DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessment of Water Resources and Watershed Conditions in Congaree National Park, South Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in the Reports and Publications section of the Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network webpage (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/secn/) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM). Please cite this publication as: Mallin, M. A., and M. R. McIver. 2010. Assessment of water resources and watershed conditions in Congaree National Park, South Carolina. Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR— 2010/267. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 178/106142, November 2010 ii Contents Page Figures........................................................................................................................................... vii Tables ............................................................................................................................................. ix Plates .............................................................................................................................................. xi Appendices ................................................................................................................................... xiii Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... xv Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................... xvii Commonly Used Abbreviations ................................................................................................... xix Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Park Description.............................................................................................................................. 3 Background .............................................................................................................................. 3 Location, Size, and Boundaries .......................................................................................... 3 History of the Park .............................................................................................................. 4 Creation of the Park ............................................................................................................ 5 Hydrologic Information ........................................................................................................... 6 Rivers .................................................................................................................................. 6 Creeks ................................................................................................................................. 8 Lakes ................................................................................................................................. 12 Wetlands ........................................................................................................................... 15 Hydrology Affecting Congaree National Park. ................................................................ 16 Groundwater Resources .................................................................................................... 19 Biological Resources ............................................................................................................. 20 Algae ................................................................................................................................. 20 Aquatic Macrophytes ........................................................................................................ 20 iii Terrestrial Vegetation ....................................................................................................... 21 Rare and Threatened Plant Species ................................................................................... 22 Invasive Plants .................................................................................................................. 23 Zooplankton ...................................................................................................................... 24 Benthic Macroinvertebrates .............................................................................................. 24 Crayfish ............................................................................................................................. 26 Fish .................................................................................................................................... 28 Reptiles and Amphibians .................................................................................................. 31 Mammals........................................................................................................................... 34 Feral hogs .......................................................................................................................... 34 Birds .................................................................................................................................. 37 Rare and Threatened Animal Species ............................................................................... 37 Invasive Animal Species ................................................................................................... 38 Assessment of Park Water Resources ........................................................................................... 39 Sources of Pollutants ............................................................................................................. 39 Congaree National Park and USGS/SCDHEC Watersheds Designation ......................... 39 Point Source Pollution ...................................................................................................... 39 Non-point Source Pollution .............................................................................................. 43 Assessment of Biological Resources with Respect to Water Quality (Both Surface and Groundwater) ......................................................................................................................... 48 Water Quality Standards ................................................................................................... 48 Surface Water Quality ....................................................................................................... 48 Groundwater Quality ........................................................................................................ 58 Ecosystem Effects ............................................................................................................. 59 Human Health Issues ........................................................................................................ 62 List of impairments (State and Federal listings) .................................................................... 63 iv List of Water Bodies with Undocumented Conditions/ Status .............................................. 64 Other Areas of Concern ................................................................................................................ 67 Development Trends .............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biodiversity Work Group Report: Appendices
    Biodiversity Work Group Report: Appendices A: Initial List of Important Sites..................................................................................................... 2 B: An Annotated List of the Mammals of Albemarle County........................................................ 5 C: Birds ......................................................................................................................................... 18 An Annotated List of the Birds of Albemarle County.............................................................. 18 Bird Species Status Tables and Charts...................................................................................... 28 Species of Concern in Albemarle County............................................................................ 28 Trends in Observations of Species of Concern..................................................................... 30 D. Fish of Albemarle County........................................................................................................ 37 E. An Annotated Checklist of the Amphibians of Albemarle County.......................................... 41 F. An Annotated Checklist of the Reptiles of Albemarle County, Virginia................................. 45 G. Invertebrate Lists...................................................................................................................... 51 H. Flora of Albemarle County ...................................................................................................... 69 I. Rare
    [Show full text]
  • Cravens Peak Scientific Study Report
    Geography Monograph Series No. 13 Cravens Peak Scientific Study Report The Royal Geographical Society of Queensland Inc. Brisbane, 2009 The Royal Geographical Society of Queensland Inc. is a non-profit organization that promotes the study of Geography within educational, scientific, professional, commercial and broader general communities. Since its establishment in 1885, the Society has taken the lead in geo- graphical education, exploration and research in Queensland. Published by: The Royal Geographical Society of Queensland Inc. 237 Milton Road, Milton QLD 4064, Australia Phone: (07) 3368 2066; Fax: (07) 33671011 Email: [email protected] Website: www.rgsq.org.au ISBN 978 0 949286 16 8 ISSN 1037 7158 © 2009 Desktop Publishing: Kevin Long, Page People Pty Ltd (www.pagepeople.com.au) Printing: Snap Printing Milton (www.milton.snapprinting.com.au) Cover: Pemberton Design (www.pembertondesign.com.au) Cover photo: Cravens Peak. Photographer: Nick Rains 2007 State map and Topographic Map provided by: Richard MacNeill, Spatial Information Coordinator, Bush Heritage Australia (www.bushheritage.org.au) Other Titles in the Geography Monograph Series: No 1. Technology Education and Geography in Australia Higher Education No 2. Geography in Society: a Case for Geography in Australian Society No 3. Cape York Peninsula Scientific Study Report No 4. Musselbrook Reserve Scientific Study Report No 5. A Continent for a Nation; and, Dividing Societies No 6. Herald Cays Scientific Study Report No 7. Braving the Bull of Heaven; and, Societal Benefits from Seasonal Climate Forecasting No 8. Antarctica: a Conducted Tour from Ancient to Modern; and, Undara: the Longest Known Young Lava Flow No 9. White Mountains Scientific Study Report No 10.
    [Show full text]
  • The Beetle Fauna of Dominica, Lesser Antilles (Insecta: Coleoptera): Diversity and Distribution
    INSECTA MUNDI, Vol. 20, No. 3-4, September-December, 2006 165 The beetle fauna of Dominica, Lesser Antilles (Insecta: Coleoptera): Diversity and distribution Stewart B. Peck Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada stewart_peck@carleton. ca Abstract. The beetle fauna of the island of Dominica is summarized. It is presently known to contain 269 genera, and 361 species (in 42 families), of which 347 are named at a species level. Of these, 62 species are endemic to the island. The other naturally occurring species number 262, and another 23 species are of such wide distribution that they have probably been accidentally introduced and distributed, at least in part, by human activities. Undoubtedly, the actual numbers of species on Dominica are many times higher than now reported. This highlights the poor level of knowledge of the beetles of Dominica and the Lesser Antilles in general. Of the species known to occur elsewhere, the largest numbers are shared with neighboring Guadeloupe (201), and then with South America (126), Puerto Rico (113), Cuba (107), and Mexico-Central America (108). The Antillean island chain probably represents the main avenue of natural overwater dispersal via intermediate stepping-stone islands. The distributional patterns of the species shared with Dominica and elsewhere in the Caribbean suggest stages in a dynamic taxon cycle of species origin, range expansion, distribution contraction, and re-speciation. Introduction windward (eastern) side (with an average of 250 mm of rain annually). Rainfall is heavy and varies season- The islands of the West Indies are increasingly ally, with the dry season from mid-January to mid- recognized as a hotspot for species biodiversity June and the rainy season from mid-June to mid- (Myers et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Abundance and Diversity of Ground-Dwelling Arthropods of Pest Management Importance in Commercial Bt and Non-Bt Cotton Fields
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications: Department of Entomology Entomology, Department of 2007 Abundance and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods of pest management importance in commercial Bt and non-Bt cotton fields J. B. Torres Universidade Federal Rural de Pernarnbuco, [email protected] J. R. Ruberson University of Georgia Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologyfacpub Part of the Entomology Commons Torres, J. B. and Ruberson, J. R., "Abundance and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods of pest management importance in commercial Bt and non-Bt cotton fields" (2007). Faculty Publications: Department of Entomology. 762. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologyfacpub/762 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications: Department of Entomology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Annals of Applied Biology ISSN 0003-4746 RESEARCH ARTICLE Abundance and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods of pest management importance in commercial Bt and non-Bt cotton fields J.B. Torres1,2 & J.R. Ruberson2 1 Departmento de Agronomia – Entomologia, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Dois Irma˜ os, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil 2 Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA, USA Keywords Abstract Carabidae; Cicindelinae; Falconia gracilis; genetically modified cotton; Labiduridae; The modified population dynamics of pests targeted by the Cry1Ac toxin in predatory heteropterans; Staphylinidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecography ECOG-02578 Pinkert, S., Brandl, R
    Ecography ECOG-02578 Pinkert, S., Brandl, R. and Zeuss, D. 2016. Colour lightness of dragonfly assemblages across North America and Europe. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ecog.02578 Supplementary material Appendix 1 Figures A1–A12, Table A1 and A2 1 Figure A1. Scatterplots between female and male colour lightness of 44 North American (Needham et al. 2000) and 19 European (Askew 1988) dragonfly species. Note that colour lightness of females and males is highly correlated. 2 Figure A2. Correlation of the average colour lightness of European dragonfly species illustrated in both Askew (1988) and Dijkstra and Lewington (2006). Average colour lightness ranges from 0 (absolute black) to 255 (pure white). Note that the extracted colour values of dorsal dragonfly drawings from both sources are highly correlated. 3 Figure A3. Frequency distribution of the average colour lightness of 152 North American and 74 European dragonfly species. Average colour lightness ranges from 0 (absolute black) to 255 (pure white). Rugs at the abscissa indicate the value of each species. Note that colour values are from different sources (North America: Needham et al. 2000, Europe: Askew 1988), and hence absolute values are not directly comparable. 4 Figure A4. Scatterplots of single ordinary least-squares regressions between average colour lightness of 8,127 North American dragonfly assemblages and mean temperature of the warmest quarter. Red dots represent assemblages that were excluded from the analysis because they contained less than five species. Note that those assemblages that were excluded scatter more than those with more than five species (c.f. the coefficients of determination) due to the inherent effect of very low sampling sizes.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of North American Odonata
    A Checklist of North American Odonata Including English Name, Etymology, Type Locality, and Distribution Dennis R. Paulson and Sidney W. Dunkle 2009 Edition (updated 14 April 2009) A Checklist of North American Odonata Including English Name, Etymology, Type Locality, and Distribution 2009 Edition (updated 14 April 2009) Dennis R. Paulson1 and Sidney W. Dunkle2 Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009. Copyright © 2009 Dennis R. Paulson and Sidney W. Dunkle 2009 edition published by Jim Johnson Cover photo: Tramea carolina (Carolina Saddlebags), Cabin Lake, Aiken Co., South Carolina, 13 May 2008, Dennis Paulson. 1 1724 NE 98 Street, Seattle, WA 98115 2 8030 Lakeside Parkway, Apt. 8208, Tucson, AZ 85730 ABSTRACT The checklist includes all 457 species of North American Odonata considered valid at this time. For each species the original citation, English name, type locality, etymology of both scientific and English names, and approxi- mate distribution are given. Literature citations for original descriptions of all species are given in the appended list of references. INTRODUCTION Before the first edition of this checklist there was no re- Table 1. The families of North American Odonata, cent checklist of North American Odonata. Muttkows- with number of species. ki (1910) and Needham and Heywood (1929) are long out of date. The Zygoptera and Anisoptera were cov- Family Genera Species ered by Westfall and May (2006) and Needham, West- fall, and May (2000), respectively, but some changes Calopterygidae 2 8 in nomenclature have been made subsequently. Davies Lestidae 2 19 and Tobin (1984, 1985) listed the world odonate fauna Coenagrionidae 15 103 but did not include type localities or details of distri- Platystictidae 1 1 bution.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera: Carabidae) Diversity
    VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AS INDICATORS OF GROUND BEETLE (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE) DIVERSITY BY ALAN D. YANAHAN THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2013 Urbana, Illinois Master’s Committee: Dr. Steven J. Taylor, Chair, Director of Research Adjunct Assistant Professor Sam W. Heads Associate Professor Andrew V. Suarez ABSTRACT Formally assessing biodiversity can be a daunting if not impossible task. Subsequently, specific taxa are often chosen as indicators of patterns of diversity as a whole. Mapping the locations of indicator taxa can inform conservation planning by identifying land units for management strategies. For this approach to be successful, though, land units must be effective spatial representations of the species assemblages present on the landscape. In this study, I determined whether land units classified by vegetative communities predicted the community structure of a diverse group of invertebrates—the ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Specifically, that (1) land units of the same classification contained similar carabid species assemblages and that (2) differences in species structure were correlated with variation in land unit characteristics, including canopy and ground cover, vegetation structure, tree density, leaf litter depth, and soil moisture. The study site, the Braidwood Dunes and Savanna Nature Preserve in Will County, Illinois is a mosaic of differing land units. Beetles were sampled continuously via pitfall trapping across an entire active season from 2011–2012. Land unit characteristics were measured in July 2012. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordinated the land units by their carabid assemblages into five ecologically meaningful clusters: disturbed, marsh, prairie, restoration, and savanna.
    [Show full text]
  • (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) for the Control of Salvinia
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2011 Introduction and Establishment of Cyrtobagous salviniae Calder and Sands (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) for the Control of Salvinia minima Baker (Salviniaceae), and Interspecies Interactions Possibly Limiting Successful Control in Louisiana Katherine A. Parys Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Parys, Katherine A., "Introduction and Establishment of Cyrtobagous salviniae Calder and Sands (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) for the Control of Salvinia minima Baker (Salviniaceae), and Interspecies Interactions Possibly Limiting Successful Control in Louisiana" (2011). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 1565. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/1565 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. INTRODUCTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF CYRTOBAGOUS SALVINIAE CALDER AND SANDS (COLEOPTERA: CURCULIONIDAE) FOR THE CONTROL OF SALVINIA MINIMA BAKER (SALVINIACEAE), AND INTERSPECIES INTERACTIONS POSSIBLY LIMITING SUCCESSFUL CONTROL IN LOUISIANA. A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Entomology By Katherine A. Parys B.A., University of Rhode Island, 2002 M.S., Clarion University of Pennsylvania, 2004 December 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In pursing this Ph.D. I owe many thanks to many people who have supported me throughout this endeavor.
    [Show full text]
  • Invertebrate Prey Selectivity of Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Punctatus) in Western South Dakota Prairie Streams Erin D
    South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2017 Invertebrate Prey Selectivity of Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) in Western South Dakota Prairie Streams Erin D. Peterson South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Peterson, Erin D., "Invertebrate Prey Selectivity of Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) in Western South Dakota Prairie Streams" (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1677. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/1677 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INVERTEBRATE PREY SELECTIVITY OF CHANNEL CATFISH (ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS) IN WESTERN SOUTH DAKOTA PRAIRIE STREAMS BY ERIN D. PETERSON A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree for the Master of Science Major in Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences South Dakota State University 2017 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS South Dakota Game, Fish & Parks provided funding for this project. Oak Lake Field Station and the Department of Natural Resource Management at South Dakota State University provided lab space. My sincerest thanks to my advisor, Dr. Nels H. Troelstrup, Jr., for all of the guidance and support he has provided over the past three years and for taking a chance on me.
    [Show full text]
  • A Catalog of the Coleóptera of America North of Mexico X
    I Ag84Ah A CATALOG OF THE COLEÓPTERA OF AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO X 1^ FAMILY: LIMNICHIDAE f.--;.- :?: -°7^ :3 0T >-y o- rV^o "0 \;.0 VC r- ■\ :x) -o t/^ 'J^ NAL_Digitizi ngProj ect fell ah52948 ,^ UNITED STATES AGRICULTURE PREPARED BY ÉTl DEPARTMENT OF( HANDBOOK ^£'^'fo^>I^'^^^ ^^ AGRICULTURE NUMBER 529-48 ÇÎ^F.'^?^^ SERVICE FAMILIES OF COLEóPTERA IN AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO Fascicle ' Family Year issued Fascicle ' Family Year issued Fascicle ' F o m il y Year issued 1_.. _ -Cupedidae ____ 1979 45... ..Chelonariidae ... 98.. ...Endomychidae __ 2_- ..Micromalthidae . 1982 46... ..Callirhipidae ... 100- ...Lathridiidae 3_....Carabidae 47._.—Hetcroceridae .. 1978 102.. ...BiphylHdae 4_....Rhysodidae -___ 1985 48... ..Limnichidae 1986 103.. ...Byturidae 5_..„Amphizoidae --- 1984 49_....Dryopidae 1983 104- ...Mycetophagidae 6_..--Haliplidae 50-_- ..Elmidae 1983 105.- ...Ciidae 1982 8_....Noteridae 51.....Buprestidae 107.. ...Prostomidae 9_....Dytiscidae 52... Cebrionidae 109-...Colydiidae 10_....Gyrinidae 53-_. ..Elateridae -..Monommatidae 13-....Sphaeriidae 54.....Throscidae 110- 14-....Hydroscaphidae 55....-Cerophytidae ... 111-. ...Cephaloidae 15... Hydraenidae 56... ..Perothopidae ... 112.. ...Zopheridae 16-...Hydrophilidae _. 57....-Eucnemidae ... 115.. ...Tenebrionidae _. 17_.. Georyssidae 58 .. ..Telegeusidae __. 116.. ...Alleculidae 18..—.Sphaeritidae 61....-Phengodidae ... 117. ..Lagriidae 20_....Histeridae 62 ..Lampyridae 118 SalDÎneidae 21.....Ptiliidae 63... ..Cantharidae 119_. ...Mycteridae 22.. Limulodidae 64...-.Lycidae 120.. ...Pyrochroidae _.- 1983 23.....Dasyceridae 65.....Derodontidae ... 121.....Othniidae 24.....Micropeplidae — 1984 66.....Nosodendridae . 122.. Inopeplidae 25 --Leptinidae 67.. -.Dermestidae 123.. -.-Oedemeridae .._ 26.....Leiodidae 69_. -.Ptinidae 124.. ...Melandryidae ._ 27.....Scydmaenidae .. 70.....Anobiidae 1982 125- ...Mordellidae 28.....Silphidae 71.. -.Bostrichidae 126.. Rhipiphoridae .. 29.._._Scaphidiidae 72.....Lyctidae 127 Meloidae 30. —Staphylinidae ... 74....-Trogositidae 128.. Anthicidae 31..—.Pselaphidae 76.
    [Show full text]
  • A Rapid Biological Assessment of the Upper Palumeu River Watershed (Grensgebergte and Kasikasima) of Southeastern Suriname
    Rapid Assessment Program A Rapid Biological Assessment of the Upper Palumeu River Watershed (Grensgebergte and Kasikasima) of Southeastern Suriname Editors: Leeanne E. Alonso and Trond H. Larsen 67 CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL - SURINAME CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ANTON DE KOM UNIVERSITY OF SURINAME THE SURINAME FOREST SERVICE (LBB) NATURE CONSERVATION DIVISION (NB) FOUNDATION FOR FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PRODUCTION CONTROL (SBB) SURINAME CONSERVATION FOUNDATION THE HARBERS FAMILY FOUNDATION Rapid Assessment Program A Rapid Biological Assessment of the Upper Palumeu River Watershed RAP (Grensgebergte and Kasikasima) of Southeastern Suriname Bulletin of Biological Assessment 67 Editors: Leeanne E. Alonso and Trond H. Larsen CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL - SURINAME CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ANTON DE KOM UNIVERSITY OF SURINAME THE SURINAME FOREST SERVICE (LBB) NATURE CONSERVATION DIVISION (NB) FOUNDATION FOR FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PRODUCTION CONTROL (SBB) SURINAME CONSERVATION FOUNDATION THE HARBERS FAMILY FOUNDATION The RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment is published by: Conservation International 2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500 Arlington, VA USA 22202 Tel : +1 703-341-2400 www.conservation.org Cover photos: The RAP team surveyed the Grensgebergte Mountains and Upper Palumeu Watershed, as well as the Middle Palumeu River and Kasikasima Mountains visible here. Freshwater resources originating here are vital for all of Suriname. (T. Larsen) Glass frogs (Hyalinobatrachium cf. taylori) lay their
    [Show full text]
  • Foster, Warne, A
    ISSN 0966 2235 LATISSIMUS NEWSLETTER OF THE BALFOUR-BROWNE CLUB Number Forty Five February 2020 Liopterus haemorrhoidalis (Fab.) found in a heathland pool in Dorset, England by Peter Sutton. ADDRESSES The addresses of authors of articles and reviewed works are mainly given at the end of this issue of Latissimus. The address for other correspondence is: Professor G N Foster, 3 Eglinton Terrace, Ayr KA7 1JJ, Scotland, UK – [email protected] 1 LATISSIMUS 45 February 2020 TOWARDS A PHOTOGUIDE FOR THE LARGER BRITISH WATER BEETLES Peter Sutton For some time now, I have been working on a sequel to The Larger Water Beetles of the British Isles (Sutton 2008) in a bid to photograph all of the large and spectacular aquatic Coleoptera of Britain. The trials and tribulations of the search for these fascinating insects are described in a recent article in British Wildlife (Sutton 2017). This article also reveals that some of the medium-sized species of interest, such as those of the genus Rhantus have been included, as have species from other groups, including the raft spider, Dolomedes plantarius (Clerck) and a rare wasp, Chalcis sispes (L.), parasitic on soldierflies (Stratiomyidae), which collectively highlight the conservation importance of some of the very special habitats in which they may be found. Figure 1 Rhantus frontalis (Marsham), brackish pool, Canvey Island, South Essex February 2020 LATISSIMUS 45 2 The prospective book, therefore, covers a good number of medium-sized water beetles (7- 13 mm), from the Piles Beetle Liopterus haemorrhoidalis (Fab.) (6.3-7.9 mm) to the comparatively large Ilybius ater (12.5 -14.5 mm), known by some in Britain as the Mud Dweller.
    [Show full text]