DOCSLIB.ORG

B4683 NRTR.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
B4683 NRTR.Pdf NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT Replace Bridge No. 20 on SR-1152 over South Deep Creek Yadkin County, North Carolina TIP B-4683 Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1152(12) WBS Element No. 38466.1.FD2 THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit Natural Environment Section June 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS ...................................................... 1 3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................... 2 3.1 Soils ...................................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Water Resources ................................................................................................................. 2 4.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES .............................................................................................. 3 4.1 Terrestrial Communities .................................................................................................... 3 4.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed ..................................................................................................... 3 4.1.2 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype) ..................................................... 3 4.1.3 Piedmont Alluvial Forest ............................................................................................... 4 4.1.4 Terrestrial Community Impacts ..................................................................................... 4 4.2 Terrestrial Wildlife ............................................................................................................. 4 4.3 Aquatic Communities ......................................................................................................... 4 4.4 Invasive Species ................................................................................................................... 5 5.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES .................................................................................... 5 5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S. ................................................................................. 5 5.2 Clean Water Act Permits ................................................................................................... 5 5.3 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern ................................ 5 5.4 Construction Moratoria ..................................................................................................... 6 5.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules ........................................................................................... 6 5.6 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters .................................................... 6 5.7 Wetland and Stream Mitigation ........................................................................................ 6 5.7.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts................................................................... 6 5.7.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts ........................................................................ 6 5.8 Endangered Species Act Protected Species ...................................................................... 6 5.9 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................................................................... 7 5.10 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species ................................................................... 8 5.11 Essential Fish Habitat ....................................................................................................... 8 6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 9 Appendix A Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Project Study Area Map Figure 3. Jurisdictional Features Map Figure 4. Terrestrial Communities Map Appendix B Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report Appendix C Stream Forms Appendix D Qualifications of Contributors LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Soils in the study area ....................................................................................... 2 Table 2. Water resources in the study area ................................................................... 2 Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area ....................... 3 Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area.................................. 4 Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area ............. 5 Table 6. Federally protected species listed for Yadkin County. .................................. 7 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4683 Yadkin County, N.C. 1.0 INTRODUCTION The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace bridge number 20 on SR-1152 (Neelie Rd.) over South Deep Creek in Yadkin County (Figure 1). The following Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) has been prepared to assist in the preparation of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project. 2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS All work was conducted in accordance with the NCDOT Natural Environment Section standard operating procedures and July 2012 NRTR template. Field work was conducted on March 4, 2015. Jurisdictional areas identified in the study area have not yet been verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). The principal personnel contributing to this document were: Principal Investigator: Phil May Education: B.S. Biology, 1992 Experience: Senior Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2006-Present Senior Scientist, HDR Engineering, Inc., 2001-2006 Staff Scientist, GN Richardson & Assoc. 1995-2001 Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, stream assessment, natural communities assessment, T/E species assessment, document review Principal Investigator: Brian Smith, PWS Education: B.S. Biology, 1992; M.S. Soil Science 1998 Experience: Senior Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2004-Present Environmental Scientist, Dewberry, 2003-2004 Environmental Scientist, Blue LWI, 1998-2003 Environmental Specialist, NCDWQ, 1997-1998 Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, stream assessment, natural communities assessment, T/E species assessment, document review Additional personnel who contributed to portions of the field work and/or documentation for this project were Rob Crowther, Chris Hopper, and Joe Sullivan. Appendix D lists the qualifications of these contributors. 1 June 2015 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4683 Yadkin County, N.C. 3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES The study area lies in the piedmont physiographic region of North Carolina (Figure 2). Topography in the project vicinity is comprised of gently rolling hills with narrow, level floodplains along streams. Elevations in the study area range from 760 to 820 ft. above sea level. Land use in the project vicinity consists of forest habitat and agricultural fields. 3.1 Soils The Yadkin County Soil Survey identifies seven soil types within the study area (Table 1). Table 1. Soils in the study area Hydric Soil Series Mapping Unit Drainage Class Status Banister fine sandy loam BaB Moderately Well Drained Hydric* Dan River and Cordorus DhA Well Drained Hydric* soils Dan River and Comus soils DmA Well Drained Hydric* Nathalie sandy clay loam NeB2 Well Drained Non-Hydric Rhodhiss-Scott Knob RdF Well Drained Hydric* complex Toast sandy clay loam TeD2 Well Drained Non-Hydric Tomlin sandy clay loam TnC2 Well Drained Non-Hydric * - Soils which are primarily nonhydric, but which may contain hydric inclusions 3.2 Water Resources Water resources in the study area are part of the Yadkin River basin [U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03040101]. Two streams were identified in the study area (Table 2). The location of each water resource is shown in Figure 3. The physical characteristics of these streams are provided in Table 3. Table 2. Water resources in the study area NCDWQ Index Best Usage Stream Name Map ID Number Classification South Deep Creek South Deep Creek 12-84-2-(1) WS-III UT 1 to South Deep Creek SA 12-84-2-(1) WS-III 2 June 2015 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4683 Yadkin County, N.C. Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area Bank Bankful Water Channel Map ID Velocity Clarity Height (ft) Width (ft) Depth (in) Substrate South Deep 4 60 18 Sand Moderate Clear Creek Slightly SA 1 4 6 Sand, Silt Moderate Turbid There are no designated anadromous fish waters, trout waters, or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present in the study area. There are no designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), or water supply watersheds (WS-I or WS-II) within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area. South Deep Creek is designated as a WS- III Critical Area (CA) from a point 0.6 miles upstream of U.S. Hwy. 601 to a point 0.1 miles downstream of U.S. Hwy. 601, approximately 0.9 mile downstream of the study area. The North Carolina 2014 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters identifies no waters within the study area or within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area as impaired due to excessive sedimentation and turbidity. No benthic sampling locations were found within 1.0 mile of the study area. Fish samples were taken adjacent to the study area at South Deep Creek at SR-1152 (Neelie Rd). It
Load more

Recommended publications
  • North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director
    North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director March 1, 2016 Honorable Jimmy Dixon Honorable Chuck McGrady N.C. House of Representatives N.C. House of Representatives 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 416B 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 304 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Senator Trudy Wade N.C. Senate 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 521 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Dear Honorables: I am submitting this report to the Environmental Review Committee in fulfillment of the requirements of Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765). As directed, this report includes a review of methods and criteria used by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission on the State protected animal list as defined in G.S. 113-331 and compares them to federal and state agencies in the region. This report also reviews North Carolina policies specific to introduced species along with determining recommendations for improvements to these policies among state and federally listed species as well as nonlisted animals. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at (919) 707-0151 or via email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Gordon Myers Executive Director North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Report on Study Conducted Pursuant to S.L. 2015-286 To the Environmental Review Commission March 1, 2016 Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765) directed the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) to “review the methods and criteria by which it adds, removes, or changes the status of animals on the state protected animal list as defined in G.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S
    Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4—An Update April 2013 Prepared by: Pam L. Fuller, Amy J. Benson, and Matthew J. Cannister U.S. Geological Survey Southeast Ecological Science Center Gainesville, Florida Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Cover Photos: Silver Carp, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix – Auburn University Giant Applesnail, Pomacea maculata – David Knott Straightedge Crayfish, Procambarus hayi – U.S. Forest Service i Table of Contents Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ vi INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of Region 4 Introductions Since 2000 ....................................................................................... 1 Format of Species Accounts ...................................................................................................................... 2 Explanation of Maps ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Timing of the Largescale Stoneroller, Campostoma Oligolepis, in the Flint River, Alabama
    REPRODUCTIVE TIMING OF THE LARGESCALE STONEROLLER, CAMPOSTOMA OLIGOLEPIS, IN THE FLINT RIVER, ALABAMA by DANA M. TIMMS A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Biological Sciences to The School of Graduate Studies of The University of Alabama in Huntsville HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Bruce Stallsmith for all his guidance on this project and greater dedication to raising awareness to Alabama’s river ecosystems. I am grateful to my other committee members, Dr. Gordon MacGregor and Dr. Debra Moriarity also from UAH. Thanks to everyone who braved the weather and elements on collecting trips: Tiffany Bell, Austin Riley, Chelsie Smith, and Joshua Mann. I would like to thank Megan McEown, Corinne Peacher, and Bonnie Ferguson for dedicating long hours in the lab. Special thanks to Matthew Moore who assisted in collections, lab work, and data processing. Most of all, I would like to thank my husband, Patrick, for his love and encouragement in all my endeavors. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page • List of Figures viii • List of Tables x • CHAPTER ONE: Introduction 1 o Context 1 o Campostoma oligolepis Taxonomy 3 o History of Campostoma oligolepis 4 ▪ Campostoma oligolepis in the South 6 ▪ Campostoma Hybridization 8 ▪ Campostoma Ranges and Species Differentiation 9 ▪ Life History 12 ▪ Reproduction 12 o Purpose and Hypothesis 15 • CHAPTER TWO: Methodology 17 o Laboratory Analysis 19 o Reproductive Data 21 o Ovary and Oocyte Staging 22 o Statistical Analysis 22 • CHAPTER THREE: Results 27 o Reproductive Data 29 ▪ Ovary and Oocyte Development 32 ▪ Testicular Development 39 vi • CHAPTER FOUR: Discussion 40 o Study Limitations 40 o Lateral Line Scale Count 41 o Reproductive Cues and Environmental Influences 42 o Multiple-spawners 42 o Asymmetry of Ovaries 42 o Bourgeois Males 43 o Campostoma variability 44 o Conclusion 45 • WORKS CITED 46 vii LIST OF FIGURES Page • 1.1 Campostoma oligolepis, Largescale Stoneroller, specimens from the Flint River, Alabama.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Inventory of Fishes in Kings Mountain National Military Park
    Re-Inventory of Fishes in Kings Mountain National Military Park James J. English1*, W. Kyle Lanning2, Shepard McAninch3, LisaRenee English1 Abstract A resurvey of fish in streams on Kings Mountain National Military Park (KIMO) was conducted following a prolonged period of record-setting temperatures and regional drought, with special attention given to Carolina Darter, Etheostoma collis, the species of highest conservation priority to South Carolina. This resurvey compares findings to a previous survey (Scott 2006) that was conducted in comparable fashion. In general, overall fish abundance, species richness and species diversity declined when considering KIMO as a whole or comparing individual streams, with few exceptions. Several species that were present in the 2006 survey were not found in the resurvey, and a few additional species were found. Comparing the 2006 and 2011 surveys found that, in general, common species became more common and rare species became rarer. Variability in temperature and pH values may be useful in predicting survivability or relative success, as species found under a greater range of these variables were more likely to be in high numbers (greater than 5% of the overall community) and were more likely to have increased in abundance between the two surveys. Carolina Darters were found under a wide temperature and pH value range, and increased in abundance compared to the 2006 survey. Included is a specific description of a complex of microhabitat conditions consistently present in each Carolina Darter finding. 1 Lipscomb University Institute for Sustainable Practice, Nashville, TN 2 Gardner-Webb University, Boiling Springs, NC 3 NPS Cumberland/Piedmont Network Ecologist and Data Manager * Corresponding author: [email protected] Introduction One of the most detrimental factors affecting population survival and species richness of fish communities is drought.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Species Mapping in North Carolina Using Maxent
    Aquatic Species Mapping in North Carolina Using Maxent Mark Endries U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office, Asheville North Carolina INTRODUCTION The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is to work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is the lead governmental agency involved in the recovery of federally endangered and threatened species in freshwater and terrestrial habitats. To meet its recovery and protection goals, the Service: (1) works with other federal agencies to minimize or eliminate impacts to fish, wildlife, and plants from projects they authorize, fund, or carry out; (2) supports the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat on private land through technical and financial assistance; and (3) provides scientific knowledge and analyses to help guide the conservation, development, and management of the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources. Freshwater ecosystems present unique management challenges due to their linear spatial orientation and their association with upland habitat variables. On broad scales, the movement of aquatic species within the stream environment is limited to upstream and downstream migration. The inability of aquatic species to circumnavigate man-made obstacles causes them to be particularly vulnerable to habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation has a major influence on species distribution and complicates distribution mapping. To better understand the spatial distributions of freshwater aquatic species in North Carolina, the Service created predictive habitat maps for 226 different aquatic species using geographic information systems (GIS) and maximum entropy (Maxent) modeling. These maps were derived by comparing known species occurrences with a suite of stream- or land-cover-derived environmental variables.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Identification of Common Game and Non-Game Fishes of North Carolina
    BASIC IDENTIFICATION OF COMMON GAME AND NON-GAME FISHES OF NORTH CAROLINA Prepared for use as an Instructional Tool for Wildlife Enforcement Officer Basic Training Chad D. Thomas Fisheries Biologist NORTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION DIVISION OF INLAND FISHERIES Raleigh, North Carolina 2000 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Lesson Purpose and Justification .....................................................................................1 Training Objectives ...........................................................................................................1 Legal Definitions of Fishes ................................................................................................2 Anatomical Features of Fishes..........................................................................................3 Key to Families of North Carolina Fishes........................................................................5 Description of Common Game and Non-game Fishes..................................................10 Mountain Trout (Family Salmonidae) Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) ..................................................................... 10 Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss).............................................................. 10 Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) ................................................................................. 11 Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) .......................................................................... 11 Sunfish (Family Centrarchidae) Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides).........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of the Fishes of West Virginia
    O REPRINTED FROM VIRGINIA JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 117 Vol. 26 • No. 3 • 1975 © Copyright, 1975, by the Virginia Academy of Science Robert F. Denoncourt Department of Biology York College of Pennsylvania York, Pennsylvania 19405 Edward C. Raney 301 Forest Drive Ichthyological Associates Ithaca, New York 14850 and Charles H. Hocutt Jay R. Stauffer Appalachian Environmental Laboratory Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies University of Maryland Frostburg, Maryland 21532 Manuscript received April 28, 1975 Revised manuscript received June 27, 1975 A Checklist of the Fishes of West Virginia Abstract—The known and expected fishes of West Virginia are major drainages have occurred, often leading to isola- documented. Seven major drainages occur in the state: the Poto- tion and speciation of distinct forms. Geological and mac and James of the Atlantic slope: and the Monongahela, Little biological aspects of the region were recently consid- Kanawha, upper and lower Karrawha system, Guyandotte, and ered by numerous workers in Holt 1969, 1970, 1971. Big Sandy of the Ohio River drainage. 151 species are known from Goldsborough and Clark (1908) published the first the state with an additional 18 species expected. checklist of the fishes of West Virginia. Other atten- tion was devoted by Addair (1944), Raney (1947), Introduction and Raney and Seaman (1950). Osburn (1901) and Trautman (1957) considered the fishes of the main- A unique and diverse fish fauna occurs in the seven channel Ohio River. However, a complete checklist major drainages of West Virginia. Atlantic coast sys- has been lacking since this earlier work. Jenkins et al. tems that drain montane eastern West Virginia are (1971) presented perhaps the most comprehensive the Potomac and James Rivers.
    [Show full text]
  • Redlip Shiner Notropis Chiliticus
    Supplemental Volume: Species of Conservation Concern SC SWAP 2015 Redlip Shiner Notropis chiliticus Contributor (2005): Ross Self and Jason Bettinger [SCDNR] Reviewed and Edited (2013): Mark Scott, Andrew Gelder, and M. Troy Cribb [SCDNR] DESCRIPTION Taxonomy and Basic Description The Redlip Shiner is a member of the genus Notropis. Containing about 71 species, Notropis is considered the genus of true shiners (Rohde et al. 1994). The true shiners are generally small and nearly all lack a barbel. Silver color is dominant; breeding males of many species have bright colors (chiefly red) and some are boldly black-patterned. A great deal of variation occurs across the genus in morphology, color, and biology. The Redlip Shiner is characterized by bright red lips with red coloration in the dorsal, anal, and caudal fins and with black blotches on the sides (Rohde et al. 1994), and the lateral line is complete (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). These fish have 8 or 9 anal rays (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). Breeding males exhibit scarlet-red body and eye coloration with yellow fins (Rohde et al. 1994). Adults range in length from 40 to 55 mm (1.6 to 2.2 in.) (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). Status The Redlip Shiner has the legal status of a species of special concern in South Carolina and is considered to be potentially critically imperiled (S1?) (NatureServe 2013). Its status across much of its range is apparently secure (G4) (NatureServe 2013). POPULATION SIZE AND DISTRIBUTION The Redlip Shiner is native to the Pee Dee drainage and the Dan River system of the Roanoke River drainage in North Carolina and Virginia.This species has recently been introduced and is apparently established in the New River drainage and Cape Fear drainage in North Carolina and Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Inventory in Four National Park Service Units in South Carolina And
    Fish Inventory in Four National Park Service Units in South Carolina Job Title: and North Carolina Period Covered January 1, 2005 through December 30, 2006 Summary South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Freshwater Fisheries staff inventoried freshwater fishes during 2005-2006 for the National Park Service (NPS) in four Cumberland Piedmont Network parks in South Carolina and North Carolina. The parks were: 1) Ninety Six National Historic Site (NISI), 2) Kings Mountain National Military Park (KIMO), 3) Cowpens National Battlefield (COWP), and 4) the Carl Sandburg Home National Historic Site (CARL). As requested by NPS, each park is reported separately. Sample collections were made in all aquatic habitat types identified on each park, including impoundments, ponds, perennial streams, ephemeral streams, and springs. A total of twenty-two species was collected in NISI, seven species in COWP, eighteen species in KIMO, and fourteen species from CARL. Introduction South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Freshwater Fisheries staff inventoried freshwater fishes during 2005-2006 for the National Park Service in four Cumberland Piedmont Network parks in South Carolina and North Carolina. The inventory comprised a series of tasks that were addressed, as applicable: (A) Identifying species richness (to a 90% level), 1 (B) Describing the distribution of each species within a park, (C) Determining abundance (particularly of sensitive species), (D) Collecting voucher specimens for those species where none exist or where species is not readily identifiable by photograph (no collecting of sensitive species), (E) Recording habitat variables and mapping observation coordinates (F) Collecting and organizing data to be compatible with existing databases, (G) Conducting representative sampling of common habitats and comprehensive coverage of specialized habitats, (H) Identifying fish species that are non-native to a park, (I) Reviewing Existing NPS Database Records for accuracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Schedule of the Largescale Stoneroller 3 (Campostoma Oligolepis) in North Alabama, USA
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 28 May 2018 doi:10.20944/preprints201805.0388.v1 1 Type of the Paper: Article 2 Reproductive Schedule of the Largescale Stoneroller 3 (Campostoma oligolepis) in North Alabama, USA 4 Dana Timms 1, Bruce Stallsmith 2* 5 1 University of Alabama in Huntsville; [email protected] 6 2 University of Alabama in Huntsville; [email protected] 7 * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-256-824-6992 8 9 Abstract: Understanding the reproductive patterns and strategies of a species is an important step in establishing 10 the species’ life history. Campostoma oligolepis, the Largescale Stoneroller, is a species that has received little 11 attention in the 90 years since it was first identified, and the work that has been done has been localized in the 12 American Midwest. Collections of C. oligolepis were made monthly from the Flint River in Madison County in 13 northern Alabama, USA, from March, 2014, to September, 2015. A total of 768 fish were collected over the 14 collection period including 492 adults, 268 females and 224 males. We found strong evidence that the peak 15 spawning time for C. oligolepis in the Flint River is March and April. Ovarian maturation, gonadosomatic index 16 for both sexes, and monthly clutch size all support this conclusion. Two unexpected features were found. The 17 first is how few females of mature size were found to carry either oocytes or a clutch except in the peak observed 18 reproductive month of April, 2014. The second unusual feature is the prevalence of asymmetric ovaries, with 19 the left the larger if a difference exists.
    [Show full text]