DOCSLIB.ORG

Yadkin River Huc 03040102

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Yadkin River Huc 03040102 LUMBER RIVER BASINWIDE ASSESSMENT April, 2007 CONTENTS This document provides overviews from four program areas within the Environmental Sciences Section . They may be considered chapters or individual reports. The contributions from each unit are provided in the following order. BASINWIDE ASSESSMENT –Provides basin and subbasin overviews of water quality and detailed information on collections of benthic macroinvertebrates, fish community structure, and fish tissue analyses. Biological Assessment Unit - Page 2 LAKE & RESERVOIR ASSESSMENT-Provides lake & reservoir-specific information in the Lumber River Basin, and an overview of assessment methodology. Intensive Survey Unit - Page 95 AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM ASSESSMENT-Provides results of analyses from DWQ fixed station Ambient Monitoring System and Coalition Data, including temporal and spatial trends of chemical, hydrological, and physical data where appropriate. Ecosystems Analysis Unit - Page 102 WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY PROGRAM-Provides an overview of permits requiring (WET), compliance information, and brief summaries of actions by individual facilities and/or DWQ in response to WET limit failures. Aquatic Toxicology Unit - Page 168 BASINWIDE ASSESSMENT REPORT LUMBER RIVER BASIN NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Water Quality Environmental Sciences Section April 2007 This page was intentionally left blank NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - Lumber River Basin - April 2006 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF APPENDICIES ........................................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................................5 LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................5 BASIN DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................................6 INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAM METHODS.......................................................................................8 LUMBER RIVER HUC 03040203 – LUMBER RIVER...........................................................................9 Description......................................................................................................................................9 Overview of Water Quality..............................................................................................................9 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................11 LUMBER RIVER HUC 03040204 – LITTLE PEE DEE RIVER ...........................................................13 Description....................................................................................................................................13 Overview of Water Quality............................................................................................................14 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................14 LUMBER RIVER HUC 03040206 – WACCAMAW RIVER..................................................................15 Description....................................................................................................................................15 Overview of Water Quality............................................................................................................15 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................15 LUMBER RIVER HUC 03040208 – LONG BAY/ATLANTIC OCEAN .................................................17 Description....................................................................................................................................17 Overview of Water Quality............................................................................................................17 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................18 GLOSSARY .........................................................................................................................................19 NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - Lumber River Basin - April 2006 3 LIST OF APPENDICIES Appendix Page B-1 Summary of benthic macroinvertebrate data, sampling methods, and criteria.................................. F-1 Fish community sampling methods and criteria................................................................................. F-2 A summary of fish community assessment data for 2002 ................................................................. F-3 Fish distributional records for the Lumber River basin ...................................................................... F-4 Water quality at 13 fish community sites in the Lumber River basin, 2006 ....................................... F-5 Habitat evaluations and stream and riparian habitats at 13 fish community monitoring sites in the Lumber River basin, 2006.............................................................................. F-6 Web links............................................................................................................................................ F-7 Fish community references................................................................................................................ NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - Lumber River Basin - April 2006 4 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Waterbodies monitored in Lumber River HUC 03040203 in the Lumber River basin for basinwide assessment, 2001 and 2006........................................................................................ 2. Waterbodies monitored in Little Pee Dee River HUC 03040204 in the Lumber River basin for basinwide assessment, 2001 and 2006 .............................................................................. 3. Waterbodies monitored in Waccamaw River HUC 03040206 in the Lumber Basin for basinwide assessment, 2001 and 2006 ............................................................................................. 4. Waterbodies monitored in Long Bay/Atlantic Ocean HUC 03040208 in the Lumber River basin for basinwide assessment, 2001 and 2006 .............................................................................. LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Geographical relationships of the Lumber River basin in North Carolina and South Carolina.......... 2. Geographical relationships and physiographic regions of the Lumber River basin in North Carolina .................................................................................................................................... 3. Sampling sites in Lumber River HUC 03040203 in the Lumber River basin..................................... 4. Sampling sites in Little Pee Dee River HUC 03040204 in the Lumber River basin .......................... 5. Sampling sites in Waccamaw River HUC 03040206 in the Lumber River basin............................... 6. Sampling sites in the Long Bay/Atlantic Ocean HUC 03040208 in the Lumber River basin............. NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - Lumber River Basin - April 2006 5 BASIN DESCRIPTION The Lumber River basin lies along the North Carolina/South Carolina border at the southeast corner of the state (Figure 1). It is composed of four major drainage areas or watersheds: the Lumber River, the Little Pee Dee River headwaters, the Waccamaw River, and the coastal area rivers. The basin extends about 150 miles from the Sand Hills ecoregion in southern Moore and Montgomery counties to the Atlantic Ocean coastline in Brunswick County. Streams and rivers in the basin, except for the Lockwoods Folly and Shallotte Rivers, flow southwest into South Carolina and are tributaries of the Great Pee Dee River. The Great Pee Dee River flows into the Atlantic Ocean near Georgetown, South Carolina. Figure 1. Geographical relationships of the Lumber River basin in North Carolina and South Carolina. There are 2,283 miles of freshwater streams in the basin, 90% of which are supplementally classified as swamp waters. There are also 4,800 acres of waters along the coast that are classified as salt waters, about 90% of which are classified as SA. Most of the basin is forested (about 60%) or in agriculture (about 30%). The basin encompasses an area of 3,343 square miles in all or part of 10 counties including Brunswick, Columbus, Bladen, Robeson, Cumberland, Hoke, Scotland, Richmond, Moore and Montgomery. Larger municipalities include Lumberton, Laurinburg, Southern Pines, Pinehurst and Whiteville. The dividing line between the Sand Hills and the Coastal Plain is located along a subtle escarpment called the Coats Scarp, which extends through central Hoke, Scotland, and northern Cumberland counties. The Sand Hills are located northwest of the line and the Coastal Plain is located to the southeast (Figure 2). Recent ecoregion delineations for North Carolina further subdivide the coastal plain, providing a basis for assessing differences in biological communities and water chemistry attributes. NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - Lumber River Basin - April
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Waccamaw Subtype)
    NATURAL LAKE SHORELINE SWAMP (LAKE WACCAMAW SUBTYPE) Concept: Type covers tree-dominated vegetated wetland vegetation on the shores of medium to large permanent natural lakes. It extends inland to where the effect of lake hydrology on vegetation is replaced by the hydrology of the surrounding area, either upland or wetland. Subtype covers the unique calcareous example at Lake Waccamaw. The vegetation resembles that of the Cypress Subtype but has a distinctive and richer flora. Sites: Wetland zones along the shore of Lake Waccamaw, influenced by the calcareous waters, generally flooded much of the time by lake waters but exposed at low water levels. Soils: A specific soil series is not mapped, but soils are sand, presumably worked by wave action. Hydrology: Permanently to seasonally flooded. Water levels may vary over periods of a few years, in response to weather cycles. Vegetation: Open woodland of Taxodium ascendens. There are a few shrubs, including Alnus serrulata, Cephalanthus occidentalis, and Cyrilla racemiflora. The herb layer is patchy, with dense beds of graminoids, areas of sparse emergent or submersed plants, and a number of species that are visible only when water levels are low and the shoreline is exposed. The denser areas are dominated by Panicum hemitomon and Cladium mariscoides. Dominants in smaller patches include Eleocharis olivacea, Sclerolepis uniflora, and Centella erecta, and Boltonia asteroides and Ludwigia sphaerocarpa are abundant. A great diversity of other herbaceous species is present, including Andropogon
    [Show full text]
  • 15A Ncac 02B .0100-.0300
    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Division of Water Resources Administrative Code Section: 15A NCAC 02B .0100: Procedures for Assignment of Water Quality Standards 15A NCAC 02B .0200: Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B .0300: Assignment of Stream Classifications Amended Effective: November 1, 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA This document available at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/csrrb/tri_rev_17to19/15A_NCAC_02B_.0100- .0300.pdf SUBCHAPTER 02B - SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND STANDARDS SECTION .0100 - PROCEDURES FOR ASSIGNMENT OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 15A NCAC 02B .0101 GENERAL PROCEDURES (a) The rules contained in Sections .0100, .0200 and .0300 of this Subchapter, which pertain to the series of classifications and water quality standards, shall be known as the "Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina." (b) The Environmental Management Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission), prior to classifying and assigning standards of water quality to any waters of the State, shall proceed as follows: (1) The Commission, or its designee, shall determine waters to be studied for the purpose of classification and assignment of water quality standards on the basis of user requests, petitions, or the identification of existing or attainable water uses, as defined by Rule .0202 of this Subchapter, not presently included in the water classification. (2) In determining the best usage of waters and assigning classifications of such waters, the Commission shall consider the criteria specified in G.S. 143-214.1(d). In determining whether to revise a designated best usage for waters through a revision to the classifications, the Commission shall follow the requirements of 40 CFR 131.10 which is incorporated by reference including subsequent amendments and editions.
    [Show full text]
  • New State Records of Aquatic Insects for Ohio, U.S.A
    Volume 121, Number 1, January and February 2010 75 NEW STATE RECORDS OF AQUATIC INSECTS FOR OHIO, U.S.A. (EPHEMEROPTERA, PLECOPTERA, TRICHOPTERA, COLEOPTERA)1 Michael J. Bolton2 ABSTRACT: Biomonitoring of Ohio streams by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has found new state records for the Ephemeroptera (mayflies): Baetis brunneicolor McDunnough, Iswaeon anoka (Daggy), Paracloeodes fleeki McCafferty and Lenat, Plauditus cestus (Provonsha and McCafferty), and Rhithrogena manifesta Eaton; the Plecoptera (stoneflies): Pteronarcys cf. biloba Newman; the Trichop- tera (caddisflies): Brachycentrus numerosus (Say) and Psilotreta rufa (Hagen); and the Coleoptera (bee- tles): Gyretes sinuatus LeConte, Dicranopselaphus variegatus Horn, and Microcylloepus pusillus (Le Conte). Additional records are given for the mayfly Paracloeodes minutus (Daggy). KEY WORDS: Ohio, state record, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Coleoptera The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency conducts biological and water qual- ity studies of Ohio streams to ascertain the condition of the aquatic resource. One component of these studies is an evaluation of the macroinvertebrate communities. As a result of this sampling, species of aquatic insects in the Ephemeroptera (may- flies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies), and Coleoptera (beetles) orders have been collected that have never been reported from Ohio. Randolph and McCafferty (1998) compiled the first state list of mayflies for Ohio. Gaufin (1956) produced a state list of stoneflies for Ohio with additions by Tkac and Foote (1978), Robertson (1979), and Fishbeck (1987). Listing of species distributions by state in Stewart and Stark (2002) and Stark and Armitage (2000, 2004) incorporated Ohio records found in the various revisionary publications. Huryn and Foote (1983) pro- duced the first comprehensive state list of caddisflies which was amended by Mac Lean and MacLean (1984), Usis and MacLean (1986), Garono and MacLean (1988), Usis and Foote (1989), and Keiper and Bartolotta (2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Check List 4(2): 92–97, 2008
    Check List 4(2): 92–97, 2008. ISSN: 1809-127X NOTES ON GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION Insecta, Ephemeroptera, Baetidae: Range extensions and new state records from Kansas, U.S.A. W. Patrick McCafferty 1 Luke M. Jacobus 2 1 Department of Entomology, Purdue University. West Lafayette, Indiana 47907 USA. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Biology, Indiana University. Bloomington, Indiana 47405 USA. The mayfly (Ephemeroptera) fauna of the U.S.A. other central lowland prairie states as well state of Kansas is relatively poorly documented (McCafferty et al. 2001; 2003; Guenther and (McCafferty 2001). With respect to small minnow McCafferty 2005). Some additionally common mayflies (family Baetidae), only 16 species have species will be evident from the new data we been documented with published records from present herein. Kansas. Those involve Acentrella turbida (McDunnough, 1924); Acerpenna pygmaea Our examination of additional unidentified (Hagen, 1861); Apobaetis Etowah (Traver, 1935); material of Kansas Baetidae housed in the Snow A. lakota McCafferty, 2000; Baetis flavistriga Museum, University of Kansas, Lawrence, McDunnough, 1921; B. intercalaris McDunnough, Kansas, and collected mainly by the State 1921; Callibaetis fluctuans (Walsh, 1862); C. Biological Survey of Kansas, has led to the pictus Eaton, 1871; Centroptilum album discovery of 19 additional species of Baetidae in McDunnough, 1926; C. bifurcatum McDunnough, Kansas, resulting in a new total of 35 species of 1924; Fallceon quilleri (Dodds, 1923); Baetidae now known from the state. The records Paracloeodes minutus (Daggy, 1945); P. given alphabetically below also represent the first dardanum (McDunnough, 1923); P. ephippiatum Kansas records of the genera Camelobaetidius, (Traver, 1935); P.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Monitoring of Surface Waters in New York State, 2019
    NYSDEC SOP #208-19 Title: Stream Biomonitoring Rev: 1.2 Date: 03/29/19 Page 1 of 188 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Water Standard Operating Procedure: Biological Monitoring of Surface Waters in New York State March 2019 Note: Division of Water (DOW) SOP revisions from year 2016 forward will only capture the current year parties involved with drafting/revising/approving the SOP on the cover page. The dated signatures of those parties will be captured here as well. The historical log of all SOP updates and revisions (past & present) will immediately follow the cover page. NYSDEC SOP 208-19 Stream Biomonitoring Rev. 1.2 Date: 03/29/2019 Page 3 of 188 SOP #208 Update Log 1 Prepared/ Revision Revised by Approved by Number Date Summary of Changes DOW Staff Rose Ann Garry 7/25/2007 Alexander J. Smith Rose Ann Garry 11/25/2009 Alexander J. Smith Jason Fagel 1.0 3/29/2012 Alexander J. Smith Jason Fagel 2.0 4/18/2014 • Definition of a reference site clarified (Sect. 8.2.3) • WAVE results added as a factor Alexander J. Smith Jason Fagel 3.0 4/1/2016 in site selection (Sect. 8.2.2 & 8.2.6) • HMA details added (Sect. 8.10) • Nonsubstantive changes 2 • Disinfection procedures (Sect. 8) • Headwater (Sect. 9.4.1 & 10.2.7) assessment methods added • Benthic multiplate method added (Sect, 9.4.3) Brian Duffy Rose Ann Garry 1.0 5/01/2018 • Lake (Sect. 9.4.5 & Sect. 10.) assessment methods added • Detail on biological impairment sampling (Sect.
    [Show full text]
  • 345D344e875a63b5be2a8cfa75
    Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems (2014) 414, 09 http://www.kmae-journal.org c ONEMA, 2014 DOI: 10.1051/kmae/2014021 Community structure and decadal changes in macrozoobenthic assemblages in Lake Poyang, the largest freshwater lake in China Y. J . C a i (1),(2),Y.J.Lu(2),Z.S.Wu(1),Y.W.Chen(1),L.Zhang(1),Y.Lu(2) Received February 19, 2014 Revised May 19, 2014 Accepted June 10, 2014 ABSTRACT Key-words: Lake Poyang is the largest freshwater lake in China and contains unique Yangtze River, and diverse biota within the Yangtze floodplain ecosystem. However, floodplain lake, knowledge of its macrozoobenthic assemblages remains inadequate. To macrozoobenthos, characterize the current community structure of these assemblages and community to portray their decadal changes, quarterly investigations were conducted structure, at 15 sites from February to November 2012. A total of 42 taxa were sand mining recorded, and Corbicula fluminea, Limnoperna fortunei, Gammaridae sp., Nephtys polybranchia, Polypedilum scalaenum and Branchiura sowerbyi were found to dominate the community in terms of abundance. The bivalves Corbicula fluminea, Lamprotula rochechouarti, Arconaia lance- olata and Lamprotula caveata dominated the community in biomass due to their large body size. The mean abundance of the total macro- zoobenthos varied from 48 to 920 ind·m−2, the mean biomass ranged from 28 to 428 g·m−2. The substrate type affected strongly the abun- dance, biomass, and diversity of the macrozoobenthos, with muddy sand substrates showing the highest values. Compared with historical data, remarkable changes were observed in the abundance of macrozooben- thos and the identity of the dominant species.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers
    Natural vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers A report prepared for the Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources in partial fulfillments of contract D07042. By M. Forbes Boyle, Robert K. Peet, Thomas R. Wentworth, Michael P. Schafale, and Michael Lee Carolina Vegetation Survey Curriculum in Ecology, CB#3275 University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC 27599‐3275 Version 1. May 19, 2009 1 INTRODUCTION The riverine and associated vegetation of the Waccamaw, Lumber, and Little Pee Rivers of North and South Carolina are ecologically significant and floristically unique components of the southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. Stretching from northern Scotland County, NC to western Brunswick County, NC, the Lumber and northern Waccamaw Rivers influence a vast amount of landscape in the southeastern corner of NC. Not far south across the interstate border, the Lumber River meets the Little Pee Dee River, influencing a large portion of western Horry County and southern Marion County, SC before flowing into the Great Pee Dee River. The Waccamaw River, an oddity among Atlantic Coastal Plain rivers in that its significant flow direction is southwest rather that southeast, influences a significant portion of the eastern Horry and eastern Georgetown Counties, SC before draining into Winyah Bay along with the Great Pee Dee and several other SC blackwater rivers. The Waccamaw River originates from Lake Waccamaw in Columbus County, NC and flows ~225 km parallel to the ocean before abrubtly turning southeast in Georgetown County, SC and dumping into Winyah Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Pee Dee-Lumber Focus Area Conservation Plan
    Little Pee Dee-Lumber Focus Area Conservation Plan South Carolina Department of Natural Resources February 2017 Little Pee Dee-Lumber Focus Area Conservation Plan Prepared by Lorianne Riggin and Bob Perry1, and Dr. Scott Howard2 February 2017 Acknowledgements The preparers thank the following South Carolina Department of Natural Resources staff for their special expertise and contributions toward the completion of this report: Heritage Trust data base manager Julie Holling; GIS applications manager Tyler Brown for mapping and listing of protected properties; archeologist Sean Taylor for information on cultural resources; fisheries biologists Kevin Kubach, Jason Marsik, and Robert Stroud for information regarding aquatic resources; hydrologist Andy Wachob for information on hydrologic resources; and wildlife biologists James Fowler, Dean Harrigal, Sam Stokes, Jr. and Amy Tegler for information regarding wildlife resources. 1 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Office of Environmental Programs. 2 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey. i Little Pee Dee-Lumber Focus Area Conservation Plan The goal of this conservation plan is to provide science-based guidance for future decisions to protect natural resource, riparian corridors and traditional landscape uses such as fish and wildlife management, hunting, fishing, agriculture and forestry. Such planning is valuable in the context of protecting Waters of the United States in accordance with the Clean Water Act, particularly when the interests of economic development and protection of natural and cultural resources collide. Such planning is vital in the absence of specific watershed planning. As additional information is gathered by the focus area partners, and as further landscape-scale conservation goals are achieved, this plan will be updated accordingly.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Diversity, Ecological Health and Condition of Aquatic Assemblages at National Wildlife Refuges in Southern Indiana, USA
    Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4300 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.3.e4300 Taxonomic Paper Biological Diversity, Ecological Health and Condition of Aquatic Assemblages at National Wildlife Refuges in Southern Indiana, USA Thomas P. Simon†, Charles C. Morris‡, Joseph R. Robb§, William McCoy | † Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 46403, United States of America ‡ US National Park Service, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Porter, IN 47468, United States of America § US Fish and Wildlife Service, Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuge, Madison, IN 47250, United States of America | US Fish and Wildlife Service, Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge, Oakland City, IN 47660, United States of America Corresponding author: Thomas P. Simon ([email protected]) Academic editor: Benjamin Price Received: 08 Dec 2014 | Accepted: 09 Jan 2015 | Published: 12 Jan 2015 Citation: Simon T, Morris C, Robb J, McCoy W (2015) Biological Diversity, Ecological Health and Condition of Aquatic Assemblages at National Wildlife Refuges in Southern Indiana, USA. Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4300. doi: 10.3897/BDJ.3.e4300 Abstract The National Wildlife Refuge system is a vital resource for the protection and conservation of biodiversity and biological integrity in the United States. Surveys were conducted to determine the spatial and temporal patterns of fish, macroinvertebrate, and crayfish populations in two watersheds that encompass three refuges in southern Indiana. The Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge had the highest number of aquatic species with 355 macroinvertebrate taxa, six crayfish species, and 82 fish species, while the Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuge had 163 macroinvertebrate taxa, seven crayfish species, and 37 fish species. The Muscatatuck National Wildlife Refuge had the lowest diversity of macroinvertebrates with 96 taxa and six crayfish species, while possessing the second highest fish species richness with 51 species.
    [Show full text]
  • Wake Forest Magazine Offers a 70 Class Notes Series of Milestones Along with the Millstones in the Story of Women at the University
    CAMPUS DURING COVID-19 | WFU WOMEN: A HISTORY OF THEIR OWN | KAREN BAYNES-DUNNING (’89): UNDAUNTED SPRING 2021 R E A D I N G t h e R I V E R THE MAGAZINE OF WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY FEATURES 38 COPING IN THE PANDEMIC Photography by Ken Bennett Wake Forest’s director of photography captured the first month of the fall semester, when campus community members embraced “Show Humanitate.” 2 52 READING THE RIVER LESSONS FROM A TIME OF By Carol L. Hanner UPHEAVAL Yadkin Riverkeeper Brian Fannon (’89) By Kerry M. King (’85) combines biology, history and a love of water Six alumni reflect on student life in the for his exceptional life in the flow. 1960s and early ’70s and how 2020 echoes those times. 18 88 UNDAUNTED CONSTANT & TRUE By Maria Henson (’82) By Sophie Hollis (’19) Karen Baynes-Dunning (’89) infuses arduous A young grad learns about isolation and work for social justice and children’s progress reaching out in a pandemic. with lessons from wondrous family lore. 34 DEPARTMENTS A HISTORY OF THEIR OWN 66 Around the Quad Illustration by Lisa Perrin As women move into their second century of 69 Philanthropy voting rights, Wake Forest Magazine offers a 70 Class Notes series of milestones along with the millstones in the story of women at the University. WAKEFOREST FROM theh PRESIDENT MAGAZINE 2019 ROBERT SIBLEY this issue of wake forest magazine is the first of 2021, a year MAGAZINE OF THE YEAR that will mark the University’s continuing challenges with the COVID-19 pandemic and an upcoming personal milestone for me and my wife, Julie.
    [Show full text]