGPD EPPO A1 list: No. 217 EU Annex designation: II/A1 HOSTS All known host plants are conifers, mainly of the family Cupressaceae: Chamaecyparis pisifera, Juniperus chinensis, J. formosana, Thuja orientalis. Taxus cuspidata and Cryptomeria japonica have also been recorded as hosts. In a glasshouse environment, the mite was successfully reared on J. communis, J. x media, J. sabina, J. virginiana and Thuja orientalis. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION EPPO region: Netherlands (intercepted only). Asia: China (Ma & Yuan, 1976), Hong Kong, Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu), Korea Republic (Lee et al., 1989), Taiwan (Lo & Ho, 1989). North America: USA (intercepted only). The species was described on intercepted material by Pritchard & Baker (1955). EU: Absent. BIOLOGY No research has been done on biological or ecological features of O. perditus such as reproduction rate, predators or overwintering capacity. These are most likely to be comparable with those of O. ununguis. On intercepted bonsai material of J. chinensis in the Netherlands, O. perditus overwintered in the egg stage, as O. ununguis does also. In Japan, diapause was induced in O. ununguis by the influence of two factors: day length and food supply.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Endangered species From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main page Contents For other uses, see Endangered species (disambiguation). Featured content "Endangered" redirects here. For other uses, see Endangered (disambiguation). Current events An endangered species is a species which has been categorized as likely to become Random article Conservation status extinct . Endangered (EN), as categorized by the International Union for Conservation of Donate to Wikipedia by IUCN Red List category Wikipedia store Nature (IUCN) Red List, is the second most severe conservation status for wild populations in the IUCN's schema after Critically Endangered (CR). Interaction In 2012, the IUCN Red List featured 3079 animal and 2655 plant species as endangered (EN) Help worldwide.[1] The figures for 1998 were, respectively, 1102 and 1197. About Wikipedia Community portal Many nations have laws that protect conservation-reliant species: for example, forbidding Recent changes hunting , restricting land development or creating preserves. Population numbers, trends and Contact page species' conservation status can be found in the lists of organisms by population. Tools Extinct Contents [hide] What links here Extinct (EX) (list) 1 Conservation status Related changes Extinct in the Wild (EW) (list) 2 IUCN Red List Upload file [7] Threatened Special pages 2.1 Criteria for 'Endangered (EN)' Critically Endangered (CR) (list) Permanent link 3 Endangered species in the United
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Assessment of Amblyseius Andersoni (Chant) As a Potential Biocontrol Agent Against Phytophagous Mites Occurring on Coniferous Plants
    insects Article A Preliminary Assessment of Amblyseius andersoni (Chant) as a Potential Biocontrol Agent against Phytophagous Mites Occurring on Coniferous Plants Ewa Puchalska 1,* , Stanisław Kamil Zagrodzki 1, Marcin Kozak 2, Brian G. Rector 3 and Anna Mauer 1 1 Section of Applied Entomology, Department of Plant Protection, Institute of Horticultural Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences—SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland; [email protected] (S.K.Z.); [email protected] (A.M.) 2 Department of Media, Journalism and Social Communication, University of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszów, Sucharskiego 2, 35-225 Rzeszów, Poland; [email protected] 3 USDA-ARS, Great Basin Rangelands Research Unit, 920 Valley Rd., Reno, NV 89512, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Simple Summary: Amblyseius andersoni (Chant) is a predatory mite frequently used as a biocontrol agent against phytophagous mites in greenhouses, orchards and vineyards. In Europe, it is an indige- nous species, commonly found on various plants, including conifers. The present study examined whether A. andersoni can develop and reproduce while feeding on two key pests of ornamental coniferous plants, i.e., Oligonychus ununguis (Jacobi) and Pentamerismus taxi (Haller). Pinus sylvestris L. pollen was also tested as an alternative food source for the predator. Both prey species and pine pollen were suitable food sources for A. andersoni. Although higher values of population parameters Citation: Puchalska, E.; were observed when the predator fed on mites compared to the pollen alternative, we conclude that Zagrodzki, S.K.; Kozak, M.; pine pollen may provide adequate sustenance for A.
    [Show full text]
  • Spruce Spider Mite
    2/16/2021 Spruce Spider Mite HOME | SPRUCE SPIDER MITE Spruce Spider Mite The spruce spider mite attacks spruce, arborvitae, juniper, hemlock, pine, Douglas-fir, and occasionally other conifers. ARTICLES | UPDATED: MARCH 23, 2017 Oligonychus ununguis (Jacobi) Introduction The spruce spider mite is considered one of the most destructive spider mites in the United States. It injures the foliage of spruce, arborvitae, juniper, hemlock, pine, Douglas-fir, and occasionally other USDA Forest Service - Region 4 - Intermountain, USDA conifers. Dwarf Alberta Forest Service, Bugwood.org spruce, Picea glauca 'Conica', is one of this pest's preferred host plants. Description After hatching, the young, pale green mites called larvae resemble adults except they are smaller and have only three pairs of legs. As the mites mature, they shed their skins three times before becoming adults. Adults and nymphs have four pairs of legs and are dark green to nearly black with the body surface clothed with salmon pink-colored spines (Fig. 1). The adult's legs are also salmon pink. https://extension.psu.edu/spruce-spider-mite 1/3 2/16/2021 Spruce Spider Mite Life History This key pest overwinters as brown eggs tucked in and around bud scales and at the base of needles. These hatch in the spring, usually before new growth starts. A generation from egg to adult may require 15-20 days and generations frequently overlap so that all stages may be found on host plants during late spring and early summer. There are 7-10 generations produced each year. Damage This species damages host plants by sucking plant fluid from needles as they feed.
    [Show full text]
  • Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(S): Noel M
    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(s): Noel M. Burkhead Source: BioScience, 62(9):798-808. 2012. Published By: American Institute of Biological Sciences URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.5 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Articles Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 NOEL M. BURKHEAD Widespread evidence shows that the modern rates of extinction in many plants and animals exceed background rates in the fossil record. In the present article, I investigate this issue with regard to North American freshwater fishes. From 1898 to 2006, 57 taxa became extinct, and three distinct populations were extirpated from the continent. Since 1989, the numbers of extinct North American fishes have increased by 25%. From the end of the nineteenth century to the present, modern extinctions varied by decade but significantly increased after 1950 (post-1950s mean = 7.5 extinct taxa per decade).
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Pests
    IAEA-TECDOC-1082 XA9950282--W6 Irradiationa as quarantine treatmentof arthropod pests Proceedings finala of Research Co-ordination Meeting organizedthe by Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture and held Honolulu,in Hawaii, November3-7 1997 INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY /A> 30- 22 199y Ma 9 J> The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Food and Environmental Protection Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 0 10 x Bo P.O. A-1400 Vienna, Austria The IAEA does not normally maintain stocks of reports in this series However, copies of these reports on microfiche or in electronic form can be obtained from IMS Clearinghouse International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse5 P.O.Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria E-mail: CHOUSE® IAEA.ORG URL: http //www laea org/programmes/mis/inis.htm Orders shoul accompaniee db prepaymeny db f Austriao t n Schillings 100,- in the form of a cheque or in the form of IAEA microfiche service coupons which may be ordered separately from the INIS Clearinghouse IRRADIATIO QUARANTINA S NA E TREATMENF TO ARTHROPOD PESTS IAEA, VIENNA, 1999 IAEA-TECDOC-1082 ISSN 1011-4289 ©IAEA, 1999 Printe IAEe th AustriAn y i d b a May 1999 FOREWORD Fresh horticultural produce from tropical and sub-tropical areas often harbours insects and mites and are quarantined by importing countries. Such commodities cannot gain access to countries which have strict quarantine regulations suc Australias ha , Japan Zealanw Ne , d e Uniteth d dan State f Americo s a unless treaten approvea y b d d method/proceduro t e eliminate such pests.
    [Show full text]
  • Badr El-Sabah A. Fetoh 1, 2 and Kholoud A. Al-Shammery2
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING (IJESE) Vol. 2: 45-52 http://www.pvamu.edu/texged Prairie View A&M University, Texas, USA Acaricidal ovicial and repellent activities of some plant extracts on the date palm dust mite, Oligonychus afrasiaticus Meg. (acari: tetranychidae) Badr El-Sabah A. Fetoh 1, 2 and Kholoud A. Al-Shammery2 1- Plant Protection Research Institute, Dokki, Giza, Egypt 2-Department of Biology, College of Science, Hail University,1441 Hail, Saudi Arabia ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article History The ethanolic extracts of Demsisa, Duranta and Cumin plants were Received: April 11, 2011 tested on the adult females of the date palm dust mite, Oligonychus Accepted: July 20, 2011 afrasiaticus Meg. (Acari: Tetranychidae). The recorded results Available online: September 2011 showed that all the tested plant extracts were effective on O. ________________ afrasiaticus, however Demsisa extract was the most virulent one. Keywords 1 Biological control The concentration 1x10 p.p.m. gave the lowest mortality percent of O. afrasiaticus 39.00%, 33.33% and 12.00%, while the Plant extracts 5 Acaricides concentration 1x10 p.p.m. resulted in the highest mortality percent Ovicides 93.33%, 69.00% and 64.67% for Demsisa, Duranta and Cumin Repellents extracts, respectively. The LC50 values were 47.16, 1102 and 5 8 Date palm 8433.2 p.p.m. The LC90 values were 3.5x10 , 2.47x10 and Mites 1.30x109 p.p.m., respectively. Also, Demsisa plant extract showed Oligonychus afrasiaticus the highest toxicity index being 100%. The slope values of the toxicity lines were 0.445, 0.240 and 0.402 for Demsisa, Duranta and Cumin extracts, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Durations, Colonization and Insecticide Efficacy of Leaf Mite, Oligonychus Oryzae Hirst on Rice
    Tropical Agricultural Research Vol. 21(1): 30 - 38 (2009) Development Durations, Colonization and Insecticide Efficacy of Leaf Mite, Oligonychus oryzae Hirst on Rice V. Radhakrishnan and K. Ramaraju Department of Agricultural Entomology Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore 641 003, Tamil Nadu India ABSTRACT. Oligonychus oryzae is an economic mite pest infesting rice crops in India and other Asian countries. This study examined the duration of development instars at 20 °C – 35 °C , level of colonization of mites in eight commercial rice varieties viz., ADT 36, ADT 43, ADT 45, IR 50, CO 47, ASD 16, ADTRH 1 and TN 1 and assessment of efficacy of five insecticides against O. oryzae during 2005 and 2006. The duration of development from egg to adult lasted 8.33±0.20 days at 35 °C. ASD 16, ADTRH 1 and CO 47 were moderately resistant to leaf mite; ADT 45, TN 1, IR 50 and ADT 36 were moderately susceptible; ADT 43 was the most susceptible variety. Among the chemicals tested, Abamectin 1.8 EC was found to be the most effective. INTRODUCTION Rice, Oryza sativa L., supplies food for nearly half of the world’s population. The crop is extensively cultivated in South and South East Asian countries. Rice crop is the foundation of national stability and economic growth in many developing countries including India. In India, the average productivity of rice is 2.11 tonnes per hectare (Viraktamath and Shobha 2008). Among the arthropod pests, insects are considered as the major pest group threatening rice production. In recent years, mites have become a greater concern to the successful cultivation of rice in India, particularly South India.
    [Show full text]
  • Spruce Spider Mites
    Spruce Spider Mites TREE DOCTOR TIPS Spruce Spider Mites (Oligonychus unuguis) description: Ranging in color from green to orange-red, spruce spider mites are conifer-loving pests that overwinter as orange eggs at the base of needles and twigs. After hatching and molting several times, the adults mate and lay eggs. There can be six to eight generations each season, depending on temperature. The spruce spider mite is most active during the cooler temperatures of spring and fall, and may discontinue its feeding and reproductive activity when temperatures rise during the summer months. hosts: a Spruce spider mites feed on more than 40 different types of conifers, especially Alberta spruce, as well as arborvitae, fir, hemlock, juniper and other spruce species. biology and symptoms: These sap-sucking pests deprive trees of nutrients, causing their needles to fleck and turn yellow. Signs of a worsening infestation include remnants of silk webbing and shed skins, as well as brown needles, premature needle drop, and branch or tree death. management: b Unless treating sensitive dwarf Alberta spruce or Colorado figure a. spruce spider mites, webbing on spruce spruce, apply an appropriate miticide before bud break to figure b. eggs of the spruce spider mite, close-up reduce overall populations and again in late fall if necessary. Talk with a certified arborist about alternative treatments when miticides cannot be used. The scientists at The Davey Institute laboratory and research facility support our arborists and technicians in diagnosing and prescribing based on the latest arboricultural science. For specific treatment and application details, your arborist may consult The Davey Institute PHC Handbook.
    [Show full text]
  • 2002-Nanfa-Conventio
    Winter (Feb.) 2003 American Currents 10 Great Lakes, Great People, Great Memories: A Report from the 2002 NANFA Convention in Ann Arbor, Michigan Christopher Scharpf 1107 Argonne Drive, Baltimore, MD 21218 [email protected] have a favorite memory from every NANFA “Hey, how did this get in here?”I asked Leo Long, who, Convention I’ve attended. In Chattanooga, it was first along with Bob Muller, co-organized the Ann Arbor meeting setting eyes on the woman who would later become my (with the help of several others, acknowledged below. I should I wife, Stephanie. In Champaign-Urbana, it was seining also mention that NANFA shared the display cabinet with for darters with Dr. Darter himself, Larry Page. In Jackson, Leo’s exquisite wood carving of a shoal of bluespotted sunfish.) it was simply getting there after our Jeep had broken down in “That was Dr. Smith’s idea,” Leo answered. the aptly named Ft. Payne, Alabama. In Hocking Hills, Ohio, Later that evening I thanked Dr. Smith for including it was the surprise party in celebration of my 40th birthday. NANFA in the Great Lakes exhibit. (Just so you know, Dr. Last year in Ann Arbor my favorite memory was this: Smith is one of North America’s most active ichthyologists, A small group of us had arrived at the University of an expert on fossil fishes, zoogeography and suckers, and Michigan Museum of Zoology and had gathered in the curator of the University of Michigan fish collection.) What lobby, or rotunda. While we waited for Dr. Gerald Smith to prompted him, I asked, to pay NANFA this honor? arrive to unlock the door to the Museum’s cavernous fish Dr.
    [Show full text]