DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecosystem Restoration in the Ouachita National Forest: Evaluating the Pragmatism of Pre-European Settlement Benchmarks

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecosystem Restoration in the Ouachita National Forest: Evaluating the Pragmatism of Pre-European Settlement Benchmarks University of Kentucky UKnowledge University of Kentucky Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2008 ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST: EVALUATING THE PRAGMATISM OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BENCHMARKS John Lawrence Davenport University of Kentucky, [email protected] Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Davenport, John Lawrence, "ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST: EVALUATING THE PRAGMATISM OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BENCHMARKS" (2008). University of Kentucky Doctoral Dissertations. 622. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/gradschool_diss/622 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Kentucky Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION John Lawrence Davenport The Graduate School University of Kentucky 2008 ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST: EVALUATING THE PRAGMATISM OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BENCHMARKS ___________________________________________ ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION ___________________________________________ A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky By John Lawrence Davenport Lexington, Kentucky Director: Dr. Jonathan Phillips, Professor of Geography Lexington, Kentucky 2008 Copyright © John Lawrence Davenport 2008 ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST: EVALUATING THE PRAGMATISM OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BENCHMARKS This paper looks at the intersections of nature and culture through a study of forest ecosystem restoration efforts in the Ouachita National Forest (Arkansas and Oklahoma). Ecosystem restoration goals are often informed by a pre-European settlement (PES) condition, with an implicit (and occasionally explicit) assertion that such conditions are both more natural than and preferable to the contemporary state. In many cases resuming pre-suppression fire regimes remains a key mechanism for achieving this restored condition. This study’s three main objectives include: (1) determining how PES benchmarks arose in restoration thought, (2) examining how the choice to use a PES benchmark is influenced by culture, and (3) evaluating the pragmatism of including a PES benchmark in restoration projects. The issues of the naturalness of PES conditions, along with the cultural implications of adopting a PES benchmark, are critically examined against the backdrop of historic legacies of fire suppression and paleoecological change. Normative balance-of-nature ideas are discussed in light of their influence on natural resource management paradigms. Linkages are drawn between PES conditions and forest health. Evidence supporting the ecological resilience associated with PES vegetation communities is considered alongside the anticipation of future forcing factors. The idea that restored forests represent an ecological archetype is addressed. Finally, an alternative explanation concerning the tendency of ecosystem restoration efforts to converge on a single historic reference condition – a point of equifinality – is weighed against notions of: (1) anthropic degradation, (2) a regional optimum, and (3) a socially-constructed yearning for a frontier ideal. Because of the unique convergence between historical human activities and natural processes, contemporary culture has conceived of the PES time period as a sort of frontier ideal. The creation of PES benchmarks appears to be an unintentional consequence of attempts to restore forest health rigorously defined by biometric standards. This study offers, to restoration thinking, a framework for critically evaluating the inclusion of historic reference conditions and a means of responding to criticism surrounding their use. This study's findings rest on evidence gathered from paleoecological and historical biogeography data, interviews, archival materials, cultural landscape interpretation, landscape and nature-based art, and complexity theory. KEYWORDS: Ecosystem Restoration, Forest Health, Historic Reference Conditions, Pre-European Settlement Benchmarks, Social-Construction of Nature John Davenport_______________________ Student’s Signature 6-27-08_____________________________ D a t e ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST: EVALUATING THE PRAGMATISM OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BENCHMARKS By John Lawrence Davenport Dr. Jonathan Phillips___________________ Director of Dissertation Dr. Richard Schein____________________ D i r e c t o r of Graduate Studies 6-27-08_____________________________ D a t e RULES FOR THE USE OF DISSERTATIONS Unpublished dissertations submitted for the Doctor’s degree and deposited in the University of Kentucky Library are as a rule open for inspection, but are to be used only with due regard to the rights of the authors. Biographical references may be noted, but quotations or summaries of parts may be published only with permission of the author, and with the usual scholarly acknowledgments. Extensive copying or publication of the dissertation in whole or in part also requires the consent of the Dean of the Graduate School of the University of Kentucky. A library that borrows this dissertation for use by its patrons is expected to secure the signature of each user. Name D a t e ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ DISSERTATION John Lawrence Davenport The Graduate School University of Kentucky 2008 ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION IN THE OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST: EVALUATING THE PRAGMATISM OF PRE-EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BENCHMARKS ___________________________________________ DISSERTATION ___________________________________________ A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky By John Lawrence Davenport Lexington, Kentucky Director: Dr. Jonathan Phillips, Professor of Geography Lexington, Kentucky 2008 Copyright © John Lawrence Davenport 2008 To Chelsey ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following dissertation, while an individual work, benefited from the insight and direction of several people. First, my Dissertation Chair, Dr. Jonathan Phillips, exemplifies the high quality scholarship to which I aspire. Next, I wish to thank the complete Dissertation Committee, and outside reader, respectively: Dr. Mary Arthur, Dr. Dan Marion, Dr. Rich Schein, and Dr. Lynne Rieske-Kinney. Their timely and instructive comments and evaluation at every stage of the dissertation process, allowed me to complete this project on schedule. Additionally, I express gratitude to Dr. Karl Raitz, whose outstanding seminar on American landscape sparked my interest in several of the themes pertinent to this study. Each individual provided insights that guided and challenged my thinking, substantially improving the finished product. In addition to the technical and instrumental assistance above, I received equally important assistance from family and friends. My wife, Chelsey Davenport, provided on- going support throughout the dissertation process, as well as technical assistance critical for completing the project in a timely manner. My mother, Mary Davenport, and father, Richard Davenport, instilled in me, from an early age, the skills and work ethic to obtain the Ph.D. Finally, I wish to thank the respondents of my study (who remain anonymous for confidentiality purposes). Their comments and insight created an informative and interesting project with opportunities for future work. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………… iii List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………….. vi List of Figures…………………..……………………………………………………….. vii Chapter 1: Forest Service Tenure and Forest Health in the Ouachita National F o r e s t 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………….............. …….. 1 1.1 History of Forest Service Management in the Ouachita National Forest....................................................................................................... …….. 5 1.2 Ecosystem Restoration and Forest Health in the Ouachita National Forest…………………………………………………………………... …….. 8 Chapter 2: Methods 2.0 Intellectual Contributions and Preliminary Research………………….. …… 18 2.1 Methodology…………………………………………………………… …… 20 2.2 Interviews………………………………………………………………. …... 21 2.3 Archival Research……………………………………………………… …… 24 2.31 Data Analysis…………………………………………………. …… 25 2.4 Landscape Art, Visual Metaphor, and Truth…………………..………. …… 26 Chapter 3: Paleoecological Change and Developmental Pathways 3.0 Ecosystem Change……………………………………………………... …… 31 3.1 Post-Pleistocene Change in Species Composition…………………………... 34 3.2 Disturbance Regimes………………………………………………............... 37 3.21 First Pathway: Ice, Wind, and Fire………………………………… 41 3.22 Second Pathway:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 8 — National Wilderness Areas in Multiple States
    Table 8 - National Wilderness Areas in Multiple States * Unit is in two or more States ** Acres estimated pending final boundary determination + Special Area that is part of a proclaimed National Forest National Wilderness Area State NFS Other Total Unit Name Acreage Acreage Acreage Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Montana Custer National Forest* 331,130 1,482 332,612 Gallatin National Forest 582,181 2,657 584,838 Wyoming Shoshone National Forest 23,694 0 23,694 Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Totals 937,005 4,139 941,144 Big Frog Wilderness Georgia Chattahoochee National Forest 136 0 136 Tennessee Cherokee National Forest* 7,996 0 7,996 Big Frog Wilderness Totals 8,132 0 8,132 Black Fork Mountain Wilderness Arkansas Ouachita National Forest* 8,249 79 8,328 Oklahoma Ouachita National Forest* 5,098 40 5,138 Black Fork Mountain Wilderness Totals 13,347 119 13,466 Cohutta Wilderness Georgia Chattahoochee National Forest 35,284 9 35,293 Tennessee Cherokee National Forest* 1,746 0 1,746 Cohutta Wilderness Totals 37,030 9 37,039 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Georgia Chattahoochee National Forest 2,023 0 2,023 North Carolina Nantahala National Forest 3,417 0 3,417 South Carolina Sumter National Forest 2,857 9 2,866 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Totals 8,297 9 8,306 Processed Date: 2/5/2014 Table 8 - National Wilderness Areas in Multiple States * Unit is in two or more States ** Acres estimated pending final boundary determination + Special Area that is part of a proclaimed National Forest National Wilderness Area State NFS Other Total Unit Name Acreage Acreage
    [Show full text]
  • A Many-Storied Place
    A Many-storied Place Historic Resource Study Arkansas Post National Memorial, Arkansas Theodore Catton Principal Investigator Midwest Region National Park Service Omaha, Nebraska 2017 A Many-Storied Place Historic Resource Study Arkansas Post National Memorial, Arkansas Theodore Catton Principal Investigator 2017 Recommended: {){ Superintendent, Arkansas Post AihV'j Concurred: Associate Regional Director, Cultural Resources, Midwest Region Date Approved: Date Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set. Proverbs 22:28 Words spoken by Regional Director Elbert Cox Arkansas Post National Memorial dedication June 23, 1964 Table of Contents List of Figures vii Introduction 1 1 – Geography and the River 4 2 – The Site in Antiquity and Quapaw Ethnogenesis 38 3 – A French and Spanish Outpost in Colonial America 72 4 – Osotouy and the Changing Native World 115 5 – Arkansas Post from the Louisiana Purchase to the Trail of Tears 141 6 – The River Port from Arkansas Statehood to the Civil War 179 7 – The Village and Environs from Reconstruction to Recent Times 209 Conclusion 237 Appendices 241 1 – Cultural Resource Base Map: Eight exhibits from the Memorial Unit CLR (a) Pre-1673 / Pre-Contact Period Contributing Features (b) 1673-1803 / Colonial and Revolutionary Period Contributing Features (c) 1804-1855 / Settlement and Early Statehood Period Contributing Features (d) 1856-1865 / Civil War Period Contributing Features (e) 1866-1928 / Late 19th and Early 20th Century Period Contributing Features (f) 1929-1963 / Early 20th Century Period
    [Show full text]
  • Cherokees in Arkansas
    CHEROKEES IN ARKANSAS A historical synopsis prepared for the Arkansas State Racing Commission. John Jolly - first elected Chief of the Western OPERATED BY: Cherokee in Arkansas in 1824. Image courtesy of the Smithsonian American Art Museum LegendsArkansas.com For additional information on CNB’s cultural tourism program, go to VisitCherokeeNation.com THE CROSSING OF PATHS TIMELINE OF CHEROKEES IN ARKANSAS Late 1780s: Some Cherokees began to spend winters hunting near the St. Francis, White, and Arkansas Rivers, an area then known as “Spanish Louisiana.” According to Spanish colonial records, Cherokees traded furs with the Spanish at the Arkansas Post. Late 1790s: A small group of Cherokees relocated to the New Madrid settlement. Early 1800s: Cherokees continued to immigrate to the Arkansas and White River valleys. 1805: John B. Treat opened a trading post at Spadra Bluff to serve the incoming Cherokees. 1808: The Osage ceded some of their hunting lands between the Arkansas and White Rivers in the Treaty of Fort Clark. This increased tension between the Osage and Cherokee. 1810: Tahlonteeskee and approximately 1,200 Cherokees arrived to this area. 1811-1812: The New Madrid earthquake destroyed villages along the St. Francis River. Cherokees living there were forced to move further west to join those living between AS HISTORICAL AND MODERN NEIGHBORS, CHEROKEE the Arkansas and White Rivers. Tahlonteeskee settled along Illinois Bayou, near NATION AND ARKANSAS SHARE A DEEP HISTORY AND present-day Russellville. The Arkansas Cherokee petitioned the U.S. government CONNECTION WITH ONE ANOTHER. for an Indian agent. 1813: William Lewis Lovely was appointed as agent and he set up his post on CHEROKEE NATION BUSINESSES RESPECTS AND WILL Illinois Bayou.
    [Show full text]
  • Antiquarian & Modern
    Blackwell’s Rare Books Blackwell’S rare books ANTIQUARIAN & MODERN Blackwell’s Rare Books 48-51 Broad Street, Oxford, OX1 3BQ Direct Telephone: +44 (0) 1865 333555 Switchboard: +44 (0) 1865 792792 Email: [email protected] Fax: +44 (0) 1865 794143 www.blackwell.co.uk/ rarebooks Our premises are in the main Blackwell’s bookstore at 48-51 Broad Street, one of the largest and best known in the world, housing over 200,000 new book titles, covering every subject, discipline and interest, as well as a large secondhand books department. There is lift access to each floor. The bookstore is in the centre of the city, opposite the Bodleian Library and Sheldonian Theatre, and close to several of the colleges and other university buildings, with on street parking close by. Oxford is at the centre of an excellent road and rail network, close to the London - Birmingham (M40) motorway and is served by a frequent train service from London (Paddington). Hours: Monday–Saturday 9am to 6pm. (Tuesday 9:30am to 6pm.) Purchases: We are always keen to purchase books, whether single works or in quantity, and will be pleased to make arrangements to view them. Auction commissions: We attend a number of auction sales and will be happy to execute commissions on your behalf. Blackwell’s online bookshop www.blackwell.co.uk Our extensive online catalogue of new books caters for every speciality, with the latest releases and editor’s recommendations. We have something for everyone. Select from our subject areas, reviews, highlights, promotions and more. Orders and correspondence should in every case be sent to our Broad Street address (all books subject to prior sale).
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to State and Local Census Geography
    Guide to State and Local Census Geography Arkansas BASIC INFORMATION 2010 Census Population: 2,915,918 (32nd) Land Area: 52,035.5 square miles (27th) Density: 56.0 persons per square mile (34th) Capital: Little Rock Became a State: June 15, 1836 (25th) Bordering States: Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas Abbreviation: AR ANSI/FIPS Code: 05 HISTORY The United States acquired the area of Arkansas from France as part of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Arkansas Territory (spelled in the enabling act as Arkansaw) was organized from part of Missouri Territory on March 2, 1819, and included the greater part of Oklahoma, west to the 100th meridian. Arkansas Territory was reduced in area in 1824 and 1828 to generally assume the boundary of the present state. Arkansas was admitted to the Union on June 15, 1836, as the 25th state. Although the territory had not yet been established, census data are available for Arkansas beginning with the 1810 census (as part of Louisiana Territory). The 1810 and 1820 populations for Arkansas reflect the 1819 boundary of the territory, which included territory now in the state of Oklahoma. The population of the entire legally established Louisiana Territory (of which the area of Arkansas was a part) in 1810 was 20,845. Data for the legally established state of Arkansas are available beginning with the 1840 census. METROPOLITAN AND MICROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS AND RELATED STATISTICAL AREAS Arkansas has 8 metropolitan statistical areas, 14 micropolitan statistical areas, and 2 combined statistical areas. COUNTIES There are 75 counties in Arkansas. The governing body for each county consists of justices of the peace and a county judge.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign George David Schieffler University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2017 Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign George David Schieffler University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Schieffler, George David, "Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 2426. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2426 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by George David Schieffler The University of the South Bachelor of Arts in History, 2003 University of Arkansas Master of Arts in History, 2005 August 2017 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ____________________________________ Dr. Daniel E. Sutherland Dissertation Director ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Elliott West Dr. Patrick G. Williams Committee Member Committee Member Abstract “Civil War in the Delta” describes how the American Civil War came to Helena, Arkansas, and its Phillips County environs, and how its people—black and white, male and female, rich and poor, free and enslaved, soldier and civilian—lived that conflict from the spring of 1861 to the summer of 1863, when Union soldiers repelled a Confederate assault on the town.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Genealogy Research Native Americans of Arkansas People
    Arkansas Genealogy Research Native Americans of Arkansas People living in the land that is now Arkansas when Europeans came include: o Caddo o Chickasaw o Osage o Quapaw o Tunica Members of the above tribes were moved to Indian reservations in Oklahoma. Some members of these tribes escaped the removal. Their descendants live in Arkansas today. The Cherokee were driven into Arkansas by the U. S. government. Descendants of those who escaped that removal have organized: Western Cherokee Nation of Arkansas and Missouri PO Box 606 Mansfield Missouri 65704 Website: http://www.westerncherokee.co Read more information at Native American Tribes of Arkansas: http://www.native-languages.org/arkansas.htm European Settlement 1539 - 1542: Hernando DeSoto assembled and financed a party of some 620 men, 500 beef cattle, 250 horses and 200 pigs. King Charles I of Spain ordered him to find gold, the Pacific Ocean and a direct passage to China. He embarked from Havana and landed on Florida’s West Coast. They traveled on land past Tampa Bay and then further north to present-day Georgia. After battles with the Creeks of present day Georgia, DeSoto had lost nearly half of his men and his horses. He determined to press on towards the Mississippi River. They were the first Europeans to travel inland into present-day Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas. At a point near present-day Memphis, he built rafts and became the first European to cross the Mississippi River. 1673: Floating down the Mississippi River from the Great Lakes, Father Jacques Marquette and trader Louis Juliet reached the Quapaw villages of Arkansae and Kappa.
    [Show full text]
  • Essays on Shakespeare, Woolf, and Munro
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2017 INVOLVEMENT WITHOUT PANIC: ESSAYS ON SHAKESPEARE, WOOLF, AND MUNRO John L. Cowden Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Cowden, John L., "INVOLVEMENT WITHOUT PANIC: ESSAYS ON SHAKESPEARE, WOOLF, AND MUNRO" (2017). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 11104. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/11104 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INVOLVEMENT WITHOUT PANIC: ESSAYS ON SHAKESPEARE, WOOLF, AND MUNRO By JOHN LAWRENCE COWDEN Bachelor of Arts in Film and Media Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara, United States, 2010 Thesis portfolio presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Literature The University of Montana Missoula, MT December 2017 Approved by: Scott Whittenburg, Dean of The Graduate School Graduate School Robert Baker, Chair English Ashby Kinch English Marton Marko German Cowden, John, M.A., Fall 2017, Literature Abstract Chairperson: Robert Baker This thesis portfolio is comprised of an introductory essay and three essays of literary critique. The introductory essay is a general commentary upon reading, literature, and criticism, and introduces the three subsequent essays. The first essay is on William Shakespeare’s play, Measure for Measure.
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Forest Service Youth Conservation Corps Projects 2021
    1 USDA Forest Service Youth Conservation Corps Projects 2021 Alabama Tuskegee, National Forests in Alabama, dates 6/6/2021--8/13/2021, Project Contact: Darrius Truss, [email protected] 404-550-5114 Double Springs, National Forests in Alabama, 6/6/2021--8/13/2021, Project Contact: Shane Hoskins, [email protected] 334-314- 4522 Alaska Juneau, Tongass National Forest / Admiralty Island National Monument, 6/14/2021--8/13/2021 Project Contact: Don MacDougall, [email protected] 907-789-6280 Arizona Douglas, Coronado National Forest, 6/13/2021--7/25/2021, Project Contacts: Doug Ruppel and Brian Stultz, [email protected] and [email protected] 520-388-8438 Prescott, Prescott National Forest, 6/13/2021--7/25/2021, Project Contact: Nina Hubbard, [email protected] 928- 232-0726 Phoenix, Tonto National Forest, 6/7/2021--7/25/2021, Project Contact: Brooke Wheelock, [email protected] 602-225-5257 Arkansas Glenwood, Ouachita National Forest, 6/7/2021--7/30/2021, Project Contact: Bill Jackson, [email protected] 501-701-3570 Mena, Ouachita National Forest, 6/7/2021--7/30/2021, Project Contact: Bill Jackson, [email protected] 501- 701-3570 California Mount Shasta, Shasta Trinity National Forest, 6/28/2021--8/6/2021, Project Contact: Marcus Nova, [email protected] 530-926-9606 Etna, Klamath National Forest, 6/7/2021--7/31/2021, Project Contact: Jeffrey Novak, [email protected] 530-841- 4467 USDA Forest Service Youth Conservation Corps Projects 2021 2 Colorado Grand Junction, Grand Mesa Uncomphagre and Gunnison National Forests, 6/7/2021--8/14/2021 Project Contact: Lacie Jurado, [email protected] 970-817-4053, 2 projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 8 - National Wilderness Areas in Multiple States
    Table 8 - National Wilderness Areas in Multiple States * Unit is in two or more States ** Acres estimated pending final boundary determination + Special Area that is part of a proclaimed National Forest National Wilderness Area State NFS Other Total Unit Name Acreage Acreage Acreage Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Montana Custer National Forest* 331,130 1,482 332,612 Gallatin National Forest 582,181 2,657 584,838 Wyoming Shoshone National Forest 23,694 0 23,694 Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Total 937,005 4,139 941,144 Big Frog Wilderness Georgia Chattahoochee National Forest 136 0 136 Tennessee Cherokee National Forest* 7,996 0 7,996 Big Frog Wilderness Total 8,132 0 8,132 Black Fork Mountain Wilderness Arkansas Ouachita National Forest* 8,249 79 8,328 Oklahoma Ouachita National Forest* 5,098 40 5,138 Black Fork Mountain Wilderness Total 13,347 119 13,466 Cohutta Wilderness Georgia Chattahoochee National Forest 35,284 9 35,293 Tennessee Cherokee National Forest* 1,746 0 1,746 Cohutta Wilderness Total 37,030 9 37,039 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Georgia Chattahoochee National Forest 2,023 0 2,023 North Carolina Nantahala National Forest 3,417 0 3,417 South Carolina Sumter National Forest 2,857 9 2,866 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Total 8,297 9 8,306 Refresh Date: 10/18/2014 Table 8 - National Wilderness Areas in Multiple States * Unit is in two or more States ** Acres estimated pending final boundary determination + Special Area that is part of a proclaimed National Forest National Wilderness Area State NFS Other Total Unit Name Acreage Acreage Acreage
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003
    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Vulnerability of Watersheds to Climate Change: Results of National Forest Watershed Vulnerability Pilot Assessments
    D E E P R A U R T LT MENT OF AGRICU United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Assessing the Vulnerability General Technical Report PNW-GTR-884 of Watersheds to Climate July 2013 Change Results of National Forest Watershed Vulnerability Pilot Assessments The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual ori- entation, marital status, family status, status as a parent (in education and training programs and activities), because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assis- tance program, or retaliation. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs or activities). If you require this information in alternative format (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), con- tact the USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (Voice or TDD). If you require information about this program, activity, or facility in a language other than English, contact the agency office responsible for the program or activity, or any USDA office. To file a complaint alleging discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]