DOCSLIB.ORG

Fuck You Maryland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fuck You Maryland ABSTRACT Title of document: INTERREGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STREAM ECOSYSTEM RESPONSES TO URBANIZATION: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES Ryan Michael Utz, Doctor of Philosophy, 2010 Directed by: Dr. Robert H. Hilderbrand Program of Marine, Estuarine and Environmental Science Stream ecosystems are profoundly degraded by watershed urbanization. Hydrologic, geomorphic, chemical and thermal adjustment following urban development contributes to substantial biodiversity loss in impacted streams. However, the extent of degradation along an urban gradient may not be uniform among regions. The hydrogeologic and climatic setting in which a stream is located may influence the severity of abiotic and biotic impact induced by urban development. I explored and compared differences in stream ecosystem responses to urbanization between the Coastal Plain and Piedmont physiographic regions of the eastern United States. Taxon-specific responses of fishes and macroinvertebrates as well as the coherence of benthic invertebrate communities along gradients of landscape stressors were quantified. Hydrologic, chemical and thermal impact induced by watershed urbanization was compared between the two physiographic provinces using existent large datasets collected by various governmental entities. I also compared the severity geomorphic and sediment regime alteration in urban streams between regions using direct measurements of channel morphometry and in situ natural experiments within selected watersheds. Biotic sensitivity to urbanization was consistently found to be heightened in Piedmont streams relative to those in the Coastal Plain. Such trends were consistently observed for fish and macroinvertebrate taxa as well as for invertebrate community coherence. The most tolerant macroinvertebrate communities were associated with low channel slopes, effective soil permeability and high levels of wetland cover. Rural Coastal Plain streams exhibited fewer flood events that were longer in duration; however, flood hydrology was more impacted by urbanization in Coastal Plain streams relative to those of the Piedmont. Conversely, thermal impact induced by urbanization was greater in Piedmont streams. Experimental observations concluded that benthic sediment size structure, deposition and transport were more impacted by urban development in Piedmont streams relative to those of the Coastal Plain. My findings highlight interregional heterogeneity in stream ecosystem responses to landscape change, suggesting that effective watershed management decisions may need to consider the physiographic setting in order to improve efficacy. Furthermore, results suggest that watersheds characteristic of hydrogeomorphic attributes that effectively transfer water to channels during precipitation events may be acutely vulnerable to urban development. ii INTERREGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STREAM ECOSYSTEM RESPONSES TO URBANIZATION: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES by Ryan Michael Utz Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2010 Advisory Committee: Dr. Robert H. Hilderbrand Dr. Keith N. Eshleman Dr. Todd R. Lookingbill Dr. Margaret A. Palmer Dr. Richard L. Raesly Dr. Maile Neal (Dean’s representative) © Copyright by Ryan Michael Utz 2010 Dedicated to Mom, of course and to Bob and Connie Utz, whose selfless, loving efforts helped me become a man capable of producing work such as this. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to first thank my advisor, Bob Hilderbrand, for being an exceptional mentor and providing me with a wealth of resources that likely rendered me the most spoiled graduate student that has ever existed. My committee (Keith Eshleman, Todd Lookingbill, Margaret Palmer and Rich Raesly) pushed me to make the most out of my research and graduate education; I thank them for that. Many, many thanks to the MBSS staff at the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Dennis Genito at the Baltimore County DEP, the USGS and the Maryland DEP for selflessly sharing their data. I could never have collected the material from Chapter VI without the amazing, selfless assistance in the field (under harrowing heat and cold) provided by Staton Klein, Jamie Utz and Emily Samargo. I am eternally grateful for the laboratory assistance offered by Jimmy Garabedian, Jamie Utz and Staton Klein. Many Appalachian Laboratory staff assisted me with lab methodology, including Jim Garlitz, Mikey Lutmerding, Katie Kline, Matt Kline, J.B. Churchill and Brian McCormick. These folk gave up their time to make sure my data were healthy- thank you! I thank Chris Moore for psychological and Matlab assistance. Several experts in the visual arts including Nicole Loskoch-Flaherty, Lynsey Kern and Ed Freeman provided me with fine work for presentations over the years. Finally, I must acknowledge all staff and faculty at the Appalachian Laboratory. Their unparalleled professionalism ensured that my education was entirely free of unnecessary red tape and other nuisances that hinder the efforts of so many graduate students. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ......................................................................................................... vi List of Figures........................................................................................................ ix Chapter I - Introduction...........................................................................................1 Dissertation Objectives...................................................................................... 7 Chapter II- Taxon-specific responses of benthic macroinvertebrates to land cover change ..................................................................................................14 Methods.............................................................................................................. 16 Study area ........................................................................................................ 16 Biological data ................................................................................................. 18 Land cover data ............................................................................................... 19 Data analysis ................................................................................................... 21 Results................................................................................................................ 26 Discussion.......................................................................................................... 34 Chapter III- Taxon-specific responses of fishes to land cover change................41 Methods.............................................................................................................. 44 Study area ........................................................................................................ 44 Biological data ................................................................................................. 46 Land cover data ............................................................................................... 47 Statistical analysis ........................................................................................... 48 Forecasting biodiversity .................................................................................. 55 Results................................................................................................................ 57 Urbanization and ISC ...................................................................................... 57 Agriculture ....................................................................................................... 63 Sensitivity Analyses .......................................................................................... 64 Greatest Conservation Need fishes .................................................................. 64 Forecasted change in the Middle Patuxent River............................................ 65 Discussion.......................................................................................................... 66 Chapter IV- Inter- and intra-regional variabilitiy in community-scale resilience to urbanization .......................................................................................76 Methods.............................................................................................................. 79 Study Region .................................................................................................... 79 Biological data ................................................................................................. 81 Geographic data .............................................................................................. 81 Statistical analyses ........................................................................................... 81 Results................................................................................................................ 88 Community structure and influence of physicochemistry ................................ 88 Community sensitivity to ISC and agriculture ................................................. 88 Community sensitivity and hydrogeomorphology ............................................ 92 Discussion.......................................................................................................... 92 iv Chapter V- Interregional comparisions of physicochemical responses
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Macroinvertebrate Communities and Habitat Characteristics in the Northern and Southern Colorado Plateau Networks Pilot Protocol Implementation
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Macroinvertebrate Communities and Habitat Characteristics in the Northern and Southern Colorado Plateau Networks Pilot Protocol Implementation Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCPN/NRTR—2010/320 ON THE COVER Clockwise from bottom left: Coyote Gulch, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (USGS/Anne Brasher); Intermittent stream (USGS/Anne Brasher); Coyote Gulch, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (USGS/Anne Brasher); Caddisfl y larvae of the genus Neophylax (USGS/Steve Fend); Adult damselfi les (USGS/Terry Short). Macroinvertebrate Communities and Habitat Characteristics in the Northern and Southern Colorado Plateau Networks Pilot Protocol Implementation Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCPN/NRTR—2010/320 Authors Anne M. D. Brasher Christine M. Albano Rebecca N. Close Quinn H. Cannon Matthew P. Miller U.S. Geological Survey Utah Water Science Center 121 West 200 South Moab, Utah 84532 Editing and Design Alice Wondrak Biel Northern Colorado Plateau Network National Park Service P.O. Box 848 Moab, UT 84532 May 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that ad- dress natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Ser- vice and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientifi c studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Monitoring of Surface Waters in New York State, 2019
    NYSDEC SOP #208-19 Title: Stream Biomonitoring Rev: 1.2 Date: 03/29/19 Page 1 of 188 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Water Standard Operating Procedure: Biological Monitoring of Surface Waters in New York State March 2019 Note: Division of Water (DOW) SOP revisions from year 2016 forward will only capture the current year parties involved with drafting/revising/approving the SOP on the cover page. The dated signatures of those parties will be captured here as well. The historical log of all SOP updates and revisions (past & present) will immediately follow the cover page. NYSDEC SOP 208-19 Stream Biomonitoring Rev. 1.2 Date: 03/29/2019 Page 3 of 188 SOP #208 Update Log 1 Prepared/ Revision Revised by Approved by Number Date Summary of Changes DOW Staff Rose Ann Garry 7/25/2007 Alexander J. Smith Rose Ann Garry 11/25/2009 Alexander J. Smith Jason Fagel 1.0 3/29/2012 Alexander J. Smith Jason Fagel 2.0 4/18/2014 • Definition of a reference site clarified (Sect. 8.2.3) • WAVE results added as a factor Alexander J. Smith Jason Fagel 3.0 4/1/2016 in site selection (Sect. 8.2.2 & 8.2.6) • HMA details added (Sect. 8.10) • Nonsubstantive changes 2 • Disinfection procedures (Sect. 8) • Headwater (Sect. 9.4.1 & 10.2.7) assessment methods added • Benthic multiplate method added (Sect, 9.4.3) Brian Duffy Rose Ann Garry 1.0 5/01/2018 • Lake (Sect. 9.4.5 & Sect. 10.) assessment methods added • Detail on biological impairment sampling (Sect.
    [Show full text]
  • OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES an Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals
    OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES An Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals By Paul Rudy, Jr. Lynn Hay Rudy Oregon Institute of Marine Biology University of Oregon Charleston, Oregon 97420 Contract No. 79-111 Project Officer Jay F. Watson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portland, Oregon 97232 Performed for National Coastal Ecosystems Team Office of Biological Services Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Table of Contents Introduction CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aequorea aequorea ................................................................ 6 Obelia longissima .................................................................. 8 Polyorchis penicillatus 10 Tubularia crocea ................................................................. 12 Anthozoa Anthopleura artemisia ................................. 14 Anthopleura elegantissima .................................................. 16 Haliplanella luciae .................................................................. 18 Nematostella vectensis ......................................................... 20 Metridium senile .................................................................... 22 NEMERTEA Amphiporus imparispinosus ................................................ 24 Carinoma mutabilis ................................................................ 26 Cerebratulus californiensis .................................................. 28 Lineus ruber .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity from Caves and Other Subterranean Habitats of Georgia, USA
    Kirk S. Zigler, Matthew L. Niemiller, Charles D.R. Stephen, Breanne N. Ayala, Marc A. Milne, Nicholas S. Gladstone, Annette S. Engel, John B. Jensen, Carlos D. Camp, James C. Ozier, and Alan Cressler. Biodiversity from caves and other subterranean habitats of Georgia, USA. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 82, no. 2, p. 125-167. DOI:10.4311/2019LSC0125 BIODIVERSITY FROM CAVES AND OTHER SUBTERRANEAN HABITATS OF GEORGIA, USA Kirk S. Zigler1C, Matthew L. Niemiller2, Charles D.R. Stephen3, Breanne N. Ayala1, Marc A. Milne4, Nicholas S. Gladstone5, Annette S. Engel6, John B. Jensen7, Carlos D. Camp8, James C. Ozier9, and Alan Cressler10 Abstract We provide an annotated checklist of species recorded from caves and other subterranean habitats in the state of Georgia, USA. We report 281 species (228 invertebrates and 53 vertebrates), including 51 troglobionts (cave-obligate species), from more than 150 sites (caves, springs, and wells). Endemism is high; of the troglobionts, 17 (33 % of those known from the state) are endemic to Georgia and seven (14 %) are known from a single cave. We identified three biogeographic clusters of troglobionts. Two clusters are located in the northwestern part of the state, west of Lookout Mountain in Lookout Valley and east of Lookout Mountain in the Valley and Ridge. In addition, there is a group of tro- globionts found only in the southwestern corner of the state and associated with the Upper Floridan Aquifer. At least two dozen potentially undescribed species have been collected from caves; clarifying the taxonomic status of these organisms would improve our understanding of cave biodiversity in the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Nemertea: Enopla: Hoplonemertea: Tetrastemmatidae
    Tetrastemma albidum Coe 1905 SCAMIT Vol. , No Group: Nemertea: Enopla: Hoplonemertea: Tetrastemmatidae Date Examined: 16 May 2007 Voucher By: Tony Phillips SYNONYMY: Prosorhochmus albidus (Coe 1905) Monostylifera sp B SCAMIT 1995 Monostylifera sp C SCAMIT 1995 LITERATURE: Bernhardt, P. 1979. A key to the Nemertea from the intertidal zone of the coast of California. (Unpublished). Coe, W.R. 1905. Nemerteans of the west and north-west coasts of North America. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard Coll. 47:1-319. Coe, W.R. 1940. Revision of the nemertean fauna of the Pacific Coast of North, Central and northern South America. Allen Hancock Pacific Exped. 2(13):247-323. Coe, W.R. 1944. Geographical distribution of the nemerteans of the Pacific coast of North America, with descriptions of two new species. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 34(1):27-32. Correa, D.D. 1964. Nemerteans from California and Oregon. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., 31(19):515-558. Crandall, F.B. & J.L. Norenborg. 2001. Checklist of the Nemertean Fauna of the United States. Nemertes (http://nemertes.si.edu). Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.D. pp. 1-36. Maslakova, S.A. et al. 2005. The smile of Amphiporus nelsoni Sanchez, 1973 (Nemertea:Hoplonemertea:Monostilifera:Amphiporidae) leads to a redescription and a change in family. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 18(3):483-498. Maslakova, S.A. & J.L. Norenburg. 2008. Revision of the smiling worms, genus Prosorhochmus Keferstein, 1862, and description of a new species, Prosorhochmus bellzeanus sp. Nov. (Prosorhochmidae, Hoplonemertea) from Florida and Belize. J. Nat. Hist., 42(17):1219-1260.
    [Show full text]
  • Ceh Code List for Recording the Macroinvertebrates in Fresh Water in the British Isles
    01 OCTOBER 2011 CEH CODE LIST FOR RECORDING THE MACROINVERTEBRATES IN FRESH WATER IN THE BRITISH ISLES CYNTHIA DAVIES AND FRANÇOIS EDWARDS CEH Code List For Recording The Macroinvertebrates In Fresh Water In The British Isles October 2011 Report compiled by Cynthia Davies and François Edwards Centre for Ecology & Hydrology Maclean Building Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford Oxfordshire, OX10 8BB United Kingdom Purpose The purpose of this Coded List is to provide a standard set of names and identifying codes for freshwater macroinvertebrates in the British Isles. These codes are used in the CEH databases and by the water industry and academic and commercial organisations. It is intended that, by making the list as widely available as possible, the ease of data exchange throughout the aquatic science community can be improved. The list includes full listings of the aquatic invertebrates living in, or closely associated with, freshwaters in the British Isles. The list includes taxa that have historically been found in Britain but which have become extinct in recent times. Also included are names and codes for ‘artificial’ taxa (aggregates of taxa which are difficult to split) and for composite families used in calculation of certain water quality indices such as BMWP and AWIC scores. Current status The list has evolved from the checklist* produced originally by Peter Maitland (then of the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology) (Maitland, 1977) and subsequently revised by Mike Furse (Centre for Ecology & Hydrology), Ian McDonald (Thames Water Authority) and Bob Abel (Department of the Environment). That list was subject to regular revisions with financial support from the Environment Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • 410 SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN 01473169 VALLEY CREEK at PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE BRIDGE NEAR VALLEY FORGE, PA LOCATION.--Lat 40°04'45
    410 SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN 01473169 VALLEY CREEK AT PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE BRIDGE NEAR VALLEY FORGE, PA LOCATION.--Lat 40°04'45", long 75°27'40", Chester County, Hydrologic Unit 02040202, on right bank 100 ft upstream from Pennsylvania turnpike bridge, 0.9 mi downstream from Little Valley Creek, 2.2 mi upstream from mouth, and 1.0 mi south of Valley Forge. DRAINAGE AREA.--20.8 mi2. WATER-DISCHARGE RECORDS PERIOD OF RECORD.--October 1982 to current year. GAGE.--Water-stage recorder and crest-stage gage. Datum of gage is 108.62 ft above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. REMARKS.--Records good except those for estimated daily discharges, which are fair. Several measurements of water temperature were made during the year. Satellite telemetry at station. Intermittent pumpage from quarry upstream. PEAK DISCHARGES FOR CURRENT YEAR.--Peak discharges greater than base discharge of 600 ft3/s and maximum (*): Discharge Gage Height Discharge Gage Height Date Time ft3/s (ft) Date Time ft3/s (ft) Nov. 17 0300 1,200 7.74 Aug. 9 1715 950 7.20 Dec. 11 1800 765 6.83 Aug. 10 0815 1,430 8.31 Feb. 22 1630 1,130 7.57 Sept. 15 1730 *1,720 *8.95 June 20 2000 1,710 8.92 Sept. 19 0230 985 7.27 DISCHARGE, CUBIC FEET PER SECOND, WATER YEAR OCTOBER 2002 TO SEPTEMBER 2003 DAILY MEAN VALUES DAY OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 1 10 23 18 101 22 29 37 27 68 34 29 20 2 10 21 17 49 22 101 36 27 29 33 20 52 3 10 19 17 50 21 60 35 27 28 39 72 27 4 12 19 16 42 29 38 34 26 188 33 111 44 5 12 19 18 35 22 74 34 27 78 33 54 25 6 9.5 37 17 35 20 140 32 31
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Cave and Karst Studies
    June 2020 Volume 82, Number 2 JOURNAL OF ISSN 1090-6924 A Publication of the National CAVE AND KARST Speleological Society STUDIES DEDICATED TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE, EDUCATION, EXPLORATION, AND CONSERVATION Published By BOARD OF EDITORS The National Speleological Society Anthropology George Crothers http://caves.org/pub/journal University of Kentucky Lexington, KY Office [email protected] 6001 Pulaski Pike NW Huntsville, AL 35810 USA Conservation-Life Sciences Julian J. Lewis & Salisa L. Lewis Tel:256-852-1300 Lewis & Associates, LLC. [email protected] Borden, IN [email protected] Editor-in-Chief Earth Sciences Benjamin Schwartz Malcolm S. Field Texas State University National Center of Environmental San Marcos, TX Assessment (8623P) [email protected] Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Leslie A. North 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Western Kentucky University Bowling Green, KY Washington, DC 20460-0001 [email protected] 703-347-8601 Voice 703-347-8692 Fax [email protected] Mario Parise University Aldo Moro Production Editor Bari, Italy [email protected] Scott A. Engel Knoxville, TN Carol Wicks 225-281-3914 Louisiana State University [email protected] Baton Rouge, LA [email protected] Exploration Paul Burger National Park Service Eagle River, Alaska [email protected] Microbiology Kathleen H. Lavoie State University of New York Plattsburgh, NY [email protected] Paleontology Greg McDonald National Park Service Fort Collins, CO The Journal of Cave and Karst Studies , ISSN 1090-6924, CPM [email protected] Number #40065056, is a multi-disciplinary, refereed journal pub- lished four times a year by the National Speleological Society.
    [Show full text]
  • A Taxonomic Catalogue of Japanese Nemerteans (Phylum Nemertea)
    Title A Taxonomic Catalogue of Japanese Nemerteans (Phylum Nemertea) Author(s) Kajihara, Hiroshi Zoological Science, 24(4), 287-326 Citation https://doi.org/10.2108/zsj.24.287 Issue Date 2007-04 Doc URL http://hdl.handle.net/2115/39621 Rights (c) Zoological Society of Japan / 本文献の公開は著者の意思に基づくものである Type article Note REVIEW File Information zsj24p287.pdf Instructions for use Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers : HUSCAP ZOOLOGICAL SCIENCE 24: 287–326 (2007) © 2007 Zoological Society of Japan [REVIEW] A Taxonomic Catalogue of Japanese Nemerteans (Phylum Nemertea) Hiroshi Kajihara* Department of Natural History Sciences, Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0810, Japan A literature-based taxonomic catalogue of the nemertean species (Phylum Nemertea) reported from Japanese waters is provided, listing 19 families, 45 genera, and 120 species as valid. Applications of the following species names to forms previously recorded from Japanese waters are regarded as uncertain: Amphiporus cervicalis, Amphiporus depressus, Amphiporus lactifloreus, Cephalothrix filiformis, Cephalothrix linearis, Cerebratulus fuscus, Lineus vegetus, Lineus bilineatus, Lineus gesserensis, Lineus grubei, Lineus longifissus, Lineus mcintoshii, Nipponnemertes pulchra, Oerstedia venusta, Prostoma graecense, and Prostoma grande. The identities of the taxa referred to by the fol- lowing four nominal species require clarification through future investigations: Cosmocephala japonica, Dicelis rubra, Dichilus obscurus, and Nareda serpentina. The nominal species established from Japanese waters are tabulated. In addition, a brief history of taxonomic research on Japanese nemerteans is reviewed. Key words: checklist, Pacific, classification, ribbon worm, Nemertinea 2001). The only recent listing of previously described Japa- INTRODUCTION nese species is the checklist of Crandall et al. (2002), but The phylum Nemertea comprises about 1,200 species the relevant literature is scattered.
    [Show full text]
  • Nemertea: Enopla: Hoplonemertea: Tetrastemmatidae
    Tetrastemma sp. B SCAMIT SCAMIT Vol. , No Group: Nemertea: Enopla: Hoplonemertea: Tetrastemmatidae Date Examined: 16 May 2010 Voucher By: Tony Phillips SYNONYMY: Tetrastemma sp 1 (Phillips 2006) Tetrastemma sp HYP1 (Phillips 2008) LITERATURE: Bernhardt, P. 1979. A key to the Nemertea from the intertidal zone of the coast of California. (Unpublished). Coe, W.R. 1901. Papers from the Harriman Expedition, 20, the Nemerteans. Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci., 3:1-110. Coe, W.R. 1905. Nemerteans of the west and north-west coasts of North America. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard Coll. 47:1-319. Coe, W.R. 1940. Revision of the nemertean fauna of the Pacific Coast of North, Central and northern South America. Allen Hancock Pacific Exped. 2(13):247-323. DIAGNOSTIC CHARACTERS: 1. Body white, thick, generally of uniform width. 2. Proboscis sheath extends almost full length of body, proboscis papillated. 3. basis slightly longer than stylet (s/b ratio .60 - .93), basis pear shaped and base slightly rounded, 1-2 accessory pouches (1 – 2 stylets). 4. eyes not visible uncleared, cleared specimens with single pair of crescentic eyes near anterior edge of head, double pair of crescent eyes (facing slightly to outside) on top of each other (anterior/posterior), just posterior to cephalic furrow and above brain lobes. 5. Size of specimens observed 3 – 6 mm. RELATED SPECIES AND CHARACTER DIFFERENCES: The distinct, double crescent posterior eyes observed has only been seen in one other provisional Tetrastemma found in the southern California Bight. That species was described as Tetrastemma sp CARP 1 (for this presentation as T.
    [Show full text]
  • Lost Creek Coldwater Conservation Plan
    Lost Creek Coldwater Conservation Plan 2013 Prepared by the Juniata County Conservation District Page | 1 Funding Provided by the Coldwater Heritage Partnership EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Lost Creek is a tributary to the Juniata River originating in the northeastern part of Juniata County, Pennsylvania. The entire stream is 17.5 miles in length, but only the upper portion, from its origin to where it crosses State Route 35 in Oakland Mills, PA is classified as a High Quality Cold Water Fishery (HQ-CWF) by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (25 Pa. Code § 93.9). PA FBC also considers this section of the stream a naturally reproducing, Class A Wild Trout Stream. The entirety of this section of the watershed is located within Fayette Township. In order to determine if this exceptional resource is continuing to serve Juniata County as a high quality cold water resource, the Juniata County Conservation District (JCCD) set out to validate the stream’s ratings via chemical testing (through both lab-verified and in-house tests), lab verified Macroinvertebrate testing, and stream habitat assessment. Additionally, JCCD sought to identify threats and opportunities within the watershed to ensure future conservation of this nearly pristine natural area. According to lab data and data collected by JCCD staff, the Lost Creek watershed upstream of State Route 35 in Oakland Mills, PA does, in fact, measure up to its designation. Although threatened by agricultural industry, residential development, and logging, Lost Creek offers great recreational opportunities and can certainly be preserved for the enjoyment of many generations to come, as well as for the benefit of the plentiful and somewhat rare natural communities that thrive within its boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of the Aquatic Invertebrates of the Delaware River Basin, 1990-2000
    A Checklist of the Aquatic Invertebrates of the Delaware River Basin, 1990-2000 By Michael D. Bilger, Karen Riva-Murray, and Gretchen L. Wall Data Series 116 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication 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 repro- duce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Bilger, M.D., Riva-Murray, Karen, and Wall, G.L., 2005, A checklist of the aquatic invertebrates of the Delaware River Basin, 1990-2000: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 116, 29 p. iii FOREWORD The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is committed to providing the Nation with accurate and timely sci- entific information that helps enhance and protect the overall quality of life and that facilitates effec- tive management of water, biological, energy, and mineral resources (http://www.usgs.gov/). Informa- tion on the quality of the Nation’s water resources is critical to assuring the long-term availability of water that is safe for drinking and recreation and suitable for industry, irrigation, and habitat for fish and wildlife.
    [Show full text]