DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment Department of Agriculture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

United States Environmental Assessment Department of Agriculture Forest Utility Corridor Vegetation Management Service October 2008 Project areas occur primarily in rural electric cooperatives’ rights-of-way that cross Ozark and Ouachita National Forests in limited portions of the following Arkansas counties: Baxter, Benton, Crawford, Franklin, Johnson, Logan, Madison, Newton, Pope, Sebastian, Scott, Stone, Yell and Washington For Information Contact: Gary Knudsen, Project Planning Officer Ozark-St. Francis National Forest 605 West Main, Russellville, AR 72801 479-964-7200 http://www.fs.fed.us/oonf/ozark/ The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250- 9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Utility Corridor Vegetation Management Project 2/12/2009 Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1 Document Structure ........................................................................................................................ 1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and Need for Action .......................................................................................................... 3 Proposed Action............................................................................................................................... 5 Decision Framework...................................................................................................................... 10 Public Involvement ....................................................................................................................... 12 Issues ............................................................................................................................................. 12 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION ................ 14 Alternatives.................................................................................................................................... 19 Mitigation for the Action Alternatives........................................................................................... 23 Comparison of Alternatives 26 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................................... 29 Existing Environment and Foreseeable Effects Geology and Soils............................................................................................................. 31 Hydrology and Water Quality........................................................................................... 37 Climate.............................................................................................................................. 48 Air Quality and Noise ....................................................................................................... 49 Vegetation Communities .................................................................................................. 51 Riparian Areas ............................................................................................................. 60 Fish and Wildlife ............................................................................................................. 65 Proposed, Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive Species (PETS)..................................... 69 Management Indicator Species (MIS) ............................................................................. 76 Cultural Resources............................................................................................................ 93 Socioeconomic Considerations......................................................................................... 94 Recreation and Scenic Integrity ........................................................................................ 96 Human Health and Safety ................................................................................................. 99 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ............................................................ 111 Appendices.................................................................................................................................. 112 Appendix 1: References ........................................................................................................ 112 Appendix 2: Glossary............................................................................................................ 126 Appendix 3: Figures.............................................................................................................. 133 Appendix 4: Sampling and Analysis Plan ............................................................................. 134 Appendix 5: Ecoregions........................................................................................................ 139 Appendix 6: Geology and Soils............................................................................................. 153 Appendix 7: Biological Review of Proposed Herbicides ..................................................... 163 Appendix 8: Biological Evaluation/PETS Species................................................................ 166 Summary ii Utility Corridor Vegetation Management Project 2/12/2009 Environmental Assessment List of Tables Table 1 – Proposed Herbicide List 6 Table 2 – Sample Foliage Mixture Spray (100 gallons) 8 Table 3 – Active Ingredient Percentages in Commercial Formulations 8 Table 4 –Active Ingredient Amounts in 100 Gallons of Sample Foliage Mixture 9 Table 5 – Sample Hack and Squirt Mixture (one gallon) with Active Ingredients 10 Table 6 – Analysis Area Measurements 15 Table 7 – Summary of Cumulative, Direct and Indirect Environmental Effects 26 Table 8 – Watersheds, Segments and Basins by County 38 Table 9 – Selected Properties of Proposed Herbicides 46 Table 10: Ecoregion Levels III and IV within the Analysis Area 52 Table 11: Level III and IV Ecoregions and Corresponding AR-GAP Landcover Types 53 Table 12—Project Area Plant Community Types 56 Table 13 - Forest Community Types 63 Table 14 - PETS Species Given Special Consideration within the Analysis Area 70 Table 15 – Analysis Area Management Indicator Species (MIS) 77 Table 16 – Potentially Affected Terrestrial Management Indicator Species 78 Table 17 – Potentially Affected Stream and River Management Indicator Species 85 Table 18 – Potentially Affected Lake and Pond Management Indicator Species 90 Table 19 – Arkansas Counties Socioeconomic Data 94 Table 20 – USDA Forest Service Risk Assessment Data, LD50 Rates 102 McNabb Table 1 - The Relative Toxicity of Commonly Used Silvicultural Herbicides 101 Table A5-1: 1999 USDA Forest Service Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment 147 Table A5-2: Field Survey Plots Where Vegetation Data was Collected 150 Table A8-1 – Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Species 166 List of Figures Figure 1 – Overview of Participating Cooperatives’ General Service Areas within the National Forests 2 Figure 1A – Overview of Participating Cooperatives' Overlap with National Forests 14 Figure 2 – Analysis Area Map Overview with Forest Service ROWs 16 Figure 3 – Ozark National Forest Analysis Area Overview 17 Figure 3a –Ozark National Forest 17 Figure 3b –Ozark National Forest 18 Figure 3c –Ozark National Forest 18 Figure 4 – Ouachita National Forest Analysis Area Overview 19 Summary iii Utility Corridor Vegetation Management Project 2/12/2009 Environmental Assessment SUMMARY The Ozark and Ouachita National Forests propose to allow the utilization of USDA- approved silvicultural herbicide treatments on target vegetation in four rural electric cooperatives’ rights-of-way (ROWs). The activity area consists of approximately 425 miles of distribution and transmission lines that cross National Forest lands in portions of fourteen counties in north central, northwest and west Arkansas. This Proposed Action Alternative is needed to increase the efficiency, effectiveness and environmental soundness of vegetation management in rural electric cooperatives’ ROWs that cross National Forest lands. The proposed herbicides, currently used by participating rural electric cooperatives on non-Forest Service properties, are proven to be safe, effective, efficient, and environmentally sound when used according to manufacturers’ label directions and when Best Management Practices (BMPs) are employed. The proposed herbicides are registered and approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for silvicultural use. EPA-approved herbicides are currently
Recommended publications
  • Arkansas Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act and Pending Evaluations of Other Species

    Arkansas Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act and Pending Evaluations of Other Species

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service December 2012 Arkansas Species listed under the Endangered Species Act and Pending Evaluations of Other Species Taxonomic Species in Multi- Species Other Listed Group District Litigation in Mega- Petitioned Species and Other Candidates Petition Species Mammals - - 4 4 Birds 1 1 1 5 Fishes 1 9 1 5 Amphibians - 1 3 1 Plants - 4 - 5 Reptiles - 1 1 - Mussels/ Snails 2 8 - 14 Ouachita Madtom, by Brian Wagner/ Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Crayfish - 9 - 2 Insects - 2 2 1 Total 4 35 12 37 Note: All numbers are subject to change based on new petitions, litigation and findings. Legal actions brought under the deadlines have been set for those final Endangered Species Act have listing decisions. dramatically increased the workload of the Southeast Region of the U.S. Fish Mega-Petition Caddo Mountain Salamander, by Stan and Wildlife Service. Under the 1973 Act, The Mega-Petition is a large petition Trauth, Arkansas State University any citizen may petition the Service to list filed in 2010 by several advocacy groups species as threatened or endangered. In that requested the Service to list 404 addition, the Service’s decisions may be aquatic and aquatic-dependent species challenged in a court of law. found mostly in the Southeast. In 2011, the Service determined 374 of those Multi-District Litigation species need to be further evaluated. No and Other Candidates deadlines have been set. In 2009 and 2010, two advocacy groups filed lawsuits related to the Service’s Other Petitions missed deadlines under the Act, and The Service continues to receive other the national backlog of 251 species petitions to list species as threatened or categorized as candidates for the Federal endangered under the Act.
  • The 'Nirbhaya' Movement: an Indian Feminist Revolution Garima Bakshi

    The 'Nirbhaya' Movement: an Indian Feminist Revolution Garima Bakshi

    'Nirbhaya' Movement The 'Nirbhaya' Movement: An Indian Feminist Revolution Garima Bakshi In December 2012, New Delhi witnessed a horrifc crime – a female medical student was violently gang-raped on a moving bus and then dumped onto the highway, injured and unconscious. While she didn’t survive the attack, Nirbhaya, as she was named by the media, sparked a revolution in India and its neighboring countries. Tis paper delves into the many aspects of the movement, examining it as a whole by drawing on the theories of Castells, Jenkins, Papacharissi, and Sundaram. It examines the protests that took place on digital forums which then transcended onto the streets, the afective nature of the movement, and international responses it elicited. Garima Bakshi is a Master's candidate at New York University's Media, Culture, and Communication department. Her research focuses on the intersections between feminism, youth movements, and creative protest in South Asia. gnovis • 43 Volume 17, Issue 2 •Spring 2017 n the night of December 16, 2012, protestors took to candlelight vigils and medical student Jyoti Singh and her peaceful demonstrations at India Gate, friend Avanindra Pandey, looking eventually leading to a change in criminal Ofor transportation home, boarded a private laws, and the setting up of a fast track court bus in South Delhi. Immediately after the to prosecute the attackers (Harris and four other men in the bus turned of the lights Kumar, 2015). and snatched Singh’s and Pandey’s phones. Tey beat them up with iron rods, leaving Te outrage that followed the attack opened Pandey half-unconscious (“Delhi Gangrape up a previously nonexistent space for victims Victims Friend Relives the Horrifying 84 and those close to them to speak out against Minutes of December 16 Night”, 2017).
  • Endangered Species

    Endangered Species

    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
  • Aquatic Fish Report

    Aquatic Fish Report

    Aquatic Fish Report Acipenser fulvescens Lake St urgeon Class: Actinopterygii Order: Acipenseriformes Family: Acipenseridae Priority Score: 27 out of 100 Population Trend: Unknown Gobal Rank: G3G4 — Vulnerable (uncertain rank) State Rank: S2 — Imperiled in Arkansas Distribution Occurrence Records Ecoregions where the species occurs: Ozark Highlands Boston Mountains Ouachita Mountains Arkansas Valley South Central Plains Mississippi Alluvial Plain Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon 362 Aquatic Fish Report Ecobasins Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - Arkansas River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - St. Francis River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - White River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain (Lake Chicot) - Mississippi River Habitats Weight Natural Littoral: - Large Suitable Natural Pool: - Medium - Large Optimal Natural Shoal: - Medium - Large Obligate Problems Faced Threat: Biological alteration Source: Commercial harvest Threat: Biological alteration Source: Exotic species Threat: Biological alteration Source: Incidental take Threat: Habitat destruction Source: Channel alteration Threat: Hydrological alteration Source: Dam Data Gaps/Research Needs Continue to track incidental catches. Conservation Actions Importance Category Restore fish passage in dammed rivers. High Habitat Restoration/Improvement Restrict commercial harvest (Mississippi River High Population Management closed to harvest). Monitoring Strategies Monitor population distribution and abundance in large river faunal surveys in cooperation
  • Five Fish Species Proposed As Endangered

    Five Fish Species Proposed As Endangered

    DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE news release For Release December 30, 1977 Levitt 202/343-5634 FIVE FISH SPECIES PROPOSEDAS ENDANGERED Five species of fish found in North Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee have been proposed for the endangered list by the Interior Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, .Keith M. Schreiner, Associate Director, announced today. The proposal, published in the December 30, 1977, Federal Register, also lists critical habitat for the Waccamaw darter, Waccamaw killifish. Waccamaw silverside, Ouachita madtom, and Barrens topminnow. Interested persons have until February 28, 1978, to comment on this rulemaking. North Carolina’s Lake Waccamaw, where three of the species occur, is a shallow, mostly sandy bottomed, coastal plain lake that is spring-fed. Its clear water is in contrast to the bog-stained “black water” that is characteristic of most lakes and ponds in the area. The three species depend upon the water quality of the lake which is being threatened by a rapidly growing seasonal tourist and resident population. The area is without a modern waste disposal system, and much of the domestic waste seeps into the lake. Run-off from fertilizer applied to gardens and lawns along the developed northern lake shore creates additional problems in the lake. Excavation of drainage canals for real estate development also jeopardizes these species by increasing siltation. Herbicides used for vegetation control in canals which drain into the lake have also severely depleted fish populations. The Ouachita madtom, which is found in south-central Arkansas, is threatened by stream alteration projects and construction activities.
  • DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, and REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY of the ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson

    DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, and REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY of the ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson

    DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY OF THE ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences APPROVED: Richard J. Neves, Chair Dona:;[d J. Orth Johm J. Ney Louis A. Hel:frich April 1987 Blacksburg, Virginia DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY OF THE ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson Richard J. Neves, Chair Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences (ABSTRACT) Distribution of the orangefin madtom (Noturus gilberti) was determined from 347 sites sampled in Virginia and North Carolina. This species inhabited 264 stream kilometers, over twice the reported range, in the following systems: Craig Creek, Roanoke River, Dan River, Big Chestnut Creek, South Mayo River, Pigg River, and Smith River. The orangefin madtom was somewhat common; 33% (Dan River) to 70% (Craig Creek) of the sites sampled were occupied. Negative interspecific associates of orangefin madtoms included chubs, mountain redbelly dace, rosyside dace, crescent shiners, and crayfish; only Roanoke darters were considered positive associates. Sand and silt levels were significantly lower at sites with !L. gilberti, while per- centage of small cobble, local gradient, and depth were sig- nificantly higher. Discriminant function analysis identified large gravel, local gradient, silt, and occurrence of rosyside dace and crayfish, as significant predictors of the occurrence of the orangefin madtom. Seasonal samples from Craig Creek consisted of three age groups. The smallest individual captured was 33 mm total length (TL) and the largest was 111 mm TL.
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003

    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003

    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
  • Clear Black Smoke Mohammed Qasim Ashfaq

    Clear Black Smoke Mohammed Qasim Ashfaq

    CLEAR 1 BLACK 1 2 2 3 SMOKE 3 4 4 5 MOHAMMED 5 6 QASIM 6 7 7 8 ASHFAQ 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 25 25 26 26 27 27 28 28 CLEAR 1 BLACK 1 2 2 3 SMOKE 3 4 4 5 MOHAMMED 5 6 QASIM 6 7 7 8 ASHFAQ 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 First Edition 2017 17 18 18 19 Editor Shanay Jhaveri 19 20 Concept Shanay Jhaveri and Hannah Barry 20 21 Coordination Diana Córdoba Barrios 21 22 Photography Damian Griffiths 22 23 Studio photos Mohammed Qasim Ashfaq 23 24 ©The Isamu Noguchi Foundation and Garden Museum 24 25 / ARS, New York + DACS, London 25 26 Design Victoria Bridal 26 27 Typefaces Circular and Palatino Edited by 27 28 Printed by Ex Why Zed, Cambridge, United Kingdom Shanay Jhaveri 28 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 SCALING UP, TO SHIFT 5 5 6 Shanay Jhaveri 6 7 7 8 BLACK 9 8 9 Alexis Lowry 9 10 10 11 THINKING THROUGH PERFECT 13 11 12 WITH DONATIEN GRAU 12 13 13 14 MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES: 33 14 15 ISAMU NOGUCHI AND THE JANTAR MANTAR 15 16 Devika Singh 16 17 17 18 POTENTIAL ART 39 18 19 Ben Eastham 19 20 20 21 PERFECTION 45 21 22 Charlie Clarke 22 23 23 24 SHIFT 51 24 25 Paul Hobson 25 26 26 27 27 28 28 SCALING UP, 1 TO SHIFT 2 3 4 SHANAY JHAVERI 5 6 7 8 9 Mohammed Qasim Ashfaq’s is a nascent practice, one that 10 is still revealing itself.

  • Marriage Certificates

    GROOM LAST NAME GROOM FIRST NAME BRIDE LAST NAME BRIDE FIRST NAME DATE PLACE Abbott Calvin Smerdon Dalkey Irene Mae Davies 8/22/1926 Batavia Abbott George William Winslow Genevieve M. 4/6/1920Alabama Abbotte Consalato Debale Angeline 10/01/192 Batavia Abell John P. Gilfillaus(?) Eleanor Rose 6/4/1928South Byron Abrahamson Henry Paul Fullerton Juanita Blanche 10/1/1931 Batavia Abrams Albert Skye Berusha 4/17/1916Akron, Erie Co. Acheson Harry Queal Margaret Laura 7/21/1933Batavia Acheson Herbert Robert Mcarthy Lydia Elizabeth 8/22/1934 Batavia Acker Clarence Merton Lathrop Fannie Irene 3/23/1929East Bethany Acker George Joseph Fulbrook Dorothy Elizabeth 5/4/1935 Batavia Ackerman Charles Marshall Brumsted Isabel Sara 9/7/1917 Batavia Ackerson Elmer Schwartz Elizabeth M. 2/26/1908Le Roy Ackerson Glen D. Mills Marjorie E. 02/06/1913 Oakfield Ackerson Raymond George Sherman Eleanora E. Amelia 10/25/1927 Batavia Ackert Daniel H. Fisher Catherine M. 08/08/1916 Oakfield Ackley Irving Amos Reid Elizabeth Helen 03/17/1926 Le Roy Acquisto Paul V. Happ Elsie L. 8/27/1925Niagara Falls, Niagara Co. Acton Robert Edward Derr Faith Emma 6/14/1913Brockport, Monroe Co. Adamowicz Ian Kizewicz Joseta 5/14/1917Batavia Adams Charles F. Morton Blanche C. 4/30/1908Le Roy Adams Edward Vice Jane 4/20/1908Batavia Adams Edward Albert Considine Mary 4/6/1920Batavia Adams Elmer Burrows Elsie M. 6/6/1911East Pembroke Adams Frank Leslie Miller Myrtle M. 02/22/1922 Brockport, Monroe Co. Adams George Lester Rebman Florence Evelyn 10/21/1926 Corfu Adams John Benjamin Ford Ada Edith 5/19/1920Batavia Adams Joseph Lawrence Fulton Mary Isabel 5/21/1927Batavia Adams Lawrence Leonard Boyd Amy Lillian 03/02/1918 Le Roy Adams Newton B.
  • European Central Bank Executive Board 60640 Frankfurt Am Main Germany Brussels, 30 August 2017 Confirmatory Application to Th

    European Central Bank Executive Board 60640 Frankfurt Am Main Germany Brussels, 30 August 2017 Confirmatory Application to Th

    The European Parliament Fabio De Masi - European Parliament - Rue Wiertz 60 - WIB 03M031 - 1047 Brussels European Central Bank Executive Board 60640 Frankfurt am Main Germany Brussels, 30 August 2017 Confirmatory application to the ECB reply dated 3 August 2017 Reference: LS/PT/2017/61 Dear Sir or Madam, We hereby submit a confirmatory application (Art. 7 (2) ECB/2004/3) based on your reply dated 3 August 2017, in which you fully refused access to the legal opinion “Responses to questions concerning the interpretation of Art. 14.4 of the Statute of the ESCB and of the ECB”. We submit the confirmatory application on the following grounds that the ECB has a legal obligation to disclose documents based on Article 2 (1) ECB/2004/3 in conjunction with Article 15 (3) TFEU. Presumption of the exceptions set out in Article 4 (2) ECB/2004/3 (undermining of the protection of court proceedings and legal advice) and Article 4 (3) ECB/2004/3 (undermining of the deliberation process) is unlawful. 1. Protection of legal advice, no undermining of legitimate interests – irrelevance of intentions, future deliberations and ‘erga omnes’ effects In your letter you state, “In the case at hand, public release of the legal opinion – which was sought by the ECB’s decision-making bodies and intended exclusively for their information and consideration – would undermine the ECB’s legitimate interest in receiving frank, objective and comprehensive legal advice. This especially so since this legal advice was not only essential for the decision-making bodies to feed
  • Editorial and Design Principles in Precursors Of

    Editorial and Design Principles in Precursors Of

    PRECURSORS TO THE RISE OF ENGLISH WORLD ATLASES; Theatres, Atlases, Cosmographies, Geographies, and Sets of Maps Dalia Varanka, Research Geographer U.S. Geological Survey 1400 Independence Road Rolla, Mo 65401 Tel. 573.308.3897 Email [email protected] Acnowledgement: This paper is based on doctoral dissertation research formulated under the supervision of J.B. Harley. The dissertation work was supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation and with fellowships from the John Carter Brown Library, Brown University; the Hermon Dunlap Smith Center for the History of Cartography, The Newberry Library; and the Graduate College of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The context of the rise of world atlases in England suggests that they were tied to wider scholarly and social issues covering the period of roughly 1630 through 1730. This short history discusses the cosmographical background and Continental foundations of the rise of world atlases in England, and a survey of relevant English precursors to those atlases. A risk exists of rooting definitions of atlases firmly in cartography, subsuming other defining concepts, such as scientific philosophy and social values. An alternative way to look at atlases is that they are part of the larger corpus of their other contemporary works. The word ‘atlas’ was applied to only a part of our extant corpus of bound or unbound collections of maps of the world made in late seventeenth- century England. A more frequent term is "set of maps," (or Tabularum Geographicarum). ‘Geography’ is also used. Bound sets of maps, which are called Atlas Factice, are almost never called atlases by their makers or producers.
  • The Wfhissue

    The Wfhissue

    A JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATIONS AND CORPORATE RELATIONS ISSUE 20 2020 The WFH Issue CHRIS KEMPCZINSKI: Year One as McDonald’s CEO SIR ALAN PARKER Interviews Adam Grant BRUNSWICK REVIEW REVIEW BRUNSWICK ADRIAN GORE Is Optimistic m ISSUE 20 DAMBISA MOYO on the Global Economy FLETCHER PREVIN: m IBM’s Pandemic Response 2020 AUDRA McDONALD on Broadway NEAL WOLIN on 2009 v 2020 SHELLYE ARCHAMBEAU: Unapologetically Ambitious SIR MARK ROWLEY The Unarmed Cop PHARMA v COVID-19 Brunswick is a strategic advisory firm focused on critical issues. Our purpose is to help the great value-creating organizations of the world play a more successful role in society. We advise on critical issues at the center of business, politics and society, and help our clients—the leaders of large, complex organizations—understand and navigate these interconnected worlds. To download and share Brunswick Review stories go to www.brunswickgroup.com/review You can follow us on Twitter @BrunswickGroup Highlights from this and previous issues are also available on LinkedIn editor in chief Kevin Helliker managing editor Carlton Wilkinson creative director Frank Tagariello senior writer, deputy editor Edward Stephens project manager Caitlin Koons editorial advisor Vanessa Quarrie The Brunswick Review is printed on Revive print production MerchantCantos 100% recycled, made using post-consumer printed by CPI Colour waste fibers and manufactured without the cover illustration Noma Bar use of any secondary bleaching. feedback [email protected] Copyright © Brunswick Group LLP 2020 2 2The Age of Acceleration BY SIR ALAN PARKER here are moments in history when 20everything seems to accelerate. Ten years in one.