DOCSLIB.ORG

Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory Update 2021 Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory 2021 Update Anna Johnson and Christopher Tracey, editors Prepared for: Southwest Pennsylvania Commission 112 Washington Pl #500 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Prepared by: Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program 800 Waterfront Drive Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Please cite this Natural Heritage Inventory report as: Johnson, Anna and Christopher Tracey, editors. 2021. Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Pittsburgh, PA. 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to acknowledge the citizens and landowners of Armstrong County and surrounding areas who volunteered information, time, and effort to the inventory and granted permission to access land. A big thank you goes to those who suggested areas of interest, provided data, and assisted with field surveys. Additional thanks goes to Ryan Gordon of the Southwest Pennsylvania Commission for providing support for this project. Advisory Committee to the 2021 update to the Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory: • Darin Alviano — Armstrong County Planning Director We want to recognize the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program and NatureServe for providing the foundation for the work that we perform for these studies. Current and former PNHP staff that contributed to this report includes JoAnn Albert, Jaci Braund, Charlie Eichelberger, Kierstin Carlson, Mary Ann Furedi, Steve Grund, Amy Jewitt, Anna Johnson, Susan Klugman, John Kunsman, Betsy Leppo, Jessica McPherson, Molly Moore, Ryan Miller, Greg Podniesinski, Megan Pulver, Erika Schoen, Scott Schuette, Emily Szoszorek, Kent Taylor, Christopher Tracey, Natalie Virbitsky, Jeff Wagner, Denise Watts, Joe Wisgo, Pete Woods, David Yeany, and Ephraim Zimmerman. The species information utilized in the inventory came from many sources as well as our own field surveys. We wish to acknowledge all of those who carried out botanical and zoological survey work over the years. Biologists, both on their own and from institutions and agencies such as the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, the Pennsylvania Game Commission, and the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission have contributed numerous plant and animal records over the years. The task of inventorying the natural heritage of the county would have been much more difficult and incomplete without this tremendous pool of information gathered by many people over many years. Finally, we especially wish to thank the landowners who granted us permission to conduct inventories on their lands. Without their support, this report would have been far less complete. This project was funded through a grant provided by the DCNR Community Conservation Partnership Program. This project also benefited from previous and current work supported by a variety of funding sources including DCNR’s Wild Resources Conservation Program, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, the Pennsylvania Game Commission, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The success of the report will be measured by the use it receives and the utility it serves to those making decisions about resources and land use throughout the county. Thank you for your interest. Anna Johnson Christopher Tracey Connservation Planner Conservation Planning Manager [email protected] [email protected] 412-586-2389 412-586-2326 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS page i Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory Contents 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i 2 THE PENNSYLVANIA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM 1 3 INTRODUCTION 2 4 BIODIVERSITY IN PENNSYLVANIA 4 5 NATURAL HISTORY OVERVIEW OF ARMSTRONG COUNTY 6 5.1 Land Cover . 6 5.2 Physiography & Geology . 7 5.3 Watersheds . 8 5.4 Natural Communities . 9 5.5 Regional Disturbances . 11 5.6 Forest Fragmentation . 12 5.7 Invasive Species . 14 5.7.1 Invasive Plants . 14 5.7.2 Invasive Animal Species . 14 5.7.3 Overall Invasive Species Recommendations . 15 6 METHODS 17 6.1 Field Work and Data Management . 17 6.2 Natural Heritage Area Mapping . 17 6.3 Site Accounts . 18 6.3.1 PNHP Element Ranks . 18 6.3.2 Federal and State Status . 19 6.3.3 Quality Ranks . 20 6.4 Site Ranking . 20 6.5 Mapping and Conservation Planning for Sensitive Species . 20 7 RESULTS 22 7.1 Armstrong CNHI Update Changes . 22 7.1.1 Natural Heritage Area (NHA) Name Changes . 22 7.1.2 Changes in number of significant ecological features and shape of NHA mapping . 22 7.1.3 Document layout . 23 7.2 Species and Communities of Concern in Armstrong County . 23 7.3 Natural Heritage Areas of Armstrong County . 26 7.4 Planning for Sensitive Species . 30 7.4.1 Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) ........................................ 30 7.4.2 Wood Turtle (Glyptemys insculpta) ................................... 31 7.4.3 Woodland Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina) ......................... 31 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32 8.1 Future Natural Resource Research in the Region . 32 8.2 A Final Note on Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species . 32 8.3 Using the Natural Heritage Inventory in the Planning Process . 32 8.4 General Recommendations . 33 8.4.1 Consider conservation initiatives for natural heritage areas on private land . 33 8.4.2 Prepare management plans that address species of concern and natural communities . 33 8.4.3 Protect bodies of water . 34 8.4.4 Provide for natural buffers in and around natural heritage areas . 34 8.4.5 Reduce fragmentation of the landscape surrounding natural heritage areas . 34 8.4.6 Manage for invasive species . 35 8.4.7 Encourage conservation work by grassroots organizations . 35 9 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED 36 10 NATURAL HERITAGE AREA SITE ACCOUNTS 37 CONTENTS page ii Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory 2 THE PENNSYLVANIA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM The Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program (PNHP) is a partnership between the Western Pennsylvania Con- servancy (WPC), the Pennsylvania Department of Con- servation and Natural Resources (DCNR), the Pennsyl- vania Game Commission (PGC), and the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC). Founded in 1982, PNHP is part of a network of Natural Heritage Pro- NatureServe, the natural heritage network, was originally grams that utilizes common methodology developed by Her- founded by The Nature Conservancy in the early 1970s, itage Programs and The Nature Conservancy, and refined with the first program established in South Carolina in through NatureServe – the organization that represents 1974. The concept was to create a federation of pro- the network of Natural Heritage Programs (see sidebar at grams in all 50 U.S. states, using a common database and right). data management methodology, to document the extent of biodiversity throughout the country with an emphasis PNHP collects and stores location and baseline ecolog- on rare and threatened species and natural communities. ical information about rare plants, rare animals, unique Many programs were established with state environmen- plant communities, significant habitats, and geologic fea- tal protection or natural resource agencies, while some tures in Pennsylvania. The PNHP database is Penn- are housed in universities. Pennsylvania’s partnership with sylvania’s chief storehouse of such information with al- three agencies and a non-profit is unique among the programs. most 30,000 detailed digital occurrence records. Though not a regulatory organization, as part of its function, Over time the heritage network has expanded throughout PNHP provides expert input on species impacted by Canada and 12 Latin American countries. In 1994, the projects that require permits issued by the Pennsylva- Association for Biodiversity Information (ABI) was founded nia Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Al- to more closely coordinate activities of the network, and though data from PNHP feed into the environmen- ABI transformed into NatureServe in 2001 as The Nature tal review tool known as the Pennsylvania Natural Conservancy transferred administration of the network to Diversity Inventory (PNDI), the process of environ- NatureServe. mental review is housed within DCNR, PFBC, and PGC. All programs in the heritage network use a common data man- agement system outlined on these pages, based on the original As part of the information maintained by PNHP, a system of concepts of elements, element occurrences, and rarity ranks. global ranks and state ranks is used to describe the relative Today, the NatureServe network stands as the most compre- degree of rarity for species and natural communities. This hensive source of information on the locations and status of system is especially useful in understanding how imperiled a biodiversity and natural communities throughout the western resource is throughout its range, as well as understanding the hemisphere. rarity of resources that do not have official state status, such as invertebrate animals and natural communities. A summary of global and state ranks can be found in the methods section. PNHP is valuable for its ability to supply technically sound data that can be applied to natural resource decisions. Information on the occurrences of elements of special concern (species and natural communities) gathered from museums, universities, colleges, and recent fieldwork by professionals throughout the state is used by PNHP to identify the areas of highest natural integrity and significance in Armstrong County. The Armstrong County Natural Heritage Inventory (CNHI) report presents the known outstanding natural features in the county.
Recommended publications
  • Olive Clubtail (Stylurus Olivaceus) in Canada, Prepared Under Contract with Environment Canada

    Olive Clubtail (Stylurus Olivaceus) in Canada, Prepared Under Contract with Environment Canada

    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Olive Clubtail Stylurus olivaceus in Canada ENDANGERED 2011 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2011. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Olive Clubtail Stylurus olivaceus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 58 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Robert A. Cannings, Sydney G. Cannings, Leah R. Ramsay and Richard J. Cannings for writing the status report on Olive Clubtail (Stylurus olivaceus) in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada. This report was overseen and edited by Paul Catling, Co-chair of the COSEWIC Arthropods Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le gomphe olive (Stylurus olivaceus) au Canada. Cover illustration/photo: Olive Clubtail — Photo by Jim Johnson. Permission granted for reproduction. ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2011. Catalogue No. CW69-14/637-2011E-PDF ISBN 978-1-100-18707-5 Recycled paper COSEWIC Assessment Summary Assessment Summary – May 2011 Common name Olive Clubtail Scientific name Stylurus olivaceus Status Endangered Reason for designation This highly rare, stream-dwelling dragonfly with striking blue eyes is known from only 5 locations within three separate regions of British Columbia.
  • The Principal Indian Towns of Western Pennsylvania C

    The Principal Indian Towns of Western Pennsylvania C

    The Principal Indian Towns of Western Pennsylvania C. Hale Sipe One cannot travel far in Western Pennsylvania with- out passing the sites of Indian towns, Delaware, Shawnee and Seneca mostly, or being reminded of the Pennsylvania Indians by the beautiful names they gave to the mountains, streams and valleys where they roamed. In a future paper the writer will set forth the meaning of the names which the Indians gave to the mountains, valleys and streams of Western Pennsylvania; but the present paper is con- fined to a brief description of the principal Indian towns in the western part of the state. The writer has arranged these Indian towns in alphabetical order, as follows: Allaquippa's Town* This town, named for the Seneca, Queen Allaquippa, stood at the mouth of Chartier's Creek, where McKees Rocks now stands. In the Pennsylvania, Colonial Records, this stream is sometimes called "Allaquippa's River". The name "Allaquippa" means, as nearly as can be determined, "a hat", being likely a corruption of "alloquepi". This In- dian "Queen", who was visited by such noted characters as Conrad Weiser, Celoron and George Washington, had var- ious residences in the vicinity of the "Forks of the Ohio". In fact, there is good reason for thinking that at one time she lived right at the "Forks". When Washington met her while returning from his mission to the French, she was living where McKeesport now stands, having moved up from the Ohio to get farther away from the French. After Washington's surrender at Fort Necessity, July 4th, 1754, she and the other Indian inhabitants of the Ohio Val- ley friendly to the English, were taken to Aughwick, now Shirleysburg, where they were fed by the Colonial Author- ities of Pennsylvania.
  • The Archaeology and Early History of the Allegheny River. Verylittlehas

    The Archaeology and Early History of the Allegheny River. Verylittlehas

    Archaeology and Early History of Allegheny River 21 The Archaeology and Early History of the Allegheny River. Very littlehas been written concerning the archaeology of the region along the Allegheny River. One reason for this lack of material relating to this most historic field of investigation is because there has never been any real scien- tific work done init,and very little has been done to collect and to study the archaeological material which has been found in it. Itis very strange that :&uch should be the case, as this river valley has seen more changes in the early aboriginal occupation than any other valley in the state. The author, in a recent number of Pittsburgh First gave a sketch of the various Indian peoples who have lived along the course of this stream. Among these are the Akan- sea, the Cherokee, the Erie, the Black Minquas and the historic Seneca, Delaware and Shawnee. — There would, therefore be mingled the cultures of the Siouian, the Iro- quoian and the Algonkian groups. There is some reason for thinking that the earliest oc- cupation of this region, like the greater part of Pennsyl- vania and New York, was Algonkian. The very oldest types of cultural remains and the most badly weathered which the author has seen, belong to this prehistoric Algonkian culture. Next comes the Iroquoian, including the Cherokee, Erie and Seneca. The last cultural remains are those of the historic period, when the Seneca, the Delaware and Shaw- nee came into this region. The State Museum has recently purchased, through the Historical Commission, a most unique collection of In- dian artifacts which were collected by L.R.
  • Stormwater Management Plan Phase 1

    Stormwater Management Plan Phase 1

    Westmoreland County Department of Planning and Development Greensburg, Pennsylvania Act 167 Scope of Study for Westmoreland County Stormwater Management Plan June 2010 © PHASE 1 – SCOPE OF STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 3 Purpose6 ................................................................................................................... 3 Stormwater7 Runoff Problems and Solutions ........................................................ 3 Pennsylvania8 Storm Water Management Act (Act 167) ................................... 4 9 Act 167 Planning for Westmoreland County ...................................................... 5 Plan1 Benefits ........................................................................................................... 6 Stormwater1 Management Planning Approach ................................................. 7 Previous1 County Stormwater Management Planning and Related Planning Efforts ................................................................................................................................. 8 II. GENERAL COUNTY DESCRIPTION ........................................................................... 9 Political1 Jurisdictions .............................................................................................. 9 NPDES1 Phase 2 Involvement ................................................................................. 9 General1 Development Patterns ........................................................................
  • A Checklist of Oklahoma Odonata

    A Checklist of Oklahoma Odonata

    Libellula comanche Calvert, 1907 - Comanche Skimmer Useful regional references: Libellula composita (Hagen, 1873) - Bleached Skimmer A Checklist of Libellula croceipennis Sélys, 1868 - Neon Skimmer —Dragonflies and damselflies of the West by Dennis Paulson (2009) Libellula cyanea Fabricius, 1775 - Spangled Skimmer and Dragonflies and damselflies of the East by Dennis Paulson (2011) Oklahoma Odonata Libellula flavida Rambur, 1842 - Yellow-sided Skimmer Princeton University Press. Libellula incesta Hagen, 1861 - Slaty Skimmer —Damselflies of Texas: A Field Guide by John C. Abbott (2011) and (Dragonflies and Damselflies) Libellula luctuosa Burmeister, 1839 - Widow Skimmer Dragonflies of Texas: A Field Guide by John C. Abbott (2015) University of Texas Press. Libellula nodisticta Hagen, 1861 - Hoary Skimmer Libellula pulchella Drury, 1773 - Twelve-spotted Skimmer —Oklahoma Odonata Project: https://biosurvey.ou.edu/smith/Oklahoma_Odonata.html Libellula saturata Uhler, 1857 - Flame Skimmer Compiled by Brenda D. Smith — Smith BD, Patten MA (2020) Dragonflies at a Biogeographical Libellula semifasciata Burmeister, 1839 - Painted Skimmer Crossroads: The Odonata of Oklahoma and Complexities Beyond its & Michael A. Patten Libellula vibrans Fabricius, 1793 - Great Blue Skimmer Borders. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, Florida, USA. Macrodiplax balteata (Hagen, 1861) - Marl Pennant Miathyria marcella (Sélys, 1856) - Hyacinth Glider Oklahoma Biological Survey, Micrathyria hagenii Kirby, 1890 - Thornbush Dasher Oklahoma
  • NYSDEC SWAP High Priority SGCN Dragonflies Damselflies

    NYSDEC SWAP High Priority SGCN Dragonflies Damselflies

    Common Name: Tiger spiketail SGCN – High Priority Scientific Name: Cordulegaster erronea Taxon: Dragonflies and Damselflies Federal Status: Not Listed Natural Heritage Program Rank: New York Status: Not Listed Global: G4 New York: S1 Tracked: Yes Synopsis: The distributional center of the tiger spiketail (Cordulegaster erronea) is in northeastern Kentucky in the mixed mesophytic forest ecoregion, and extends southward to Louisiana and northward to western Michigan and northern New York. New York forms the northeastern range extent and an older, pre-1926 record from Keene Valley in Essex County is the northernmost known record for this species. Southeastern New York is the stronghold for this species within the lower Hudson River watershed in Orange, Rockland, Putnam and Westchester counties and is contiguous with New Jersey populations (Barlow 1995, Bangma and Barlow 2010). These populations were not discovered until the early 1990s and some have remained extant, while additional sites were added during the New York State Dragonfly and Damselfly Survey (NYSDDS). A second occupied area in the Finger Lakes region of central New York has been known since the 1920s and was rediscovered at Excelsior Glen in Schuyler County in the late 1990s. During the NYDDS, a second Schuyler County record was reported in 2005 as well as one along a small tributary stream of Otisco Lake in southwestern Onondaga County in 2008 (White et al. 2010). The habitat in the Finger Lakes varies slightly from that in southeastern New York and lies more in accordance with habitat in Michigan (O’Brien 1998) and Ohio (Glotzhober and Riggs 1996, Glotzhober 2006)—exposed, silty streams flowing from deep wooded ravines into large lakes (White et al.
  • Armstrong County Survey

    Armstrong County Survey

    ARMSTRONG COUNTY IRON AND STEEL SURVEY Final draft Eliza Smith Brown with Carmen P. DiCiccio, Ph.D. Prepared for Steel Industry Heritage Corporation by Brown, Carlisle & Associates October 1997 Contents Introduction . 1 Methodology . 2 Historic Context . 4 Iron . 5 Steel . 8 Coal and Coke . 9 Clay and Refractories . 12 Glass . 14 Lumber . 15 Oil and Gas . 15 Limestone . 17 Water Transportation . 17 Rail Transportation . 20 Associated Properties Typology . 23 Criteria for Selection . 25 Site List . 26 National Register Eligibility . 51 Recommendations Endangered Site and Action List . 53 Designations . 53 Interpretation . 54 Bibliography . 55 Introduction This report is a component of the Rivers of Steel program, which is an outgrowth of the Steel Industry Heritage Concept Plan published in 1993. Rivers of Steel is a heritage tourism initiative that seeks to preserve and celebrate the story of Big Steel and its related industries in southwestern Pennsylvania. More specifically, it weaves together cultural, recreational, and historical resources in a unifying physical framework with an exciting programmatic theme that will bolster the regional economy through tourism and economic development. The Rivers of Steel region, originally encompassing the six counties of Allegheny, Beaver, Fayette, Greene, Washington, and Westmoreland, was named a Heritage Area by the Pennsylvania Heritage Parks Program in April 1996. Late in 1996, Armstrong County was added to the Heritage Area, prompting the need for both historic and ethnographic surveys. Consequently, the Steel Industry Heritage Corporation (SIHC) commissioned this study, funded by the Pennsylvania Heritage Parks Program, with matching funds from five local financial institutions: Farmers National Bank, Mellon Bank, Merchants National Bank, Pennwood Savings Bank, and National City Bank.
  • The Emergence and Decline of the Delaware Indian Nation in Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Country, 1730--1795

    The Emergence and Decline of the Delaware Indian Nation in Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Country, 1730--1795

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by The Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University) Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports 2005 The emergence and decline of the Delaware Indian nation in western Pennsylvania and the Ohio country, 1730--1795 Richard S. Grimes West Virginia University Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd Recommended Citation Grimes, Richard S., "The emergence and decline of the Delaware Indian nation in western Pennsylvania and the Ohio country, 1730--1795" (2005). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 4150. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/4150 This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Emergence and Decline of the Delaware Indian Nation in Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Country, 1730-1795 Richard S. Grimes Dissertation submitted to the Eberly College of Arts and Sciences at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Mary Lou Lustig, Ph.D., Chair Kenneth A.
  • A Checklist of North American Odonata

    A Checklist of North American Odonata

    A Checklist of North American Odonata Including English Name, Etymology, Type Locality, and Distribution Dennis R. Paulson and Sidney W. Dunkle 2009 Edition (updated 14 April 2009) A Checklist of North American Odonata Including English Name, Etymology, Type Locality, and Distribution 2009 Edition (updated 14 April 2009) Dennis R. Paulson1 and Sidney W. Dunkle2 Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009. Copyright © 2009 Dennis R. Paulson and Sidney W. Dunkle 2009 edition published by Jim Johnson Cover photo: Tramea carolina (Carolina Saddlebags), Cabin Lake, Aiken Co., South Carolina, 13 May 2008, Dennis Paulson. 1 1724 NE 98 Street, Seattle, WA 98115 2 8030 Lakeside Parkway, Apt. 8208, Tucson, AZ 85730 ABSTRACT The checklist includes all 457 species of North American Odonata considered valid at this time. For each species the original citation, English name, type locality, etymology of both scientific and English names, and approxi- mate distribution are given. Literature citations for original descriptions of all species are given in the appended list of references. INTRODUCTION Before the first edition of this checklist there was no re- Table 1. The families of North American Odonata, cent checklist of North American Odonata. Muttkows- with number of species. ki (1910) and Needham and Heywood (1929) are long out of date. The Zygoptera and Anisoptera were cov- Family Genera Species ered by Westfall and May (2006) and Needham, West- fall, and May (2000), respectively, but some changes Calopterygidae 2 8 in nomenclature have been made subsequently. Davies Lestidae 2 19 and Tobin (1984, 1985) listed the world odonate fauna Coenagrionidae 15 103 but did not include type localities or details of distri- Platystictidae 1 1 bution.
  • The Allegheny River Corridor Provide Intermodal Opportunities Along the Corridor

    The Allegheny River Corridor Provide Intermodal Opportunities Along the Corridor

    CORRIDOR 21 The Allegheny River Corridor This corridor connects Pittsburgh and its eastern suburbs to I-80, north-central Pennsylvania and the markets of the northeastern United States and Canada. The corridor includes Pittsburgh, Kittanning, and Brookville. OBJECTIVES: • Provide better access to the Port of Pittsburgh. • Provide intermodal opportunities along the corridor. 66 Brookville Clarion 28 Major Corridor Facilities Butler Jefferson 28 PA Highway 66 Railroad Kittanning Airport Armstrong Mass Transit 28 Port Pittsburgh 66 Other Facilities Allegheny Other Connecting Highway Westmoreland Railroad 87 PennPlan MOVES CORRIDOR 22 The Rivers of Steel Corridor This north-south corridor connects West Virginia to Pittsburgh, Sharon, and Erie, and is western Pennsylvania’s most significant transportation corridor. The corridor includes the City of Pittsburgh and its airport and port; the Beaver Valley; New Castle; and the Sharon-Farrell-Hermitage urban area. OBJECTIVES: • Provide better access to the Port of Erie and the Port of Pittsburgh. • Construct the Mon-Fayette Expressway from Pittsburgh to I-68 in West Virginia. • Provide intermodal opportunities along the corridor. • Enhance safety and reduce congestion along PA 18 in the Sharon area. • Implement intelligent transportation systems along the corridor. 88 Statewide Corridors CORRIDOR 22 The Rivers of Steel Corridor New York Erie Erie 18 79 8 Crawford Major Corridor Facilities 322 Interstate Highway 18 Mercer US Highway Sharon Venango PA Highway Ohio 79 Butler Railroad Lawrence Airport 8 Mass Transit 60 Ports Beaver Allegheny 279 30 Other Facilities 18 Pittsburgh Other Connecting Highway Washington Railroad 79 18 Greene Fayette West Virginia Maryland 89 PennPlan MOVES CORRIDOR 23 The Gateway Corridor This corridor connects southwestern Pennsylvania to northern Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and the rest of the midwestern United States.
  • Water Quality in the Allegheny and Monongahela River Basins Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York, and Maryland, 1996–98

    Water Quality in the Allegheny and Monongahela River Basins Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York, and Maryland, 1996–98

    Water Quality in the Allegheny and Monongahela River Basins Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York, and Maryland, 1996–98 U.S. Department of the Interior Circular 1202 U.S. Geological Survey POINTS OF CONTACT AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The companion Web site for NAWQA summary reports: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/ Allegheny-Monongahela River contact and Web site: National NAWQA Program: USGS State Representative Chief, NAWQA Program U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division Water Resources Division 215 Limekiln Road 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, M.S. 413 New Cumberland, PA 17070 Reston, VA 20192 e-mail: [email protected] http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/ http://pa.water.usgs.gov/almn/ Other NAWQA summary reports River Basin Assessments Albemarle-Pamlico Drainage Basin (Circular 1157) Rio Grande Valley (Circular 1162) Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin (Circular 1164) Sacramento River Basin (Circular 1215) Central Arizona Basins (Circular 1213) San Joaquin-Tulare Basins (Circular 1159) Central Columbia Plateau (Circular 1144) Santee River Basin and Coastal Drainages (Circular 1206) Central Nebraska Basins (Circular 1163) South-Central Texas (Circular 1212) Connecticut, Housatonic and Thames River Basins (Circular 1155) South Platte River Basin (Circular 1167) Eastern Iowa Basins (Circular 1210) Southern Florida (Circular 1207) Georgia-Florida Coastal Plain (Circular 1151) Trinity River Basin (Circular 1171) Hudson River Basin (Circular 1165) Upper Colorado River Basin (Circular 1214) Kanawha-New River Basins (Circular
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018

    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018

    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018 Carolina Northern Flying Squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus) photo by Clifton Avery Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. The list is published periodically, generally every two years.