Habitat Analysis by Hierarchical Scheme and Stream Geomorphology James B

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Habitat Analysis by Hierarchical Scheme and Stream Geomorphology James B Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Theses, Dissertations and Capstones 1-1-2005 Habitat Analysis by Hierarchical Scheme and Stream Geomorphology James B. Spence [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://mds.marshall.edu/etd Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Spence, James B., "Habitat Analysis by Hierarchical Scheme and Stream Geomorphology" (2005). Theses, Dissertations and Capstones. Paper 151. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HABITAT ANALYSIS BY HIERARCHICAL SCHEME AND STREAM GEOMORPHOLOGY Thesis submitted to The Graduate College of Marshall University In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Science Physical Science By James B. Spence Dr. Thomas Jones, Committee Chairperson Dr. Michael Little Dr. Pam Edwards Marshall University May 5, 2005 ABSTRACT “Habitat Analysis by Hierarchical Scheme and Stream Geomorphology” By James B. Spence A study was undertaken to classify eight stream reaches in the North Branch of the Potomac River watershed and determine if geomorphologic differences influenced the availability of fish habitat structure and fish density. Stream reaches were classified using Rosgen Level II (1996) methods, and fish habitat was determined using Hydraulic Channel Unit (HCU) classification based on a method modified from Bisson et al. (1982). Other habitat variables were also studied such as stream shading and physical habitat based on the Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (Barbour et al. 1999). Despite the differences in HCU density between sites, HCU density did not influence fish density in the study streams. HCU density appeared to be mainly controlled by slope. Fish densities were highest in the relatively unimpacted streams, as expected. However, the impacted streams also appeared to have sufficient physical fish habitat structure to support fishes historically found in these streams. Other confounding variables, such as acid mine drainage, may be controlling factors in inhibiting fish populations in the impacted streams. DEDICATION The author wishes to dedicate this thesis to my wife Julie and my daughters Hannah and Olivia. I restarted my college career 7 days after we got married and have worked full-time and gone to school since. Her patience and support cannot be expressed in words. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge Dr. Tom Jones for all of his help in preparing this thesis and during the field work, especially during the initial stages. Also invaluable was the support provided by Dr. Mike Little throughout the study. I also would like to especially thank Noah Kennedy for all of his help in completing the field work. I would like to thank Keith Donahue, Adam Cottrell, Joe Hughes and Doug for providing additional help during the field work. Thanks also to Dr. Edwards for her review and for participating on my committee. I would also like to thank Dr. Ralph Taylor and Mr. Barry Passmore for serving as adjunct committee members. Especially appreciated is the funding and support by Dominion Power through the dedication of Mr. Bill Bolin, Mr. Frank Massie and Ms. Kristin Edwards. Finally, much thanks is due to Wanda Dyke for making sure everything ran smoothly.. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ..............................................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.............................................................................................................. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... x Chapter I. Introduction.................................................................................................................. 1 Project Background................................................................................................................................1 Study Area...............................................................................................................................................3 Rosgen......................................................................................................................................................5 Stream Habitat........................................................................................................................................6 Fish Surveys ............................................................................................................................................7 Purpose of Project ..................................................................................................................................8 Chapter II. Literature Review........................................................................................................ 9 Stream Geomorphic and Habitat Classification..................................................................................9 Fish Habitat Studies .............................................................................................................................17 Studies Combining Fish Habitat with Stream Classification ...........................................................24 Chapter III. Methods ................................................................................................................... 32 Reach Locations....................................................................................................................................32 Discharge ...............................................................................................................................................34 Pebble Counts .......................................................................................................................................36 Cross Sections .......................................................................................................................................38 Slope.......................................................................................................................................................39 Fish Surveys ..........................................................................................................................................39 General Habitat Assessments ..............................................................................................................40 Riparian Cover .....................................................................................................................................41 Habitat Mapping—Hydraulic Channel Units....................................................................................41 Rosgen Data ..........................................................................................................................................43 Upper Stony River Reach ....................................................................................................................44 Statistics.................................................................................................................................................44 Chapter IV. Results...................................................................................................................... 46 Fish Surveys ..........................................................................................................................................46 Habitat Mapping...................................................................................................................................48 Rosgen Data ..........................................................................................................................................50 Other Habitat Results ..........................................................................................................................56 HSI Values.............................................................................................................................................59 Comparison of Sites..............................................................................................................................60 Chapter V. Discussion.................................................................................................................. 78 Hierarchical Setting of Channels ........................................................................................................78 Fish Study..............................................................................................................................................79 Available Physical Habitat...................................................................................................................80 Hydraulic Unit Classification ..............................................................................................................80 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................81
Recommended publications
  • A Retrospective Tiered Environmental Assessment of the Mount Storm Wind Energy Facility, West Virginia, Usa
    - ORNL/TM-2012/515 A RETROSPECTIVE TIERED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE MOUNT STORM WIND ENERGY FACILITY, WEST VIRGINIA, USA November 26, 2012 Rebecca A. Efroymson and Robin J. Day Oak Ridge National Laboratory M. Dale Strickland Western EcoSystems Technology DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY Reports produced after January 1, 1996, are generally available free via the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Information Bridge. Web site http://www.osti.gov/bridge Reports produced before January 1, 1996, may be purchased by members of the public from the following source. National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Telephone 703-605-6000 (1-800-553-6847) TDD 703-487-4639 Fax 703-605-6900 E-mail [email protected] Web site http://www.ntis.gov/support/ordernowabout.htm Reports are available to DOE employees, DOE contractors, Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDE) representatives, and International Nuclear Information System (INIS) representatives from the following source. Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Telephone 865-576-8401 Fax 865-576-5728 E-mail [email protected] Web site http://www.osti.gov/contact.html This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Build Your Own Plunge Pool
    How To Build Your Own DIY Plunge Pool ------------------------------------------------------- Save Up to $10,000 Or More on Your Costs! Includes: Construction Overview, Materials, Cost Breakdowns & More! The “Little” Book that’s worth its Weight in GOLD!!! Copyright © 1999-2016 Revised 9/08/2016 Custom Built Spas The DIY Plunge Pool Build Manual The Fastest Growing “Must Have” for Gen X and Baby Boomers! I don’t think I know anybody who doesn’t enjoy relaxing in a nice clean body of water, warm or cool. And, it’s pretty common knowledge that for most of us, water provides one of the best environments for relaxing and exercise that you can do for yourself. Water exercise is low impact, less strain, good for tired or injured muscles and suitable for just about everyone, regardless of what age they may be or what shape they may be in. A low intensity water type workout is excellent for anyone starting or on their journey of getting back in shape. Maybe you’re just looking for a means to do a low impact cardio type workout. A refreshing water environment is one of the most perfect means to accomplish both a low impact workout and low impact cardio exercises. Best of all you can just stop, float and relax anytime you want. So… just what is a Plunge Pool anyway? Simply put; a plunge pool is much the same as a hot tub, swim spa or exercise pool, but typically without the jets. It can be smaller or sometimes shorter than a typical swim spa.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources Research Center in the District of Columbia: Water
    DC WRRC Report. No. 36 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Water Resources Research Center WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Water Supply Management In the District of Columbia: An Institutional Assessment by Daniel P. Beard, Principal Investigator February 1982 WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT IN TI-M DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: AN INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT WRRC Report No. 36 by Or. Daniel Beard ERRATA The following errors should be corrected as follows: Page V-5, Line 11 - The diameter of the conduit from Great Falls is 9 ft. not 90 ft. Page V-6, Line 18 - The operation of the water department of the District is not under the Chief of Engineers. Page V-8, Figure 14 - The line of supply to the Federal Government in Virginia is through the D.C.-DES, not through Arlington County. Page VI-8 - Mr. Jean B. Levesque was the Administrator of the Water Resources Management Administration of the Department of Environmental Services. DISCLAIMER "Contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the United States Department of the Interior, Office of Water Research and Technology, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute their endorsement or recommendation for use by the United States Government”. ABSTRACT This study defines the District of Columbia's water management structure, explains how it operates, delineates the issues it will have to deal with in the 1980's, and assesses how the District is prepared to deal with these issues. The study begins with a description of the Potomac River Basin and the physical environment water managers in the Washington Metropolitan have to deal with.
    [Show full text]
  • Participant Statistical Areas Program Verification
    39.338794N 2020 PSAP VERIFICATION (PSAPV) - CENSUS TRACT CODE REVIEW MAP: Tucker County, WV 39.335839N 79.842446W 79.282054W S a un r ny o sid Rd r e e R 26 u ik d n d A P tow orge R Kane e W H r G a e d s hingt o v on wy i R H 50 ll F R hurch o i r ll e w C y R e e d t t d R i h l S 72 el 50 W G D d 50 a y R r d re n d t ha e Aurora R t S s itt H e w w d e y il D 50 en W B g in 219 K d venb 50 R Ste urg d 24 50 l R o d y Rd 50 on ho w b c Geor H ib S ge Washi R n n g gton Hwy e so d n u n R i l a orman R i r B k M G n 50 p a S R le p 560 a M /5 te 76 ollo o R Dayt tone H w Rd C on S B o lya rd n Rd Georg ma e Wa Gor sco L sh er d Ro a in y R n te ill t g S ll H z t Be o R n d Hw Grange Hall 219 y glon Rd 50 R E S M te e a v nburg d p en teve le bu S R rg o S B c d p ir k R r ch y 72 in Cas d lley Hw d g h Ro t R Va n Va o t la H lle 50 l a e Is w y o R h y d o C n d h e 50 ge R c v id e R S w S o rr 6 24 a R 1 N ts d a r Mo e Rd b ge Gorman m Rid u e N pl m te S Sn y yder w H H o tt llo e w rr d 90 a R G k K c no o tt R s 219 e l F b V e a Rd 50 C l T a a t d on l h o or le e n l R C a H a n Rd y t i rt o ill H ll o ls e H 50 w Rd P i ous y ent D W th Accid Al Rd y ar d a ay W B rk 72 a P d 90 e in o W F ses h G airview C S Hor neg hurch R in d y Chur d Bayard c n R ch l u Rd a l R r i nak T r S e Rd R y a e c d l l e a n V e S n s 24 i e v e s a t r G D H 219 - ir e a e l L inc d S R lli H n a ilson Rd m W w o d PRESTON 077 B R ds lan d n Is R Seve TUCKER 093 e Ridg ry er d h R C d k R c s a t B a l g F A les Rd o l Sca d H B o ro o
    [Show full text]
  • Health and History of the North Branch of the Potomac River
    Health and History of the North Branch of the Potomac River North Fork Watershed Project/Friends of Blackwater MAY 2009 This report was made possible by a generous donation from the MARPAT Foundation. DRAFT 2 DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 TABLE OF Figures ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 THE UPPER NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER WATERSHED ................................................................................... 7 PART I ‐ General Information about the North Branch Potomac Watershed ........................................................... 8 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Geography and Geology of the Watershed Area ................................................................................................. 9 Demographics .................................................................................................................................................... 10 Land Use ............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Forebay
    VA DEQ STORMWATER DESIGN SPECIFICATION INTRODUCTION: APPENDIX D: SEDIMENT FOREBAY APPENDIX D SEDIMENT FOREBAY VERSION 1.0 March 1, 2011 SECTION D-1: DESCRIPTION OF PRACTICE A sediment forebay is a settling basin or plunge pool constructed at the incoming discharge points of a stormwater BMP. The purpose of a sediment forebay is to allow sediment to settle from the incoming stormwater runoff before it is delivered to the balance of the BMP. A sediment forebay helps to isolate the sediment deposition in an accessible area, which facilitates BMP maintenance efforts. SECTION D-2: PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Not applicable. Introduction: Appendix D: Sediment Forebay 1 of 7 Version 1.0, March 1, 2011 VA DEQ STORMWATER DESIGN SPECIFICATION INTRODUCTION: APPENDIX D: SEDIMENT FOREBAY SECTION D-3: PRACTICE APPLICATIONS AND FEASIBILITY A sediment forebay is an essential component of most impoundment and infiltration BMPs including retention, detention, extended-detention, constructed wetlands, and infiltration basins. A sediment forebay should be located at each inflow point in the stormwater BMP. Storm drain piping or other conveyances may be aligned to discharge into one forebay or several, as appropriate for the particular site. Forebays should be installed in a location which is accessible by maintenance equipment. Water Quality A sediment forebay not only serves as a maintenance feature in a stormwater BMP, it also enhances the pollutant removal capabilities of the BMP. The volume and depth of the forebay work in concert with the outlet protection at the inflow points to dissipate the energy of incoming stormwater flows. This allows the heavier, course-grained sediments and particulate pollutants to settle out of the runoff.
    [Show full text]
  • Setting the Standard in Fiberglass Pool Installation
    Established in 1999 Setting the Standard in Fiberglass Pool Installation 1617 E. Terra Lane • O’Fallon, Missouri 63366 • 636-978-6660 www.RandRPools.net Small Pools 16’ $42,000 $40,000 10’ 4’ JAMAICA MILAN $44,800 $43,800 ARUBA ST. LUCIA 25’ 12’ 3’6” $44,250 $49,500 6’ 30’ 14’ 3’6” 6’ PICASSO CORINTHIAN 12 2 Trilogy Pools Medium Pools $44,800 $45,800 FREEPORT VALENCIA 30’ 30’ 14’ 3’6” 4’ $53,500 $57,0007’ 14’ 6’ 30’ 30’ 14’ 3’6” 4’ 7’ 14’ 6’ LAGUNA LAGUNA DELUXE 26’ 12’ 3’ 6” $44,200 $50,0005’ 6” 26’ 12’ 3’ 6” 5’ 6” BERMUDA ROCKPORT $55,000 GULF SHORE Trilogy Pools 3 Medium Pools 35’ 16’ 3’ 6” $55,000 $54,9006’ 6” 35’ 16’ 3’ 6” 6’ 6” CANCUN GEMINI 35’ $59,500 16’ 4’ 3” $54,900 6’ 6” 35’ 16’ 4’ 3” 6’ 6” CANCUN DELUXE LAKE SHORE 30’ $53,000 14’ 3’ 6” $55,500 6’ 30’ 14’ 3’ 6” 6’ FIJI STARGAZE 14 30’ 14’ 3’6” $50,700 $53,000 6’ 30’ 14’ 3’6” 6’ ST. THOMAS CORINTHIAN 14 4 Trilogy Pools Large Pools $61,000 $56,500 MONACO KINGSTON 40’ $62,000 15’ 10” 3’6” $61,000 7’ 40’ 15’ 10” 3’6” 7’ CORINTHIAN 16 OCEAN BREEZE 30’ $60,500 $64,000 15’ 10” 3’ 6” 30’ 6’ 15’ 10” 3’ 6” 6’ GULF COAST ASTORIA 38’ $60,000 16’ 3’ 6” $56,500 7’ 38’ 16’ 3’ 6” 7’ BARCELONA AXIOM Trilogy Pools 5 Large Pools $56,000 $61,500 SYNERGY GENESIS Additional Shapes 35’ $48,250 $53,400 $50,500 14’ 35’ 3’ 7” 5’ 7” 14’ 3’ 7” 5’ 7” SIRIUS FORTITUDE MONTEGO 33’ 14’ 3’ 6” $53,400 $50,000 5’ 4” $47,250 33’ 14’ 3’ 6” 5’ 4” ECLIPSE NEBULA CLAREMONT $49,000 $53,000 $58,500 6 6 EMPRESS MAJESTY OLYMPIA 6 Trilogy Pools 6 6 6 6 Inclusions in Standard Package: • Hayward Salt Chlorination • Hayward
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 64E-9 PUBLIC SWIMMING POOLS and BATHING PLACES 64E-9.001 General
    CHAPTER 64E-9 PUBLIC SWIMMING POOLS AND BATHING PLACES 64E-9.001 General. 64E-9.002 Definitions. 64E-9.003 Forms. 64E-9.0035 Exemptions. 64E-9.004 Operational Requirements. 64E-9.005 Construction Plan or Modification Plan Approval. 64E-9.006 Construction Plan Approval Standards. 64E-9.007 Recirculation and Treatment System Requirements. 64E-9.008 Supervision and Safety. 64E-9.009 Wading Pools. 64E-9.010 Spa Pools. 64E-9.011 Water Recreation Attractions and Specialized Pools. 64E-9.012 Special Purpose Pools. (Repealed) 64E-9.013 Bathing Places. 64E-9.014 Authorization and Operating Permit. (Repealed) 64E-9.015 Fee Schedule. 64E-9.016 Variances. 64E-9.017 Enforcement. 64E-9.018 Public Pool Service Technician Certification 64E-9.001 General (1) Regulation of public swimming pools and bathing places is considered by the department as significant in the prevention of disease, sanitary nuisances, and accidents by which the health or safety of an individual(s) may be threatened or impaired. (a) Any modification resulting in the operation of the pool in a manner unsanitary or dangerous to public health or safety shall subject the state operating permit to suspension or revocation. (b) Failure to comply with any of the requirements of these rules shall constitute a public nuisance dangerous to health. (2) This chapter prescribes minimum design, construction, and operation requirements. (a) The department will accept dimensional standards for competition type pools as published by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2008; Federation Internationale de Natation Amateur (FINA), 2005-2009 Handbook; 2006-2007 Official Rules and Code of USA Diving with 2007 Amendments by USA Diving, Inc.; 2008 USA Swimming Rules and Regulations, and National Federation of State High School Associations, Swimming and Diving and Water Polo Rules Book, 2008-2009, which are incorporated by reference in these rules and can be obtained from: NCAA.org, fina.org , usadiving.org, usaswimming.org, and nfhs.org, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Drop Structures
    DROP STRUCTURES 1 DESCRIPTION OF TECHNIQUE Drop structures (also known as grade controls, sills, or weirs) are low-elevation structures that span the entire width of the channel, creating an abrupt drop in channel bed and water surface elevation in a downstream direction. Drop structures have been used extensively in Washington State to stabilize channel grades, improve fish passage, and to reduce erosion. Generally speaking, in fish bearing waters, vertical drops must not exceed 1 foot [WAC 220-110-070]; lesser drops are often required to accommodate certain species and age classes of fish. Drop Structures are designed to spill and direct flow such that there is a distinct drop in water surface elevation at normal low flows. The purpose of drop structures may include but is not limited to: • redistribute or dissipate energy; • stabilize the channel bed; • restore a step pool morphology to an altered channel • limit channel incision; • limit bank erosion by directing flow away from an eroding bank; • modify the channel bed profile and form by promoting collection, sorting and deposition of sediment; • create structural and hydraulic diversity in uniform channels; • improve fish passage over natural and artificial barriers by backwatering the upstream reach; • scour the channel bed, creating holding pools for fish and other aquatic life; • provide backwater (depth) in groundwater fed side channels; or • raise the bed of an incised stream to reconnect it with its floodplain. Drop structures may resemble porous weirs in appearance. But while drop structures direct water over the structure and are applied primarily to modify the profile of a channel, porous weirs allow water to flow through the structure and are applied primarily to redirect or concentrate flow.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.00 Storm Water Pond Systems
    This guidance is not a regulatory document and should be considered only informational and supplementary to the MPCA permits (such as the construction storm water general permit or MS4 permit) and local regulations. CHAPTER 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 5.00 STORMWATER-DETENTION PONDS............................................................................5.00-1 5.01 Pond Design Criteria: SYSTEM DESIGN.........................................................5.01-1 5.02 Pond Design Criteria: POND LAYOUT AND SIZE.........................................5.02-1 5.03 Pond Design Criteria: MAIN TREATMENT CONCEPTS...............................5.03-1 5.04 Pond Design Criteria: DEAD STORAGE VOLUME .......................................5.04-1 5.05 Pond Design Criteria: EXTENDED DETENTION ...........................................5.05-1 5.06 Pond Design Criteria: POND OUTLET STRUCTURES ..................................5.06-1 5.07 Pond Design Criteria: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..........................5.07-1 5.08 Pond Design Criteria: SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................5.08-1 5.10 STORMWATER POND SYSTEMS..........................................................................5.10-1 5.11 Pond Systems: ON-SITE VERSUS REGIONAL PONDS ................................5.11-1 5.12 Pond Systems: ON-LINE VERSUS OFF-LINE PONDS ..................................5.12-1 5.13 Pond Systems: OTHER POND SYSTEMS.......................................................5.13-1 5.20 Ponds: EXTENDED-DETENTION PONDS..............................................................5.20-1
    [Show full text]
  • Why Geomorphology for Fish Passage
    Channel Morphology - Stream Crossing Interactions An Overview Michael Love Michael Love & Associates [email protected] (707) 476-8938 Why Geomorphology for Fish Passage 1. Understand the Scale of the Barrier (local or related to watershed scale changes) 2. Base Design on Channel Morphology 3. Anticipate Channel Response to Project 4. Conduct Geomorphic Risk Assessments 1 Common Geomorphic Issues with Culverts Upstream: Localized Aggradation from backwatering Downstream: Channel Incised leave culvert perched Describing the Channel Terrace (Abandoned Floodplain ) Flood Prone Width Bankfull Channel Floodplain 2 Definitions Bankfull Discharge - For streams with adjustable banks, flow associated with water surface at edge of lowest depositional bank. Average return period of 1.2 – 1.7 years (regional). Video Guide to Field Identification of Bankfull Stage in Western US http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/publications/bankfull_west.html Active Channel - Line on the shore established by the annual fluctuations of water. Physical Characteristics: • Scour line along bank • Destruction of terrestrial vegetation. Channel Indicators Bankfull Bench Active Channel Margin 3 Dynamic Equilibrium Sediment Size Stream Slope Coarse Fine Flat Steep Degradation Aggradation Runoff Sediment Supply (Sediment Supply) x (Sediment Size) (Stream Slope) x (Flow) The Lane Relationship (from Lane, 1955) Dynamic Equilibrium Degradation Aggradation Sediment Runoff Supply Urbanization = Increased Runoff Increased Runoff = Channel Degradation (Incision) Degradation = Increased Sediment Supply and Reduced Slope Channel Returns to Equilibrium 4 Sediment Size Stream Slope Degradation Aggradation Run Off Sediment Channel Incision Supply Channel Incision – Lowering of the channel bed (a.k.a. degradation or downcutting). Causes of Channel Incision: Channelization . Shortens channel length (increasing slope) . Reduces overbank storage, increasing peak flows.
    [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]