DOCSLIB.ORG

Mammalian Diversity in Nineteen Southeast Coast Network Parks

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mammalian Diversity in Nineteen Southeast Coast Network Parks National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Mammalian Diversity in Nineteen Southeast Coast Network Parks Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/263 ON THE COVER Northern raccoon (Procyon lotot) Photograph by: James F. Parnell Mammalian Diversity in Nineteen Southeast Coast Network Parks Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/263 William. David Webster Department of Biology and Marine Biology University of North Carolina – Wilmington Wilmington, NC 28403 November 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in the Reports and Publications section of the Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network webpage (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/secn/) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM). Please cite this publication as: Webster, W. D. 2010. Mammalian Diversity in nineteen Southeast Coast Network Parks. Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/263. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 910/106015, November 2010 ii Contents Page Figures............................................................................................................................................ ix Tables ............................................................................................................................................. xi Appendices ................................................................................................................................... xiii Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... xv Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................... xvii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Methods........................................................................................................................................... 5 Park Accounts ................................................................................................................................. 9 Cape Hatteras National Seashore (CAHA) .............................................................................. 9 Fort Raleigh National Historic Site (FORA) .................................................................... 14 Wright Brothers National Memorial (WRBR) .................................................................. 18 Cape Lookout National Seashore (CALO) ............................................................................ 23 Castillo de San Marcos National Monument (CASA) .......................................................... 27 Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area (CHAT) ..................................................... 30 Congaree National Park (CONG) .......................................................................................... 53 Cumberland Island National Seashore (CUIS) ...................................................................... 58 Fort Caroline National Memorial (FOCA) ............................................................................ 65 Fort Frederica National Monument (FOFR) .......................................................................... 70 Fort Matanzas National Monument (FOMA) ........................................................................ 73 Fort Sumter National Monument (FOSU) ............................................................................. 77 Fort Moultrie Subunit (FOMO) ........................................................................................ 80 Charles Pickney National Historic Site (CHPI) ............................................................... 83 iii Horseshoe Bend National Military Park (HOBE) ................................................................. 88 Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park (KEMO) ...................................................... 93 Moores Creek National Battlefield (MOCR) ........................................................................ 98 Ocmulgee National Monument (OCMU) ............................................................................ 103 Timucuan Ecological and Historical Preserve (TIMU) ....................................................... 108 Species Accounts ........................................................................................................................ 113 Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) ............................................................................ 113 Southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris) .............................................................................. 114 Least shrew (Cryptotis parva) ............................................................................................. 115 Northern short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda) .............................................................. 115 Southern short-tailed shrew (Blarina carolinensis) ............................................................. 116 Eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus) ...................................................................................... 116 Star-nosed mole (Condylura cristata) ................................................................................. 117 Little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus) ............................................................................... 117 Southeastern myotis (Myotis austroriparius) ...................................................................... 118 Silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) ..................................................................... 118 Eastern pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus) .......................................................................... 118 Big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) ........................................................................................ 118 Eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis) ...................................................................................... 119 Seminole bat (Lasiurus seminolus) ...................................................................................... 119 Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) ............................................................................................. 119 Northern yellow bat (Lasiurus intermedius) ........................................................................ 119 Evening bat (Nycticeius humeralis) ..................................................................................... 120 Rafinesque’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) ...................................................... 120 Brazilian free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis) ................................................................. 120 iv Nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) ................................................................ 120 Swamp rabbit (Sylvilagus aquaticus) .................................................................................. 121 Marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris) ...................................................................................... 121 Woodchuck (Marmota monax) ............................................................................................ 122 Eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus) .................................................................................... 122 Eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) ........................................................................ 122 Eastern fox squirrel (Sciurus niger) ..................................................................................... 123 Southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans) .....................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparative Functional Morphology of Attachment Devices in Arachnida
    Comparative functional morphology of attachment devices in Arachnida Vergleichende Funktionsmorphologie der Haftstrukturen bei Spinnentieren (Arthropoda: Arachnida) DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) an der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel vorgelegt von Jonas Otto Wolff geboren am 20. September 1986 in Bergen auf Rügen Kiel, den 2. Juni 2015 Erster Gutachter: Prof. Stanislav N. Gorb _ Zweiter Gutachter: Dr. Dirk Brandis _ Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 17. Juli 2015 _ Zum Druck genehmigt: 17. Juli 2015 _ gez. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang J. Duschl, Dekan Acknowledgements I owe Prof. Stanislav Gorb a great debt of gratitude. He taught me all skills to get a researcher and gave me all freedom to follow my ideas. I am very thankful for the opportunity to work in an active, fruitful and friendly research environment, with an interdisciplinary team and excellent laboratory equipment. I like to express my gratitude to Esther Appel, Joachim Oesert and Dr. Jan Michels for their kind and enthusiastic support on microscopy techniques. I thank Dr. Thomas Kleinteich and Dr. Jana Willkommen for their guidance on the µCt. For the fruitful discussions and numerous information on physical questions I like to thank Dr. Lars Heepe. I thank Dr. Clemens Schaber for his collaboration and great ideas on how to measure the adhesive forces of the tiny glue droplets of harvestmen. I thank Angela Veenendaal and Bettina Sattler for their kind help on administration issues. Especially I thank my students Ingo Grawe, Fabienne Frost, Marina Wirth and André Karstedt for their commitment and input of ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Pest Management: Current and Future Strategies
    Integrated Pest Management: Current and Future Strategies Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa, USA Printed in the United States of America Cover design by Lynn Ekblad, Different Angles, Ames, Iowa Graphics and layout by Richard Beachler, Instructional Technology Center, Iowa State University, Ames ISBN 1-887383-23-9 ISSN 0194-4088 06 05 04 03 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging–in–Publication Data Integrated Pest Management: Current and Future Strategies. p. cm. -- (Task force report, ISSN 0194-4088 ; no. 140) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-887383-23-9 (alk. paper) 1. Pests--Integrated control. I. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. II. Series: Task force report (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology) ; no. 140. SB950.I4573 2003 632'.9--dc21 2003006389 Task Force Report No. 140 June 2003 Council for Agricultural Science and Technology Ames, Iowa, USA Task Force Members Kenneth R. Barker (Chair), Department of Plant Pathology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh Esther Day, American Farmland Trust, DeKalb, Illinois Timothy J. Gibb, Department of Entomology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana Maud A. Hinchee, ArborGen, Summerville, South Carolina Nancy C. Hinkle, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Athens Barry J. Jacobsen, Department of Plant Sciences and Plant Pathology, Montana State University, Bozeman James Knight, Department of Animal and Range Science, Montana State University, Bozeman Kenneth A. Langeland, Department of Agronomy, University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Gainesville Evan Nebeker, Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State David A. Rosenberger, Plant Pathology Department, Cornell University–Hudson Valley Laboratory, High- land, New York Donald P.
    [Show full text]
  • Fleas, Hosts and Habitat: What Can We Predict About the Spread of Vector-Borne Zoonotic Diseases?
    2010 Fleas, Hosts and Habitat: What can we predict about the spread of vector-borne zoonotic diseases? Ph.D. Dissertation Megan M. Friggens School of Forestry I I I \, l " FLEAS, HOSTS AND HABITAT: WHAT CAN WE PREDICT ABOUT THE SPREAD OF VECTOR-BORNE ZOONOTIC DISEASES? by Megan M. Friggens A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Forest Science Northern Arizona University May 2010 ?Jii@~-~-u-_- Robert R. Parmenter, Ph. D. ~",l(*~ l.~ Paulette L. Ford, Ph. D. --=z:r-J'l1jU~ David M. Wagner, Ph. D. ABSTRACT FLEAS, HOSTS AND HABITAT: WHAT CAN WE PREDICT ABOUT THE SPREAD OF VECTOR-BORNE ZOONOTIC DISEASES? MEGAN M. FRIGGENS Vector-borne diseases of humans and wildlife are experiencing resurgence across the globe. I examine the dynamics of flea borne diseases through a comparative analysis of flea literature and analyses of field data collected from three sites in New Mexico: The Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, the Sandia Mountains and the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP). My objectives were to use these analyses to better predict and manage for the spread of diseases such as plague (Yersinia pestis). To assess the impact of anthropogenic disturbance on flea communities, I compiled and analyzed data from 63 published empirical studies. Anthropogenic disturbance is associated with conditions conducive to increased transmission of flea-borne diseases. Most measures of flea infestation increased with increasing disturbance or peaked at intermediate levels of disturbance. Future trends of habitat and climate change will probably favor the spread of flea-borne disease.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Structure of Mites (Acari: Acariformes and Parasitiformes) in Nests of the Semi-Collared Flycatcher (Ficedula Semitorquata) R
    International Research Journal of Natural Sciences Vol.3, No.3, pp.48-53, December 2015 ___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org) COMMUNITY STRUCTURE OF MITES (ACARI: ACARIFORMES AND PARASITIFORMES) IN NESTS OF THE SEMI-COLLARED FLYCATCHER (FICEDULA SEMITORQUATA) R. Davidova, V. Vasilev, N. Ali, J. Bakalova Konstantin Preslavsky University of Shumen, 115, Universitetska Str., Shumen, 9700, Bulgaria. ABSTRACT: The aims of the present paper are to establish the specific structure of communities of prostigmatic and mesostigmatic mites in nests of the semi-collared flycatcher (Ficedula semitorquata) and to compare the fauna with the mites in nests of two other European flycatchers. For analysis of community structure of mites were used the indices: prevalence, relative density, mean intensity and dominance. Mite communities are strongly dominated by the species Dermanyssus gallinae and Ornithonyssus sylviarum, which were found with the highest frequency and dominance. The mite communities are characterized by a large number of subrecedent species. KEYWORDS: Acariformes, Parasitiformes, Nest of Bird, Community Structure INTRODUCTION The nests of different species of birds are an example of a fairly unstable and isolated habitat, with its own dependent on it specific fauna which involves different groups of invertebrate animals. One of the components of this fauna which demonstrates particular abundance is the arthropods, and more specifically, the mites. The studies of Parasitiformes show that mesostigmatic mites living in birds' nests vary both in terms of their species affiliation and the structure of their communities [4, 8]. Highly important with respect to veterinary science and medicine are a number of species, such as Ornithonyssus bursa, Ornithonyssus sylviarum, Dermanyssus gallinae harboured by birds, Ornithonyssus bacoti, harboured by rodents, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Fleas and Flea-Borne Diseases
    International Journal of Infectious Diseases 14 (2010) e667–e676 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Infectious Diseases journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijid Review Fleas and flea-borne diseases Idir Bitam a, Katharina Dittmar b, Philippe Parola a, Michael F. Whiting c, Didier Raoult a,* a Unite´ de Recherche en Maladies Infectieuses Tropicales Emergentes, CNRS-IRD UMR 6236, Faculte´ de Me´decine, Universite´ de la Me´diterrane´e, 27 Bd Jean Moulin, 13385 Marseille Cedex 5, France b Department of Biological Sciences, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA c Department of Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA ARTICLE INFO SUMMARY Article history: Flea-borne infections are emerging or re-emerging throughout the world, and their incidence is on the Received 3 February 2009 rise. Furthermore, their distribution and that of their vectors is shifting and expanding. This publication Received in revised form 2 June 2009 reviews general flea biology and the distribution of the flea-borne diseases of public health importance Accepted 4 November 2009 throughout the world, their principal flea vectors, and the extent of their public health burden. Such an Corresponding Editor: William Cameron, overall review is necessary to understand the importance of this group of infections and the resources Ottawa, Canada that must be allocated to their control by public health authorities to ensure their timely diagnosis and treatment. Keywords: ß 2010 International Society for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Flea Siphonaptera Plague Yersinia pestis Rickettsia Bartonella Introduction to 16 families and 238 genera have been described, but only a minority is synanthropic, that is they live in close association with The past decades have seen a dramatic change in the geographic humans (Table 1).4,5 and host ranges of many vector-borne pathogens, and their diseases.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of the Preserve Lands Around Strouds Run State Park
    of land in the area (Athens and Alexander) were History of Sells Park apportioned by the Ohio Company for the university. The Company divided the remainder of Sells Park began in 1939 when Edward and the land into shares in 1796, based on townships Laura Sells, who were developing a residential and 640-acre sections (one mile square). A subdivision on the east side of Athens, split off 22 peculiarity of this division was the establishment of acres at the head of the hollow and donated it to “fractions.” Nine sections of each township were the U. S. Forest Service. The assumption was, redivided into 262-acre pieces of land that apparently, that this might eventually connect with accompanied sections numbered the same. This other National Forest lands as part of the Wayne was the only way they could divide the land evenly National Forest. The Wayne Forest headquarters between shareholders. These fractions are unique were only three blocks away at the time, at the top to this land division by the Ohio Company. of Euclid Avenue, on Dalton Avenue. The first settlers arrived in the Athens County Utilizing the Civilian Conservation Corps, the region in 1796. They were especially encouraged USFS developed Sells Park with a dam, forming a to settle on the college lands so as to make them pond, picnic facilities, trails, a pavilion, and A History of the attractive, productive, and to pay rents for support restrooms. The fairly large pavilion was installed of the institution. This land-leasing venture led to with eight main supporting posts across an old Preserve Lands around the founding of Ohio University, the first college in roadway on a hillside bench about halfway up the the Northwest Territory.
    [Show full text]
  • Lauren Maestas M.S
    11/5/12 Lauren Maestas M.S. Candidate University of Tennessee Department of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Photo Credits: Robyn Nadolny, Chelsea Wright Wayne Hynes, Daniel Sonenshine, Holly Gaff Old Dominion University Dept. of Biology } Introduction and Justification } Objectives } Methods } Anticipated Results } Future Directions 1 11/5/12 Bridging Vector • Ticks carry and transmit a I. scapularis greater variety of pathogens to domestic animals than any Sylvaticother type cycle of biting arthropod • Ticks are a close second to mosquitos worldwide in human disease transmission I. affinis Photo Credit: Robyn Nadolny, Chelsea Wright Wayne Hynes, Daniel Sonenshine, Holly Gaff Old Dominion University Dept. of Biology Maria Duik-Wasser Ixodes affinis Ixodes scapularis •Both have a 1-2 year life cycle •Both feed on multiple wildlife hosts http://www.humanillnesses.com/Infectious-Diseases-He-My/Lyme-Disease.html 0% Bbsl 40% Bbsl Maggi 2009 Bbss? Photo Credit: Robyn Nadolny, Chelsea Wright Wayne Hynes, Daniel Sonenshine, Holly Gaff Old Dominion University Dept. of Biology A. Causey personal communication http://www.fishing-nc.com/nc-fishing-regulations.php 2 11/5/12 18 Species of Borrelia currently recognized in the Bbsl complex Rudenko et al. 2011 1. To test for North- South latitudinal trends in Ixodes spp. genotype, and Bbsl prevalence and strain type. 2. In South Carolina, to compare the prevalence of Bbsl and Ixodid tick species collected from wild mesomammals with those from a) vegetation, and b) domestic dogs (Sentinels). 3 11/5/12
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Borrelia Spp. Prevalence in Ixodes Spp. Ticks from the Southeastern Coastal United States
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2013 TRENDS IN BORRELIA SPP. PREVALENCE IN IXODES SPP. TICKS FROM THE SOUTHEASTERN COASTAL UNITED STATES Lauren Paul Maestas University of Tennessee - Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Biology Commons, Entomology Commons, Molecular Genetics Commons, Parasitology Commons, and the Population Biology Commons Recommended Citation Maestas, Lauren Paul, "TRENDS IN BORRELIA SPP. PREVALENCE IN IXODES SPP. TICKS FROM THE SOUTHEASTERN COASTAL UNITED STATES. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2013. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2433 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Lauren Paul Maestas entitled "TRENDS IN BORRELIA SPP. PREVALENCE IN IXODES SPP. TICKS FROM THE SOUTHEASTERN COASTAL UNITED STATES." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Wildlife and Fisheries Science. Graham J. Hickling, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Debra L. Miller, Rebecca T. Trout Fryxell Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) TRENDS IN BORRELIA SPP.
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic Structure of Arthropods in Starling Nests Matter to Blood Parasites and Thereby to Nestling Development
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Springer - Publisher Connector J Ornithol (2012) 153:913–919 DOI 10.1007/s10336-012-0827-1 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Trophic structure of arthropods in Starling nests matter to blood parasites and thereby to nestling development Peter H. J. Wolfs • Izabela K. Lesna • Maurice W. Sabelis • Jan Komdeur Received: 23 September 2011 / Revised: 16 January 2012 / Accepted: 30 January 2012 / Published online: 19 February 2012 Ó The Author(s) 2012. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Nestling development and long-term survival inherent density-dependent delays in Lotka-Volterra pred- in many bird species depend on factors such as parental ator–prey interactions are taken into account: a high den- feeding, time of breeding and environmental conditions. sity of predatory mites (AC) always arises after an increase However, little research has been carried out on the effect of prey mites (DG). Thus, the high density of predatory of ectoparasites on nestling development, and no research mites indicates a preceding peak density of parasitic mites. on the impact of the trophic structure of arthropods Clearly, this explanation requires insight in the trophic inhabiting the nest (combined effects of ectoparasitic mites structure of mites inhabiting Starling nests and bird nests in and predatory mites feeding on ectoparasites). We assess general. We conclude that multitrophic interactions nestling development of European Starlings (Sturnus vul- (between predator, parasite and host) in nests should not be garis) in relation to the number of parasitic mites Derma- ignored when assessing nestling development.
    [Show full text]
  • When Did Dirofilaria Repense Merge in Domestic Dogs and Humans in the Baltic Countries?
    Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Oct 04, 2021 When did Dirofilaria repense merge in domestic dogs and humans in the Baltic countries? Deksne, Gunita ; Jokelainen, Pikka; Oborina, Valentina ; Lassen, Brian; Akota, Ilze ; Kutanovaite, Otilia ; Zaleckas, Linas ; Cirule, Dina ; Tupts, Artjoms ; Pimanovs, Viktors Total number of authors: 12 Published in: 9th Conference of the Scandinavian - Baltic Society for Parasitology Publication date: 2021 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link back to DTU Orbit Citation (APA): Deksne, G., Jokelainen, P., Oborina, V., Lassen, B., Akota, I., Kutanovaite, O., Zaleckas, L., Cirule, D., Tupts, A., Pimanovs, V., Talijunas, A., & Krmia, A. (2021). When did Dirofilaria repense merge in domestic dogs and humans in the Baltic countries? In 9th Conference of the Scandinavian - Baltic Society for Parasitology : Abstract book (pp. 79-79). Nature Research Centre. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]
  • UMI MICROFILMED 1990 INFORMATION to USERS the Most Advanced Technology Has Been Used to Photo­ Graph and Reproduce This Manuscript from the Microfilm Master
    UMI MICROFILMED 1990 INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. These are also available as one exposure on a standard 35mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road.
    [Show full text]
  • Class G Tables of Geographic Cutter Numbers: Maps -- by Region Or
    G3862 SOUTHERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3862 FEATURES, ETC. .C55 Clayton Aquifer .C6 Coasts .E8 Eutaw Aquifer .G8 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway .L6 Louisville and Nashville Railroad 525 G3867 SOUTHEASTERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3867 FEATURES, ETC. .C5 Chattahoochee River .C8 Cumberland Gap National Historical Park .C85 Cumberland Mountains .F55 Floridan Aquifer .G8 Gulf Islands National Seashore .H5 Hiwassee River .J4 Jefferson National Forest .L5 Little Tennessee River .O8 Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail 526 G3872 SOUTHEAST ATLANTIC STATES. REGIONS, G3872 NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. .B6 Blue Ridge Mountains .C5 Chattooga River .C52 Chattooga River [wild & scenic river] .C6 Coasts .E4 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Area .N4 New River .S3 Sandhills 527 G3882 VIRGINIA. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G3882 .A3 Accotink, Lake .A43 Alexanders Island .A44 Alexandria Canal .A46 Amelia Wildlife Management Area .A5 Anna, Lake .A62 Appomattox River .A64 Arlington Boulevard .A66 Arlington Estate .A68 Arlington House, the Robert E. Lee Memorial .A7 Arlington National Cemetery .A8 Ash-Lawn Highland .A85 Assawoman Island .A89 Asylum Creek .B3 Back Bay [VA & NC] .B33 Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge .B35 Baker Island .B37 Barbours Creek Wilderness .B38 Barboursville Basin [geologic basin] .B39 Barcroft, Lake .B395 Battery Cove .B4 Beach Creek .B43 Bear Creek Lake State Park .B44 Beech Forest .B454 Belle Isle [Lancaster County] .B455 Belle Isle [Richmond] .B458 Berkeley Island .B46 Berkeley Plantation .B53 Big Bethel Reservoir .B542 Big Island [Amherst County] .B543 Big Island [Bedford County] .B544 Big Island [Fluvanna County] .B545 Big Island [Gloucester County] .B547 Big Island [New Kent County] .B548 Big Island [Virginia Beach] .B55 Blackwater River .B56 Bluestone River [VA & WV] .B57 Bolling Island .B6 Booker T.
    [Show full text]