DOCSLIB.ORG

A Paired-Catchment Approach for Characterizing Hydrologic Response to Mountaintop Mining

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Paired-Catchment Approach for Characterizing Hydrologic Response to Mountaintop Mining Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Geosciences Theses Department of Geosciences 5-8-2020 A Paired-catchment Approach for Characterizing Hydrologic Response to Mountaintop Mining Elinor A. Sattler Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/geosciences_theses Recommended Citation Sattler, Elinor A., "A Paired-catchment Approach for Characterizing Hydrologic Response to Mountaintop Mining." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2020. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/geosciences_theses/142 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Geosciences at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Geosciences Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A PAIRED-CATCHMENT APPROACH FOR CHARACTERIZING HYDROLOGIC RESPONSE TO MOUNTAINTOP MINING by ELINOR SATTLER Under the Direction of Richard Milligan, PhD ABSTRACT This study examined six large-scale watersheds divided into three pairs (mined and unmined), leveraging streamflow and mining permit datasets from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP), to develop a novel high- resolution time series of five decades of surface mining and valley fill activity for each watershed. Streamflow metrics were evaluated for trends and any correlation with mining permit history. Both mined and unmined watersheds experienced little or no change in annual flow. Mined watersheds exhibited significant decreasing trends in maximum flow and significant increasing trends in minimum flow, and these metrics were significantly correlated with mining permit history. No effect of mining cover on runoff ratio (Q/P) was found for any watershed. Future work should differentiate mining from other land-use/land-change disturbances in each watershed and expand on the mining permit histories developed in this study. INDEX WORDS: Hydrology, Streamflow, SFM/VF, Paired watershed, Trend analysis, Land use change A PAIRED-CATCHMENT APPROACH FOR CHARACTERIZING HYDROLOGIC RESPONSE TO MOUNTAINTOP MINING by ELINOR SATTLER A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in the College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University 2020 Copyright by Elinor Sattler 2020 A PAIRED-CATCHMENT APPROACH FOR CHARACTERIZING HYDROLOGIC RESPONSE TO MOUNTAINTOP MINING by ELINOR SATTLER Committee Chair: Richard Milligan Committee: Richard Milligan Jeremy Diem Luke Pangle Electronic Version Approved: Office of Graduate Services College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University May 2020 iv DEDICATION This is dedicated to the Kalapooia River and Michael. This would never have happened without either of you. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to everyone that supported me through this, many of whom will never see this but are appreciated. Thanks to my adviser, Dr. Milligan, for endless patience and guidance, and my committee, Dr. Diem and Dr. Pangle, for helping me to get better at writing science and doing science. Thank you to Dr. Price for pointing me at hydrology. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. V LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... IX LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... X LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................... XII 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Surface mining and valley fill ............................................................................. 1 1.2 Long-term hydrological impacts of land use conversion ................................. 3 1.3 Inconsistent quality of available SFM/VF data ................................................ 5 1.4 Large-scale watersheds ....................................................................................... 6 1.5 Paired-catchment studies .................................................................................... 7 1.6 Research questions and objectives ..................................................................... 7 2 STUDY REGIONS ..................................................................................................... 9 2.1 USGS 3198500 Big Coal River at Ashford, WV ............................................. 10 2.2 USGS 3203600 Guyandotte River at Logan, WV........................................... 11 2.3 USGS 3192000 Gauley River Above Belva, WV ............................................ 13 2.4 USGS 3051000 Tygart Valley River at Belington .......................................... 14 2.5 USGS 3054500 Tygart Valley River at Philippi, WV .................................... 16 2.6 USGS 3183500 Greenbrier River at Alderson, WV ....................................... 17 3 METHODS ................................................................................................................ 19 vii 3.1 Preliminary characterization of streamgages for pairing ............................. 19 3.2 Refinement of characterization ........................................................................ 19 3.3 Calculating watershed permit areas ................................................................ 19 3.4 Creating paired watersheds ............................................................................. 21 3.5 Compiling mining history timeseries ............................................................... 21 3.6 Annual metrics and statistical analysis ........................................................... 22 4 RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 24 4.1 Characterization of streamgages and watersheds .......................................... 24 4.2 Pairing of watersheds ........................................................................................ 27 4.3 Mining permit history timeseries ..................................................................... 29 4.4 Annual hydrologic metrics for paired watersheds ......................................... 30 4.4.1 Average annual daily flow ............................................................................ 31 4.4.2 Minimum daily flow ...................................................................................... 32 4.4.3 Maximum daily flow ..................................................................................... 33 4.4.4 25th percentile ................................................................................................ 34 4.4.5 75th percentile ................................................................................................ 35 4.4.6 Interquartile .................................................................................................. 35 4.4.7 Runoff ratios and mining permit history ..................................................... 36 4.5 Statistical analysis of paired watersheds ......................................................... 37 5 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................ 41 viii 6 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 45 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 47 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 52 Appendix A .................................................................................................................. 52 Appendix A.1 Lifetime hydrologic metrics .............................................................. 52 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Final streamgage/watershed pairing candidates. ............................................................. 26 Table 2 Final 6 streamgages chosen for pairing. .......................................................................... 27 Table 3 Mann-Whitney U test values. .......................................................................................... 39 Table 4 Kendall's tau-b nonparametric test ................................................................................... 40 Table 5 Pearson correlation test for mining history and each hydrologic metric. ........................ 40 x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 West Virginia and paired watersheds ............................................................................... 9 Figure 2 USGS 3198500 Big Coal River at Ashford, WV ........................................................... 10 Figure 3 USGS 3203600 Guyandotte River at Logan, WV.......................................................... 12 Figure 4 USGS 3192000 Gauley River Above Belva, WV .......................................................... 13 Figure 5 USGS 3051000 Tygart Valley River at Belington, WV ................................................ 15 Figure 6 USGS 3054500 Tygart Valley River at Philippi, WV ................................................... 16 Figure 7 USGS 3183500 Greenbrier River at Alderson, WV ...................................................... 18 Figure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 02070001 South Branch Potomac 01605500 South Branch Potomac River at Franklin, WV 01606000 N F South Br Potomac R at Cabins, WV 01606500 So
    Appendix D Active Stream Flow Gauging Stations In West Virginia Active Stream Flow Gauging Stations In West Virginia 02070001 South Branch Potomac 01605500 South Branch Potomac River At Franklin, WV 01606000 N F South Br Potomac R At Cabins, WV 01606500 So. Branch Potomac River Nr Petersburg, WV 01606900 South Mill Creek Near Mozer, WV 01607300 Brushy Fork Near Sugar Grove, WV 01607500 So Fk So Br Potomac R At Brandywine, WV 01608000 So Fk South Branch Potomac R Nr Moorefield, WV 01608070 South Branch Potomac River Near Moorefield, WV 01608500 South Branch Potomac River Near Springfield, WV 02070002 North Branch Potomac 01595200 Stony River Near Mount Storm,WV 01595800 North Branch Potomac River At Barnum, WV 01598500 North Branch Potomac River At Luke, Md 01600000 North Branch Potomac River At Pinto, Md 01604500 Patterson Creek Near Headsville, WV 01605002 Painter Run Near Fort Ashby, WV 02070003 Cacapon-Town 01610400 Waites Run Near Wardensville, WV 01611500 Cacapon River Near Great Cacapon, WV 02070004 Conococheague-Opequon 01613020 Unnamed Trib To Warm Spr Run Nr Berkeley Spr, WV 01614000 Back Creek Near Jones Springs, WV 01616500 Opequon Creek Near Martinsburg, WV 02070007 Shenandoah 01636500 Shenandoah River At Millville, WV 05020001 Tygart Valley 03050000 Tygart Valley River Near Dailey, WV 03050500 Tygart Valley River Near Elkins, WV 03051000 Tygart Valley River At Belington, WV 03052000 Middle Fork River At Audra, WV 03052450 Buckhannon R At Buckhannon, WV 03052500 Sand Run Near Buckhannon, WV 03053500 Buckhannon River At Hall, WV 03054500 Tygart Valley River At Philippi, WV Page D 1 of D 5 Active Stream Flow Gauging Stations In West Virginia 03055500 Tygart Lake Nr Grafton, WV 03056000 Tygart Valley R At Tygart Dam Nr Grafton, WV 03056250 Three Fork Creek Nr Grafton, WV 03057000 Tygart Valley River At Colfax, WV 05020002 West Fork 03057300 West Fork River At Walkersville, WV 03057900 Stonewall Jackson Lake Near Weston, WV 03058000 West Fork R Bl Stonewall Jackson Dam Nr Weston 03058020 West Fork River At Weston, WV 03058500 W.F.
    [Show full text]
  • Highlands Conservancy Kicks Off Initiative on Monongahela National Forest
    Volume 39 Number 3 March, 2006 West Virginia Highlands Conservancy: We’re Friends of the Monongahela National Forest HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY KICKS OFF INITIATIVE ON MONONGAHELA NATIONAL FOREST By Dave Saville Within this issue of the Highlands ways, dams, massive clear cutting of the for- forever vigilant, to protect the Mon. Voice, we are kicking off a new Highlands Con- ests, pipelines, power transmission lines, mis- It was the Highlands Conservancy in the servancy program called We’re Friends of the guided management, car races, ATVs, reck- 1960s that led the campaign to protect Dolly Mon! This program will coordinate our current Sods and Otter Creek as Wilderness. We filed efforts on behalf of the Monongahela National a successful lawsuit in the mid 1970s against Forest and gradually expand our work to in- large-scale clear cutting. This famous legal vic- clude more service projects like trail mainte- tory called “The Monongahela Decision” ulti- nance, stream and forest protection and resto- mately catalyzed legislation, sponsored by the ration efforts, and a more concerted effort to West Virginia delegation, called the National educate our membership and encourage their Forest Management Act (NFMA). This law engagement in projects and special uses of the changed how all National Forests would be Mon Forest. managed to this day. It limits the size of clear These are things we’ve always done; cuts and requires each National Forest to have we’re just working to better coordinate these a Management Plan specific to that Forest. efforts and increase our effectiveness. In 1983 a 12-year Highlands Conser- For over 40 years the West Virginia vancy campaign came to a successful conclu- Highlands Conservancy has been working to sion with designation of the Cranberry and Lau- protect and restore, and to help people enjoy rel Fork Wilderness Areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimating Selected Streamflow Statistics Representative of 1930–2002 in West Virginia
    In cooperation with the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water and Waste Management Estimating Selected Streamflow Statistics Representative of 1930–2002 in West Virginia Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5105 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Mash Fork at Camp Creek State Forest, Mercer County, West Virginia. Photo by Terence Messinger, U.S. Geological Survey. Estimating Selected Streamflow Statistics Representative of 1930–2002 in West Virginia By Jeffrey B. Wiley In cooperation with the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water and Waste Management Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5105 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2008 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Wiley, J.B.., 2008, Estimating selected streamflow statistics representative of 1930–2002 in West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5105, 24 p.
    [Show full text]
  • GAULEY RIVER Ifjj
    D-1 IN final wild and scenic river study ~ORA GE ' auoust 1983 GAULEY RIVER ifjJ WEST VIRGINIA PLEASE RETURN TO: TECHNICAL ltfFORMATION CENTER DENVER SERVICE CE'NTER NATIONAL PARK SERVICE UNITED S'm.TES DEPARIMENT CF 'lHE INI'ERIOR/NATICNAL PARK SERVICE As the Nation's principal conservation a· gency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environ­ mental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through out­ door recreation. The Oepartmer:t assesses our energy and min· eral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories un­ der U. S. administration. FINl\L REPORT GAULEY RIVER WILD AND SCENIC RIVER S'IUDY WEST VIRGINIA August 1983 Prepared by: Mid-Atlantic Regional Office National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior ,. OONTENTS I. SUMMAm' OF FINDINGS / 1 I I • CDNDUCT' OF 'llIE S'IUDY I 6 Purpose I 6 Background I 6 Study Approach I 6 Public Involvement I 7 Significant Issues / 8 Definitions of Terms Used in Report I 9 III. EVAWATION I 10 Eligibility I 10 Classification I 12 Suitcbility / 15 IV. THE RIVER ENVIOONMENT I 18 Natural Resources / 18 Cultural Resources / 29 Existing Public Use / 34 Status of Land OWnership arrl Use / 39 V.
    [Show full text]
  • District 1 Fishing Guide
    TROUT STOCKING – Rivers and Streams Code No. Stockings ............Period Code No. Stockings ............Period Code No. Stockings ............Period Trout Stocking River or Stream: County SR = state Route Q One .................................... 1st week of March One ......................................................... February CR Varies .............................................................Varies Code: Area CR = county Route FR = USFS Road One ............................................................January BW M One each month ................February-May One every two weeks ...........March-May Tygart Lake (Tailwaters) Tygart Valley River: W Two ......................................................... February MJ One each month ..................January-April Taylor M-F: below Tygart Dam in Grafton City Park. One ............................................................January One each week ..........................March-May Y One ...................................................................April BA BW: Lower – from Wheeling Hospital upstream to I-470; X After April 1 or area is open to public One ............................................................... March F Once/week .....Columbus Day week & next week Wheeling Creek: Marshall and Ohio Middle – from Ohio County line upstream along CR 5 to 1 mile below Burches Run Lake; Upper – from Pennsylvania line 3 miles downstream along CR 15 and 15/1 to mouth of Wolf Run. Whiteday Creek: Marion and Monongalia BW: Lower – from 0.5 mile above CR 73 bridge upstream for 2 miles along CR 73/1; Trout Stocking Upper – from CR 79/12 bridge upstream 1 mile to 0.25 mile below the CR 33/7 bridge. River or Stream: County SR = state Route Code: Area CR = county Route FR = USFS Road BW: from Bruceton Mills upstream to Clifton Mills along CR 8; also at CR 4/2 State Line Bridge near Big Sandy Creek: Preston the Pennsylvania state line. W-F: from Davis upstream 4 miles along the Camp 70 Road; also a 3-mile section at the SR 32 Blackwater River: Tucker bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • “A People Who Have Not the Pride to Record Their History Will Not Long
    STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE i “A people who have not the pride to record their History will not long have virtues to make History worth recording; and Introduction no people who At the rear of Old Main at Bethany College, the sun shines through are indifferent an arcade. This passageway is filled with students today, just as it was more than a hundred years ago, as shown in a c.1885 photograph. to their past During my several visits to this college, I have lingered here enjoying the light and the student activity. It reminds me that we are part of the past need hope to as well as today. People can connect to historic resources through their make their character and setting as well as the stories they tell and the memories they make. future great.” The National Register of Historic Places recognizes historic re- sources such as Old Main. In 2000, the State Historic Preservation Office Virgil A. Lewis, first published Historic West Virginia which provided brief descriptions noted historian of our state’s National Register listings. This second edition adds approx- Mason County, imately 265 new listings, including the Huntington home of Civil Rights West Virginia activist Memphis Tennessee Garrison, the New River Gorge Bridge, Camp Caesar in Webster County, Fort Mill Ridge in Hampshire County, the Ananias Pitsenbarger Farm in Pendleton County and the Nuttallburg Coal Mining Complex in Fayette County. Each reveals the richness of our past and celebrates the stories and accomplishments of our citizens. I hope you enjoy and learn from Historic West Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • An Allocation of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources to Gauley River National Recreation Area and New River Gorge National River, West Virginia
    An Allocation of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources to Gauley River National Recreation Area and New River Gorge National River, West Virginia By Christopher J. Schenk, Timothy R. Klett, Ronald R. Charpentier, Troy A. Cook, Robert A. Crovelli, Richard M. Pollastro, and Robert C. Milici This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Open-File Report 03–396 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 USGS Methodology for Resource Allocation........................................................................................... 1 Results ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 Additional Information ................................................................................................................................. 3 Gauley River National Recreation Area..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Candy Darter Recovery Outline
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Candy Darter Recovery Outline Photo by Corey Dunn, University of Missouri Species Name: Candy Darter (Etheostoma osburni) Species Range: Upper Kanawha River Basin including the Gauley, Greenbrier, and New River Watersheds including portions of Greenbrier, Pocahontas, Nicholas, and Webster counties in West Virginia; and Bland, Giles, and Wythe counties, Virginia. The range of the species is shown in figure 1 below. Recovery Priority Number: 5; explanation provided below Listing Status: Endangered; November 21, 2019; 83 FR 58747 Lead Regional Office/Cooperating RO(s): Northeast Region, Hadley MA Lead Field Office/Cooperating FO(s): West Virginia Field Office, Elkins WV; Southwestern Virginia Field Office, Abingdon, VA; White Sulphur Springs National Fish Hatchery, White Sulphur Springs, WV Lead Contact: Barbara Douglas, 304-636-6586 ext 19. [email protected] 1) Background This section provides a brief overview of the ecology and conservation of the candy darter. This information is more fully described in the Species Status Assessment (SSA), the final listing rule, and the proposed critical habitat rule. These documents are available at: https://www.fws.gov/northeast/candydarter/ 1 Type and Quality of Available Information to Date: Important Information Gaps and Treatment of Uncertainties One of the primary threats that resulted in the listing of the candy darter under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the spread of the introduced variegate darter (Etheostoma variatum). This species hybridizes with the candy darter. Key information gaps and areas of uncertainty for the recovery and management of the candy darter include whether there are any habitat or other natural factors that could limit the spread of variegate darter.
    [Show full text]
  • The Natural History & Distribution of Riverine Turtles in West Virginia
    Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Theses, Dissertations and Capstones 2010 The aN tural History & Distribution of Riverine Turtles in West Virginia Linh Diem Phu Follow this and additional works at: http://mds.marshall.edu/etd Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Phu, Linh Diem, "The aN tural History & Distribution of Riverine Turtles in West Virginia" (2010). Theses, Dissertations and Capstones. Paper 787. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Natural History & Distribution of Riverine Turtles in West Virginia Thesis submitted to the Graduate College of Marshall University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences By Linh Diem Phu Dr. Thomas K. Pauley, Ph.D., Committee Chairperson Dr. Dan Evans, Ph.D. Dr. Suzanne Strait, Ph.D. Marshall University May 2010 Abstract Turtles are unique evolutionary marvels that evolved from amphibians and developed their protective shelled form more than 200 million years ago. In West Virginia, there are 10 native species of turtles, 9 of which are aquatic. Most of these aquatic turtles feed on carrion and dead plant matter, in the water and essentially "clean" our water systems. Turtles are long-lived animals with sensitive life stages that can serve as both long-term and short-term bioindicators of environmental health. With the increase in commercial trade, habitat fragmentation, degradation, destruction, there has been a marked decline in turtle species.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer of West Virginia
    Bulletin No. 233 Series F, Geography, 41 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIKECTOU A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA I-IEISTRY G-AN3STETT WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1904 A» cl O a 3. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. DEPARTMENT OP THE INTEKIOR, UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, Washington, D. C. , March 9, 190Jh SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for publication as a bulletin, a gazetteer of West Virginia! Very respectfully, HENRY GANNETT, Geogwvpher. Hon. CHARLES D. WALCOTT, Director United States Geological Survey. 3 A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA. HENRY GANNETT. DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE. The State of West Virginia was cut off from Virginia during the civil war and was admitted to the Union on June 19, 1863. As orig­ inally constituted it consisted of 48 counties; subsequently, in 1866, it was enlarged by the addition -of two counties, Berkeley and Jeffer­ son, which were also detached from Virginia. The boundaries of the State are in the highest degree irregular. Starting at Potomac River at Harpers Ferry,' the line follows the south bank of the Potomac to the Fairfax Stone, which was set to mark the headwaters of the North Branch of Potomac River; from this stone the line runs due north to Mason and Dixon's line, i. e., the southern boundary of Pennsylvania; thence it follows this line west to the southwest corner of that State, in approximate latitude 39° 43i' and longitude 80° 31', and from that corner north along the western boundary of Pennsylvania until the line intersects Ohio River; from this point the boundary runs southwest down the Ohio, on the northwestern bank, to the mouth of Big Sandy River.
    [Show full text]
  • TROUT Stocking – Lakes and Ponds Code No
    TROUT Stocking – Lakes and Ponds Code No. Stockings .......Period Code No. Stockings .......Period Code No. Stockings .......Period Q One ...........................1st week of March Twice a month .............. February-April CR Varies ...........................................Varies BW One ........................................... January M One each month ........... February-May One .................................................. May W Two..........................................February MJ One each month ............January-April One ........................................... January One each week ....................March-May Y One ................................................. April BA One each week ...................................... X After April 1 or area is open to public One ...............................................March F weeks of October 19 and 26 Lake or Pond ‒ County Code Lake or Pond ‒ County Code Anawalt – McDowell M Laurel – Mingo MJ Anderson – Kanawha BA Lick Creek – Wayne MJ Baker – Ohio Q Little Beaver – Raleigh MJ Barboursville – Cabell BA Logan County Airport – Logan Q Bear Rock Lakes – Ohio BW Mason Lake – Monongalia M Berwind – McDowell M Middle Wheeling Creek – Ohio BW Big Run – Marion Y Miletree – Roane BA Boley – Fayette M Mill Creek – Barbour M Brandywine – Pendleton BW-F Millers Fork – Wayne Q Brushy Fork – Pendleton BW Mountwood – Wood MJ Buffalo Fork – Pocahontas BW-F Newburg – Preston M Cacapon – Morgan W-F New Creek Dam 14 – Grant BW-F Castleman Run – Brooke, Ohio BW Pendleton – Tucker
    [Show full text]
  • Natural History Gauley River
    Natural History National Park Service There are many rare and threatened animal U.S. Department of the Interior species within the recreation area including the Allegheny woodrat,cerulean warbler, Gauley River National Recreation Area black-bellied salamander (a rare species), and finescale saddled darter. Gauley River Vegetation is diverse and abundant along the Gauley River. Extremes in topography, elevation and microclimate have caused tremendous variation in plant life. Most of the recreation area is below 2,000 feet. Central hardwood trees thrive here such as red oak, white oak, American beech, yellow poplar, hemlock and dogwood. High-energy rivers are an ecological driving force for some plant communities. Gauley Gauley River National Recreation Area River is an excellent example of a high energy offers big thrills to thousands of Whitewater system which supports rare plant species and enthusiasts along its path through narrow their communities such as Virginia spiraea, gorges. The park includes 25 miles of the Appalachian blue violet, and Barbara's Gauley River and 5 miles of the Meadow River. buttons. The Gauley River is ranked among the best Whitewater rivers in the world by expert The Three Rivers boaters. Dropping more than 668 feet through rugged terrain, the river's complex stretch of Gauley River National Recreation Area is Whitewater features more than 100 rapids with one of three National Park units in southern a steep gradient, technical runs, an incredible West Virginia, together with New River Gorge volume of water and huge waves. National River and Bluestone National Scenic River. The diversity of natural and historical Established in 1988 for its recreational resources found in these three parks are opportunities, the Gauley River offers preserved as part of a larger family of nearly Whitewater boating, fishing, camping, hunting, 400 nationally significant places which make and picnicking.
    [Show full text]