DOCSLIB.ORG

South Carolina's Wetlands: Status and Trends, 1982-1989

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
South Carolina's Wetlands: Status and Trends, 1982-1989 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service South Carolina’s Wetlands Status and Trends, 1982 – 1989 South Carolina’s Wetlands Status and Trends, 1982 – 1989 T. E. Dahl U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Habitat Conservation Habitat Assessment Branch Acknowledgments This study was funded in part by the Dr. Kenneth Burnham of Colorado State Environmental Protection Agency University, Fort Collins, CO wrote the (EPA), Office of Wetlands, Oceans and statistical analysis programs. Watersheds under interagency agree- Publication design and layout was done ment number DW149356-01-0. Special by the U.S. Geological Survey, appreciation is due to Doreen Vetter and Madison, WI. Chris Williams of the EPA, Wetlands Division, Washington, D.C. This report should be cited as follows: Dahl, T.E. 1999. South Carolina’s wet- The author would like to recognize the lands — status and trends extraordinary efforts of two people of 1982 – 1989. U.S. Department of the the Wetlands Status and Trends Unit Interior, Fish and Wildlife of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Service, Washington, D.C. 58 pp. Mr. Richard Young was responsible for the integrity and geographic information system analysis of the data. Ms. Martha Caldwell assisted in the field work and Front cover photo: Estuarine emergents, conducted the statistical analysis of the Edisto River, South Carolina data sets. T. Dahl Many other people on the staff at the Back cover photo: White water-lily National Wetlands Inventory Center of (Nymphaea odorata) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in St. USFWS Petersburg, FL contributed to this effort. Their help is greatly appreciated. United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service United States Environmental Protection Agency 1 Conversion Table U.S. Customary to Metric inches (in.) x 25.40 = millimeters (mm) inches (in.) x 2.54 = centimeters (cm) feet (ft) x 0.3048 = meters (m) miles (mi) x 1.609 = kilometers (km) nautical miles (nmi) x 1.852 = kilometers (km) square feet (ft2) x 0.0929 = square meters (m2) square miles (mi2) x 2.590 = square kilometers (km2) acres (A) x 0.4047 = hectares (ha) gallons (gal) x 3.785 = liters (L) cubic feet (ft3) x 0.02831 = cubic meters (m3) acre-feet (A-ft) x 1233.5 = cubic meters (m3) ounces (oz) x 28.3495 = grams (g) pounds (lb) x 0.4536 = kilograms (kg) short tons (tons) x 0.9072 = metric tons (t) British Thermal Units (BTU) x 0.2520 = kilocalories (kcal) Farenheit degrees (F ) 0.5556 (F - 32) = Celsius degrees (C ) Metric to U.S. Customary millimeters (mm) x 0.03937 = inches (in.) centimeters (cm) x 0.3937 = inches (in.) meters (m) x 3.281 = feet (ft) kilometers (km) x 0.6214 = miles (mi) square meters (m2) x 10.764 = square feet (ft2) square kilometers (km2) x 0.3861 = square miles (mi2) hectares (ha) x 2.471 = acres (A) liters (L) x 0.2642 = gallons (gal) cubic meters (m3) x 35.31 = cubic feet (ft3) cubic meters (m3) x 0.0008110 = acre-feet (A-ft) milligrams (mg) x 0.00003527 = ounces (oz) grams (g) x 0.03527 = ounces (oz) kilograms (kg) x 2.2046 = ounces (oz) metric tons (t) x 2204.62 = pounds (lb) metric tons (t) x 1.102 = short tons (tons) kilocalories (kcal) x 3.968 = British Thermal Units (BTU) Celsius degrees (C ) 1.8(C ) + 32 = Farenheit degrees (F ) 2 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................7 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................8 Historical Background ............................................................................................................................................................9 Study Area ..............................................................................................................................................................................14 Estimating South Carolina’s Wetland Resources .............................................................................................................19 South Carolina’s Wetlands — Common Community Associations ................................................................................. 21 Results: Status, Distribution and Ownership of Wetlands...............................................................................................30 Wetland Trends, 1982–89 ......................................................................................................................................................40 Discussion of Wetland Trends ..............................................................................................................................................44 Summary .................................................................................................................................................................................49 References Cited....................................................................................................................................................................50 Appendix A: Definitions of Habitat Categories Used in the South Carolina Status and Trends Study ...........................................................................................................................53 Appendix B: Data Table ........................................................................................................................................................57 Appendix C: Data Table — Combined categories .............................................................................................................58 3 List of Figures Figure 1. Estimated extent of South Carolina’s original wetlands .............................................................................................9 Figure 2. Regions of historical commercial rice producing wetlands in South Carolina .........................................................9 Figure 3. A 1989 high altitude infrared photograph shows patterns of old rice fields and levees along the Ashepoo River, Colleton County, South Carolina.......................................................................................................10 Figure 4. An infrared photograph of primarily forested wetland along the Pee Dee River, South Carolina, 1990 ...........11 Figure 5. Location and construction date of the major reservoirs in South Carolina ...........................................................12 Figure 6. A 1990 aerial infrared photograph of “Carver’s Bay”, Georgetown County, South Carolina.............................13 Figure 7. The four physiographic zones within South Carolina used in this study ................................................................14 Figure 8. Three major segments of South Carolina’s coast .......................................................................................................15 Figure 9. The South Carolina portion of the Coastal Barrier Resources System ..................................................................16 Figure 10. Major rivers and (watershed) basins within South Carolina. ................................................................................17 Figure 11. South Carolina counties ...............................................................................................................................................18 Figure 12. Major land use categories within South Carolina ....................................................................................................18 Figure 13. Randomized sample plot distribution for this study. ...............................................................................................19 Figure 14a-d. Wetland area (a) as compared to total area of the State; (b) percent by estuarine and freshwater types; (c) estuarine covertypes; (d) freshwater covertypes ...................................................................................30 Figure 15. Estuarine emergent wetlands along South Carolina’s coast ..................................................................................31 Figure 16. Estuarine wetland distribution along South Carolina’s coast, 1989 ......................................................................32 Figure 17. Palustrine (freshwater) wetland distribution within South Carolina, 1989 ..........................................................33 Figure 18. Forested wetland distribution within South Carolina, 1989 ...................................................................................37 Figure 19. Graphic representation of wetland resource areas in South Carolina, 1989 ........................................................37 Figure 20. Change in wetlands (as a percentage) converted to various land uses in South Carolina between 1982 and 1989 ....................................................................................................................................................................40 Figure 21. Conversion and loss of forested wetland in South Carolina, 1982-1989 ................................................................41 Figure 22. An example of wetland loss to “other upland” land use in Horry County, South Carolina ................................42 Figure 23. An illustration of major Federal land units in South Carolina ...............................................................................43 Figure 24. Metropolitan lands in South Carolina and losses of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Approved Plant List 10/04/12
    FLORIDA The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time to plant a tree is today. City of Sunrise Approved Plant List 10/04/12 Appendix A 10/4/12 APPROVED PLANT LIST FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SG xx Slow Growing “xx” = minimum height in Small Mature tree height of less than 20 feet at time of planting feet OH Trees adjacent to overhead power lines Medium Mature tree height of between 21 – 40 feet U Trees within Utility Easements Large Mature tree height greater than 41 N Not acceptable for use as a replacement feet * Native Florida Species Varies Mature tree height depends on variety Mature size information based on Betrock’s Florida Landscape Plants Published 2001 GROUP “A” TREES Common Name Botanical Name Uses Mature Tree Size Avocado Persea Americana L Bahama Strongbark Bourreria orata * U, SG 6 S Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum * L Black Olive Shady Bucida buceras ‘Shady Lady’ L Lady Black Olive Bucida buceras L Brazil Beautyleaf Calophyllum brasiliense L Blolly Guapira discolor* M Bridalveil Tree Caesalpinia granadillo M Bulnesia Bulnesia arboria M Cinnecord Acacia choriophylla * U, SG 6 S Group ‘A’ Plant List for Single Family Homes Common Name Botanical Name Uses Mature Tree Size Citrus: Lemon, Citrus spp. OH S (except orange, Lime ect. Grapefruit) Citrus: Grapefruit Citrus paradisi M Trees Copperpod Peltophorum pterocarpum L Fiddlewood Citharexylum fruticosum * U, SG 8 S Floss Silk Tree Chorisia speciosa L Golden – Shower Cassia fistula L Green Buttonwood Conocarpus erectus * L Gumbo Limbo Bursera simaruba * L
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States
    Pfego-/6^7fV SDMS DocID 463450 ^7'7/ Biological Services Program \ ^ FWS/OBS-79/31 DECEMBER 1979 Superfund Records Center ClassificaHioFF^^^ V\Aetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States KPHODtKtD BY NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFOR/V^ATION SERVICE U.S. IKPARTMEN TOF COMMERCt SPRINGMflO, VA. 22161 Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI) C # The Biological Services Program was established within the U.S. Fish . and Wildlife Service to supply scientific information and methodologies on key environmental issues which have an impact on fish and wildlife resources and their supporting ecosystems. The mission of the Program is as follows: 1. To strengthen the Fish and Wildlife Service in its role as a primary source of Information on natural fish and wildlife resources, par­ ticularly with respect to environmental impact assessment. 2. To gather, analyze, and present information that will aid decision­ makers in the identification and resolution of problems asso­ ciated with major land and water use changes. 3. To provide better ecological information and evaluation for Department of the Interior development programs, such as those relating to energy development. Information developed by the Biological Services Program is intended for use in the planning and decisionmaking process, to prevent or minimize the impact of development on fish and wildlife. Biological Services research activities and technical assistance services are based on an analysis of the issues, the decisionmakers involved and their information neeids, and an evaluation of the state^f-the-art to Identify information gaps and determine priorities. This Is a strategy to assure that the products produced and disseminated will be timely and useful.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Stable States of Tidal Marsh Vegetation Patterns and Channel Complexity
    ECOHYDROLOGY Ecohydrol. (2016) Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/eco.1755 Alternative stable states of tidal marsh vegetation patterns and channel complexity K. B. Moffett1* and S. M. Gorelick2 1 School of the Environment, Washington State University Vancouver, Vancouver, WA, USA 2 Department of Earth System Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA ABSTRACT Intertidal marshes develop between uplands and mudflats, and develop vegetation zonation, via biogeomorphic feedbacks. Is the spatial configuration of vegetation and channels also biogeomorphically organized at the intermediate, marsh-scale? We used high-resolution aerial photographs and a decision-tree procedure to categorize marsh vegetation patterns and channel geometries for 113 tidal marshes in San Francisco Bay estuary and assessed these patterns’ relations to site characteristics. Interpretation was further informed by generalized linear mixed models using pattern-quantifying metrics from object-based image analysis to predict vegetation and channel pattern complexity. Vegetation pattern complexity was significantly related to marsh salinity but independent of marsh age and elevation. Channel complexity was significantly related to marsh age but independent of salinity and elevation. Vegetation pattern complexity and channel complexity were significantly related, forming two prevalent biogeomorphic states: complex versus simple vegetation-and-channel configurations. That this correspondence held across marsh ages (decades to millennia)
    [Show full text]
  • The Horry County Comprehensive Plan Cultural Resources Element
    The Horry County Comprehensive Plan Cultural Resources Element CR1 Horry County Planning and Zoning Department July 2014 Draft Cultural Resources Element INTRODUCTION resources of Horry County: cultural facilities, special events and festivals, and cultural groups. Horry County celebrates its culture in a variety of As the population continues to grow, it will ways from shag dancing to folk art. Managing become necessary to protect and promote the cultural resources concerns preserving history and irreplaceable heritage of Horry County and its heritage, public art and music, and physical people, as well as sustain the functions provided spaces devoted to similar activities, such as by the various cultural facilities and organizations museums, libraries and art galleries. Horry County that exist in Horry County. is fortunate to be steeped in history and culture. Planning for the future of its cultural resources is COMMUNITIES, CROSSROADS & TOWNSHIPS therefore of the utmost importance. The unincorporated areas of Horry County have In February of 2013, Horry County Council many unique place names which have survived, adopted the Horry County Historic Preservation in some cases, for more than two centuries. In Plan as part of its comprehensive plan, Envision 1869, by order of the South Carolina General 2025. This document details and plans for the Assembly, Horry County was divided into ten future of historic resource and heritage townships. These original townships were: preservation. As historic preservation and heritage preservation typically encompass a large part of a 1. Buck Township, town meetings to be held at Cultural Resource Element, the Horry County the Ball Creek Muster Shed. Historic Preservation Plan is hereby incorporated 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Take a Lesson from Butch. (The Pros Do.)
    When we were children, we would climb in our green and golden castle until the sky said stop. Our.dreams filled the summer air to overflowing, and the future was a far-off land a million promises away. Today, the dreams of our own children must be cherished as never before. ) For if we believe in them, they will come to believe in I themselves. And out of their dreams, they will finish the castle we once began - this time for keeps. Then the dreamer will become the doer. And the child, the father of the man. NIETROMONT NIATERIALS Greenville Division Box 2486 Greenville, S.C. 29602 803/269-4664 Spartanburg Division Box 1292 Spartanburg, S.C. 29301 803/ 585-4241 Charlotte Division Box 16262 Charlotte, N.C. 28216 704/ 597-8255 II II II South Caroli na is on the move. And C&S Bank is on the move too-setting the pace for South Carolina's growth, expansion, development and progress by providing the best banking services to industry, business and to the people. We 're here to fulfill the needs of ou r customers and to serve the community. We're making it happen in South Carolina. the action banlt The Citizens and Southern National Bank of South Carolina Member F.D.I.C. In the winter of 1775, Major General William Moultrie built a fort of palmetto logs on an island in Charleston Harbor. Despite heavy opposition from his fellow officers. Moultrie garrisoned the postand prepared for a possible attack. And, in June of 1776, the first major British deftl(lt of the American Revolution occurred at the fort on Sullivan's Island.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Introduction to the Shantou Intertidal Wetland, Southern China
    AA BriefBrief IntroductionIntroduction toto thethe ShantouShantou IntertidalIntertidal Wetland,Wetland, SouthernSouthern ChinaChina Y.Y. W.W. ZhouaZhoua*.*. G.G. Z.Z. ChenChen SchoolSchool ofof EnvironmentalEnvironmental ScienceScience andand Engineering,Engineering, SunSun YatYat--sensen University,University, Guangzhou,Guangzhou, ChinaChina PR;PR; ** EE--mail:mail: [email protected]@163.com 11 IntroductionIntroduction • Shantou City is one of the most developed cities in southeast coastal area of China. • It had a high population of 4,846,400 . The population density was 2,348 per km2, GDP was 1,700 US $,in 2003. • The current use of the Shantou Intertidal Wetland includes: • briny and limnetic aquaculture, • reclamation for farmland and municipal estate, • transition to the salt field or tourism park, • natural wetland as the habitat of resident and migratory wildlife. 2.2. CharacteristicsCharacteristics ofof ShantouShantou IntertidalIntertidal WetlandWetland 2.1 Environmental characteristics The total area of the Shantou Intertidal Wetland is 1,435.29 ha . The demonstration site’s area is 3,475.2 ha , including 4 parts: Fig. 1 Demonstrated content of sub demonstration sites No Demon site Demonstrated Content Area/ha 1 Hexi biodiversity of water weed 512.4 2 Sanyuwei aquiculture and the biological treatment of waste water 1639.5 3 Suaiwang secondary mangrove for birds habitat 388.7 4 Waisha Eco-tourism 934.6 2.22.2 ClimateClimate • The climate is warm all year round with high temperatures and abundant light, and clearly differentiated dry and wet seasons. • Mean annual duration of sunshine: 954.2 hrs. • Historical average air temperature : 23.1 °C. • Average high temperature :38.8 °C • Average low temperature : 15.8 °C.
    [Show full text]
  • Oaks (Quercus Spp.): a Brief History
    Publication WSFNR-20-25A April 2020 Oaks (Quercus spp.): A Brief History Dr. Kim D. Coder, Professor of Tree Biology & Health Care / University Hill Fellow University of Georgia Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources Quercus (oak) is the largest tree genus in temperate and sub-tropical areas of the Northern Hemisphere with an extensive distribution. (Denk et.al. 2010) Oaks are the most dominant trees of North America both in species number and biomass. (Hipp et.al. 2018) The three North America oak groups (white, red / black, and golden-cup) represent roughly 60% (~255) of the ~435 species within the Quercus genus worldwide. (Hipp et.al. 2018; McVay et.al. 2017a) Oak group development over time helped determine current species, and can suggest relationships which foster hybridization. The red / black and white oaks developed during a warm phase in global climate at high latitudes in what today is the boreal forest zone. From this northern location, both oak groups spread together southward across the continent splitting into a large eastern United States pathway, and much smaller western and far western paths. Both species groups spread into the eastern United States, then southward, and continued into Mexico and Central America as far as Columbia. (Hipp et.al. 2018) Today, Mexico is considered the world center of oak diversity. (Hipp et.al. 2018) Figure 1 shows genus, sub-genus and sections of Quercus (oak). History of Oak Species Groups Oaks developed under much different climates and environments than today. By examining how oaks developed and diversified into small, closely related groups, the native set of Georgia oak species can be better appreciated and understood in how they are related, share gene sets, or hybridize.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Zone Region / Overview
    SECTION 9 COASTAL ZONE REGION / OVERVIEW Index Map to Study Sites 2A Table Rock (Mountains) 5B Santee Cooper Project (Engineering & Canals) 2B Lake Jocassee Region (Energy Production) 6A Congaree Swamp (Pristine Forest) 3A Forty Acre Rock (Granite Outcropping) 7A Lake Marion (Limestone Outcropping) 3B Silverstreet (Agriculture) 8A Woods Bay (Preserved Carolina Bay) 3C Kings Mountain (Historical Battleground) 9A Charleston (Historic Port) 4A Columbia (Metropolitan Area) 9B Myrtle Beach (Tourist Area) 4B Graniteville (Mining Area) 9C The ACE Basin (Wildlife & Sea Island Culture) 4C Sugarloaf Mountain (Wildlife Refuge) 10A Winyah Bay (Rice Culture) 5A Savannah River Site (Habitat Restoration) 10B North Inlet (Hurricanes) TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR SECTION 9 COASTAL ZONE REGION / OVERVIEW - Index Map to Coastal Zone Overview Study Sites - Table of Contents for Section 9 - Power Thinking Activity - "Turtle Trot" - Performance Objectives - Background Information - Description of Landforms, Drainage Patterns, and Geologic Processes p. 9-2 . - Characteristic Landforms of the Coastal Zone p. 9-2 . - Geographic Features of Special Interest p. 9-3 . - Carolina Grand Strand p. 9-3 . - Santee Delta p. 9-4 . - Sea Islands - Influence of Topography on Historical Events and Cultural Trends p. 9-5 . - Coastal Zone Attracts Settlers p. 9-5 . - Native American Coastal Cultures p. 9-5 . - Early Spanish Settlements p. 9-5 . - Establishment of Santa Elena p. 9-6 . - Charles Towne: First British Settlement p. 9-6 . - Eliza Lucas Pinckney Introduces Indigo p. 9-7 . - figure 9-1 - "Map of Colonial Agriculture" p. 9-8 . - Pirates: A Coastal Zone Legacy p. 9-9 . - Charleston Under Siege During the Civil War p. 9-9 . - The Battle of Port Royal Sound p.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Gray Squirrel Survival in a Seasonally-Flooded Hunted Bottomland Forest Ecosystem
    Squirrel Survival in a Flooded Ecosystem. Wilson et al. Eastern Gray Squirrel Survival in a Seasonally-Flooded Hunted Bottomland Forest Ecosystem Sarah B. Wilson, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr. Auburn University, AL 36849 Stephen S. Ditchkoff, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr. Auburn University, AL 36849 Robert A. Gitzen, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr. Auburn University, AL 36849 Todd D. Steury, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, 602 Duncan Dr. Auburn University, AL 36849 Abstract: Though the eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) is an important game species throughout its range in North America, little is known about environmental factors that may affect survival. We investigated survival and predation of a hunted population of eastern gray squirrels on Lown- des Wildlife Management Area in central Alabama from July 2015–April 2017. This area experiences annual flooding conditions from November through the following September. Our Kaplan-Meier survival estimate at 365 days for all squirrels was 0.25 (0.14–0.44, 95% CL) which is within the range for previously studied eastern gray squirrel populations (0.20–0.58). There was no difference between male (0.13; 0.05–0.36, 95% CL) and female survival (0.37; 0.18–0.75, 95% CL, P = 0.16). Survival was greatest in summer (1.00) and fall (0.65; 0.29–1.0, 95% CL) and lowest during winter (0.23; 0.11–0.50, 95% CL). We found squirrels were more likely to die during the flooded winter season and mortality risk increased as flood extent through- out the study area increased.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20Th Century
    u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service Co l\Ietland Trends In the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century November 2004 A National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Ralph W. Tiner1, Irene J. Huber2, Todd Nuerminger2, and Aimée L. Mandeville3 1U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program Northeast Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035 2Natural Resources Assessment Group Department of Plant and Soil Sciences University of Massachusetts Stockbridge Hall Amherst, MA 01003 3Department of Natural Resources Science Environmental Data Center University of Rhode Island 1 Greenhouse Road, Room 105 Kingston, RI 02881 November 2004 National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report between U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, University of Rhode Island, and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management This report should be cited as: Tiner, R.W., I.J. Huber, T. Nuerminger, and A.L. Mandeville. 2004. Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, Hadley, MA. In cooperation with the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and the University of Rhode Island. National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report. 37 pp. plus appendices. Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Study Area 1 Methods 5 Data Compilation 5 Geospatial Database Construction and GIS Analysis 8 Results 9 Baywide 1996 Status 9 Coastal Wetlands and Waters 9 500-foot Buffer Zone 9 Baywide Trends 1951/2 to 1996 15 Coastal Wetland Trends 15 500-foot Buffer Zone Around Coastal Wetlands 15 Trends for Pilot Study Areas 25 Conclusions 35 Acknowledgments 36 References 37 Appendices A.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015-2016 Catalog & Student Handbook
    2015-16 CATALOG & STUDENT HANDBOOK Conway Campus (843) 347-3186 2050 Highway 501 East • Post Office Box 261966 • Conway, South Carolina 29528-6066 Five miles east of Conway on US Highway 501, eight miles west of the Atlantic Intra-Coastal Waterway Georgetown Campus (843) 546-8406 • Fax (843) 546-1437 4003 South Fraser Street, Georgetown, South Carolina 29440-9620 Two miles south of Georgetown near the Georgetown Airport Grand Strand Campus (843) 477-0808 • Fax (843) 477-0775 743 Hemlock Avenue, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina 29577 Two miles south of Coastal Grand Mall, near The Market Common, between U.S. 17 Bypass and U.S. 17 Business 1-888-544-HGTC (4482) • On the web at http://www.hgtc.edu Disclaimer: Every attempt has been made to verify the accuracy and completeness of this document at the time of printing. This document does not constitute a contract between Horry Georgetown Technical College and any individual or group. This catalog is based on timely completion of your program of study. Check with DegreeWorks in WaveNet or with your academic advisor for the most current information. 1 HORRY GEORGETOWN TECHNICAL COLLEGE CATALOG & STUDENT HANDBOOK 2015 - 2016 Letter From The President Dear Student, By enrolling at Horry Georgetown Technical College, you’ve made a big step towards a rewarding future. You’ve selected one of the best technical colleges in the South. Nearly 8,000 students enrolled in more than ninety academic programs make all three campuses of Horry Georgetown Technical College dynamic year-around. From culinary arts to sports tourism, forestry to engi- neering technology, HGTC students choose from more career options today than ever before.
    [Show full text]
  • Upside-Down'' Estuaries of the Florida Everglades
    Limnol. Oceanogr., 51(1, part 2), 2006, 602±616 q 2006, by the American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, Inc. Relating precipitation and water management to nutrient concentrations in the oligotrophic ``upside-down'' estuaries of the Florida Everglades Daniel L. Childers1 Department of Biological Sciences and SERC, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199 Joseph N. Boyer Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199 Stephen E. Davis Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 Christopher J. Madden and David T. Rudnick Coastal Ecosystems Division, South Florida Water Management District, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Fred H. Sklar Everglades Division, South Florida Water Management District, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Abstract We present 8 yr of long-term water quality, climatological, and water management data for 17 locations in Everglades National Park, Florida. Total phosphorus (P) concentration data from freshwater sites (typically ,0.25 mmol L21,or8mgL21) indicate the oligotrophic, P-limited nature of this large freshwater±estuarine landscape. Total P concentrations at estuarine sites near the Gulf of Mexico (average ø0.5 m mol L21) demonstrate the marine source for this limiting nutrient. This ``upside down'' phenomenon, with the limiting nutrient supplied by the ocean and not the land, is a de®ning characteristic of the Everglade landscape. We present a conceptual model of how the seasonality of precipitation and the management of canal water inputs control the marine P supply, and we hypothesize that seasonal variability in water residence time controls water quality through internal biogeochemical processing.
    [Show full text]