DOCSLIB.ORG

Madison Blue Spring State Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Madison Blue Spring State Park Madison Blue Spring State Park APPROVED Unit Management Plan STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Division of Recreation and Parks August 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................1 PURPOSE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PARK ....................................... 1 Park Significance ................................................................................1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE PLAN..................................................... 2 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW ................................................... 8 Management Authority and Responsibility .............................................. 8 Park Management Goals ...................................................................... 8 Management Coordination ................................................................... 9 Public Participation ..............................................................................9 Other Designations .............................................................................9 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMPONENT INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 11 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT..................................... 12 Natural Resources ............................................................................. 12 Topography .................................................................................. 12 Geology ....................................................................................... 17 Soils ............................................................................................ 18 Minerals ....................................................................................... 21 Hydrology .................................................................................... 21 Natural Communities (FNAI) ........................................................... 25 Imperiled Species ......................................................................... 38 Exotic and Nuisance Species ........................................................... 41 Special Natural Features .................................................................... 43 Cultural Resources ............................................................................ 44 Condition Assessment .................................................................... 44 Prehistoric and Historic Archaeological Sites ..................................... 45 Historic Structures ........................................................................ 46 Collections ................................................................................... 46 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ................................................. 47 Management Goals, Objectives and Actions .......................................... 47 Natural Resource Management ........................................................... 48 Hydrological Management .............................................................. 48 Natural Communities Management .................................................. 51 Imperiled Species Management ...................................................... 54 Exotic Species Management ........................................................... 56 Cultural Resource Management .......................................................... 58 Special Management Considerations .................................................... 60 Timber Management Analysis ......................................................... 60 Arthropod Control Plan ................................................................... 60 Resource Management Schedule ......................................................... 61 Land Management Review ................................................................. 61 i LAND USE COMPONENT INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 63 EXTERNAL CONDITIONS .................................................................... 63 Existing Use of Adjacent Lands ........................................................... 64 Planned Use of Adjacent Lands ........................................................... 65 PROPERTY ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 65 Recreation Resource Elements ............................................................ 66 Land Area .................................................................................... 66 Water Area ................................................................................... 67 Shoreline ..................................................................................... 67 Natural Scenery ............................................................................ 67 Significant Habitat ......................................................................... 67 Natural Features ........................................................................... 67 Florida Greenways and Trails System ............................................... 67 Assessment of Use ............................................................................ 67 Past Uses ..................................................................................... 67 Future Land Use and Zoning ........................................................... 67 Current Recreational Use and Visitor Programs ................................. 68 Other Uses ................................................................................... 71 Protected Zones ............................................................................ 71 Existing Facilities .............................................................................. 71 Recreation Facilities ....................................................................... 72 Support Facilities .......................................................................... 72 CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN ........................................................... 72 Potential Uses .................................................................................. 75 Public Access and Recreational Opportunities .................................... 75 Proposed Facilities ............................................................................ 76 Capital Facilities and Infrastructure ................................................. 78 Facilities Development ....................................................................... 78 Recreational Carrying Capacity ........................................................... 79 Optimum Boundary ........................................................................... 79 IMPLEMENTATION COMPONENT MANAGEMENT PROGRESS .................................................................. 83 Acquisition ....................................................................................... 83 Park Administration and Operations .................................................... 83 Resource Management ...................................................................... 83 Natural Resources ..................................................................... 83 Cultural Resources ..................................................................... 84 Recreation and Visitor Services ....................................................... 84 Park Facilities ............................................................................... 84 MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ............................................ 84 ii TABLES TABLE 1 – Madison Blue Spring State Park Management Zones ................. 12 TABLE 2 – Imperiled Species Inventory .................................................. 40 TABLE 3 – Inventory of FLEPPC Category I and II Exotic Plant Species ....... 43 TABLE 4 – Cultural Sites Listed in the Florida Master Site File ................... 47 TABLE 5 – Prescribed Fire Management .................................................. 52 TABLE 6 – Existing Use and Recreational Carrying Capacity ...................... 79 TABLE 7 – Implementation Schedule and Cost Estimates.......................... 87 MAPS Vicinity Map ...........................................................................................3 Reference Map .......................................................................................5 Management Zones Map........................................................................ 13 Topographic Map .................................................................................. 15 Soils Map ............................................................................................ 19 Natural Communities Map ...................................................................... 27 Base Map ............................................................................................ 69 Conceptual Land Use Plan ...................................................................... 73 Optimum Boundary Map ........................................................................ 81 LIST OF ADDENDA ADDENDUM 1 Acquisition History .......................................................................... A 1 - 1 ADDENDUM 2 Advisory Group Members and Report ................................................ A 2 - 1 ADDENDUM 3 References Cited ............................................................................ A 3 - 1 ADDENDUM 4 Soil Descriptions ............................................................................ A
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 100 Characters
    40 Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation: Final Report Leon C. Hinz Jr. and James N. Zahniser Illinois Natural History Survey Prairie Research Institute University of Illinois 30 April 2015 INHS Technical Report 2015 (31) Prepared for: Illinois Department of Natural Resources State Wildlife Grant Program (Project Number T-88-R-001) Unrestricted: for immediate online release. Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Brian D. Anderson, Interim Executive Director Illinois Natural History Survey Geoffrey A. Levin, Acting Director 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-6830 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation. Project Number: T-88-R-001 Contractor information: University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability Illinois Natural History Survey 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 Project Period: 1 October 2013—31 September 2014 Principle Investigator: Leon C. Hinz Jr., Ph.D. Stream Ecologist Illinois Natural History Survey One Natural Resources Way, Springfield, IL 62702-1271 217-785-8297 [email protected] Prepared by: Leon C. Hinz Jr. & James N. Zahniser Goals/ Objectives: (1) Review all SGNC listing criteria for currently listed non-mollusk invertebrate species using criteria in Illinois Wildlife Action Plan, (2) Assess current status of species populations, (3) Review criteria for additional species for potential listing as SGNC, (4) Assess stressors to species previously reviewed, (5) Complete draft updates and revisions of IWAP Appendix I and Appendix II for non-mollusk invertebrates. T-88 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Epa Level I, Ii, and Iii
    EVALUATION OF EPA LEVEL I, II, AND III ASSESSMENTS AND THE EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON WETLAND COMMUNITIES By JOSHUA J. CRANE Bachelor of Science in Fisheries and Wildlife Management Lake Superior State University Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan 2012 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE July, 2014 EVALUATION OF EPA LEVEL I, II, AND III ASSESSMENTS AND THE EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON COMMUNITIES ON WETLAND COMMUNITIES Thesis Approved: Dr. Andrew Dzialowski Thesis Adviser Dr. Craig Davis Dr. Monica Papeş ii Name: JOSHUA J. CRANE Date of Degree: JULY, 2014 Title of Study: EVALUATION OF EPA LEVEL I, II, AND III ASSESSMENTS AND THE EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON WETLAND COMMUNITIES Major Field: ZOOLOGY Abstract: Effective tools are needed to monitor and assess wetland ecosystems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a three level framework that includes landscape assessments (Level I), rapid assessments (Level II), and intensive surveys of wetland communities (Level III). The EPA conducted a national wetland condition assessment in 2011 using a new rapid assessment method (USA-RAM) that was not calibrated to specific regions. The objectives of this study were to compare the relationships between USA-RAM to the Level I and III assessments, analyze the influence of spatial scale on Level I analysis, and determine whether within-wetland or landscape features were more important in structuring macroinvertebrate communities. Plant communities from 22 wetlands of varying levels of landscape disturbance were surveyed in 2012 and 2013 and macroinvertebrate communities were surveyed twice in the 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resource Condition Assessment Horseshoe Bend National Military Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2015/981 ON THE COVER Photo of the Tallapoosa River, viewed from Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Photo Courtesy of Elle Allen Natural Resource Condition Assessment Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2015/981 JoAnn M. Burkholder, Elle H. Allen, Stacie Flood, and Carol A. Kinder Center for Applied Aquatic Ecology North Carolina State University 620 Hutton Street, Suite 104 Raleigh, NC 27606 June 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are 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 comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Important Considerations for Establishing a Biological
    Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561 Columbus, OH 43221-0561 Biological and Habitat Assessment of the Great Miami River 2018 Montgomery County, Ohio Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561 Columbus, OH 43221-0561 Peter A. Precario, Executive Director Jim Lane, Board President Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MBI). 2019. Biological and Habitat Assessment of the Great Miami River 2018. Montgomery County, Ohio. MBI Technical Report 2019-3-1. Report to University of Dayton. Dayton, OH. 16 pp. + appendices. MBI Great Miami River Biological & Habitat Assessment March 31, 2019 Biological and Habitat Assessment of the Great Miami River 2018 Montgomery County, Ohio MBI Technical Report 2019-3-1 March 31, 2019 Submitted by: Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561 Columbus, Ohio 43221-0561 Chris Yoder, Research Director [email protected] Submitted to: University of Dayton Department of Biology UD Vivarium 300 College Park, 45469-2320 Jeff Kavanaugh, Director [email protected] i MBI Great Miami River Biological & Habitat Assessment March 31, 2019 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................. iii PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES – GREAT MIAMI RIVER BIOASSESSMENT ....................................... 1 Credible Data Requirements .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Water Resources and Watershed Conditions in Congaree National Park, South Carolina
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Assessment of Water Resources and Watershed Conditions in Congaree National Park, South Carolina Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/267 ON THE COVER Researchers at Wise Lake, an oxbow within Congaree National Park Photograph by: Michael Mallin Assessment of Water Resources and Watershed Conditions in Congaree National Park, South Carolina Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/267 Michael A. Mallin and Matthew R. McIver Center for Marine Science University of North Carolina Wilmington Wilmington, NC 28409 December 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementation Guide to the DRAFT
    2015 Implementation Guide to the DRAFT As Prescribed by The Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Program and the State Wildlife Grant Program Illinois Wildlife Action Plan 2015 Implementation Guide Table of Contents I. Acknowledgments IG 1 II. Foreword IG 2 III. Introduction IG 3 IV. Species in Greatest Conservation Need SGCN 8 a. Table 1. SummaryDRAFT of Illinois’ SGCN by taxonomic group SGCN 10 V. Conservation Opportunity Areas a. Description COA 11 b. What are Conservation Opportunity Areas COA 11 c. Status as of 2015 COA 12 d. Ways to accomplish work COA 13 e. Table 2. Summary of the 2015 status of individual COAs COA 16 f. Table 3. Importance of conditions for planning and implementation COA 17 g. Table 4. Satisfaction of conditions for planning and implementation COA 18 h. Figure 1. COAs currently recognized through Illinois Wildlife Action Plan COA 19 i. Figure 2. Factors that contribute or reduce success of management COA 20 j. Figure 3. Intersection of COAs with Campaign focus areas COA 21 k. References COA 22 VI. Campaign Sections Campaign 23 a. Farmland and Prairie i. Description F&P 23 ii. Goals and Current Status as of 2015 F&P 23 iii. Stresses and Threats to Wildlife and Habitat F&P 27 iv. Focal Species F&P 30 v. Actions F&P 32 vi. Focus Areas F&P 38 vii. Management Resources F&P 40 viii. Performance Measures F&P 42 ix. References F&P 43 x. Table 5. Breeding Bird Survey Data F&P 45 xi. Figure 4. Amendment to Mason Co. Sands COA F&P 46 xii.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resource Condition Assessment Congaree National Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment Congaree National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2018/1665 ON THE COVER A quiet gut off Weston Lake Trail, Congaree National Park Photograph by Stacie Flood. Natural Resource Condition Assessment Congaree National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2018/1665 JoAnn M. Burkholder, Elle H. Allen, Carol A. Kinder, and Stacie Flood Center for Applied Aquatic Ecology North Carolina State University 620 Hutton Street, Suite 104 Raleigh, NC 27606 June 2018 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are 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 comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracking List
    Tracked Taxa List: Current as of Invertebrates 2021-May-17 This list contains the tracked invertebrate animal taxa known by the Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre (SKCDC) to occur within Saskatchewan, as of the date provided above. If you notice any errors or omissions, please contact [email protected]. For more information about how the SKCDC generates these lists and what determines when a species is tracked by the SKCDC, visit: http://biodiversity.sk.ca/lists.htm Conservation ranks/status are provided for each species. For details on each, refer to the following resources: ◦ Subnational (S), National (N) and Global (G) Ranks: www.biodiversity.sk.ca/ranking.htm ◦ Government of Saskatchewan Wild Species at Risk Regulations: https://publications.saskatchewan.ca/#/products/1609 ◦ COSEWIC: https://www.cosewic.ca/index.php ◦ SARA; Government of Canada Species at Risk public registry: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/species-risk-public-registry.html SYNONYMS: This list is being provided by the SKCDC as a tool to facilitate users in determining the current, accepted taxonomy. If a name is currently out of use in Saskatchewan, it’s current synonym is provided, indented in the line below the accepted name. In this row, we are unable to distinguish between true synonyms and misapplied names used as synonyms. For example, Cryptantha fendleri is an accepted name for a vascular plant that is currently found in Saskatchewan. This name, however, has also been misapplied to both Cryptantha kelseyana and Cryptantha minima in the past. Therefore, it appears as a synonym to those two species.
    [Show full text]
  • Ap Ppend Dices
    2012 y Apppendices to: Ma Biological and Water Quality Study of the Upper Scioto River Watershed 2009 & 2011 John Kasich, Governor Mary Taylor, Lt. Governor Scott J. Nally, Director Upper Scioto River TSD Appendices 2009 & 2011 DSW/2012-3-5 May 01, 2012 Appendix A-1. Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI) attributes and scores collected from the upper Scioto River basin, 2009 and 2011 Appendix A-2. Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI) attributes and scores collected from the upper Scioto River basin, 2009 and 1995 Appendix B-1. Fish scores for the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) and the Modified Index of well-being (MIwb), 2009 & 2011 Appendix C-1. Fish Species and Abundance for Each Sampling Location, 2009 & 2011 Appendix D-1. Macroinvertebrate ICI Scores and Metrics, 2009 & 2011 Appendix E-1. Notice to Users, Biosurvey Background information, Mechanisms for Water Quality Impairment, and Methods Appendix F-1. Surface Water Chemistry Results, 2009 Appendix G-1. Durez Corporation - Chronology of Events and Remediation Plan Appendix A-1 Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI) attributes and scores collected from the upper Scioto River basin, 2009 and 2011. WWH Attributes MWH Attributes High Influence Moderate Influence Key QHEI Components River Gradient Mile QHEI (ft/mile) (02-001) Scioto River Year: 2011 211.5 59.0 3.25 # # # 3♦ 1• • • • • • • 7 0.50 2.25 210.1 67.0 1.21 # # # # # # 6 0• • • • • • • 7 0.14 1.14 203.4 74.5 2.07 # # # # # # # # 8 0• • • • 4 0.11 0.56 196.2 53.0 2.07 # # # # 4♦ 1• • • • • • 6 0.40 1.60 192.2
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Illinois Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Guide
    2015 Implementation Guide to the As Prescribed by The Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Program and the State Wildlife Grant Program Illinois Wildlife Action Plan 2015 Implementation Guide Table of Contents I. Acknowledgments IG vi II. Foreword IG vii III. Introduction IG 1 IV. Species in Greatest Conservation Need SGCN 6 a. Table 1. Summary of Illinois’ SGCN by taxonomic group SGCN 8 V. Conservation Opportunity Areas a. Description COA 9 b. What are Conservation Opportunity Areas COA 9 c. Status as of 2015 COA 10 d. Ways to accomplish work COA 11 e. Table 2. Summary of the 2015 status of individual COAs COA 14 f. Table 3. Importance of conditions for planning and implementation COA 15 g. Table 4. Satisfaction of conditions for planning and implementation COA 16 h. Figure 1. COAs currently recognized through Illinois Wildlife Action Plan COA 17 i. Figure 2. Factors that contribute or reduce success of management COA 18 j. Figure 3. Intersection of COAs with Campaign focus areas COA 19 k. References COA 20 VI. Campaigns Campaign 21 a. Farmland and Prairie i. Description F&P 22 ii. Goals and Current Status as of 2015 F&P 22 iii. Stresses and Threats to Wildlife and Habitat F&P 26 iv. Focal Species F&P 30 v. Actions F&P 31 vi. Focus Areas F&P 37 vii. Management Resources F&P 39 viii. Performance Measures F&P 41 ix. References F&P 42 x. Table 5. Breeding Bird Survey Data F&P 44 xi. Figure 4. Amendment to Mason Co. Sands COA F&P 45 xii.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Methods for Evaluating Primary Headwater Streams in Ohio Version 4.0 Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water October 2018
    Field Methods for Evaluating Primary Headwater Streams in Ohio Version 4.0 Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water October 2018 State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water Field Methods for Evaluating Primary Headwater Streams in Ohio Spring Creek, Cuyahoga County October 2018 (Version 4.0) John Kasich, Governor Mary Taylor, Lt. Governori Craig Butler, Director Field Methods for Evaluating Primary Headwater Streams in Ohio Version 4.0 Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water October 2018 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK i Field Methods for Evaluating Primary Headwater Streams in Ohio Version 4.0 Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water October 2018 Notices: Ohio EPA has developed this manual to provide standardized assessment methodologies for conducting assessments of primary headwater streams. The methods provided in this manual are used to discern the actual and expected biological conditions in primary headwater streams. The use of the procedures in this manual is particularly relevant in the context of Section 401 water quality certifications and antidegradation reviews. This manual replaces prior documents made available to the public on standardized sampling in primary headwater habitat streams (Davic, 1996; Anderson et al. 1999; Ohio EPA, 2002a; Ohio EPA, 2009; Ohio EPA, 2012). Questions regarding Ohio EPA water quality standard regulations and aquatic life use designations should be directed to the Division of Surface Water, PO Box 1049, Columbus Ohio 43216-1049 [(614) 644-2001]. Ohio EPA maintains a primary headwater web page, accessible at http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/wqs/headwaters/index.aspx that contains this field manual as well as related documents and information.
    [Show full text]