DOCSLIB.ORG

Forest Class & Tree Inspection

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Forest Class & Tree Inspection Forest Class & Tree Inspection On: Section 5.1 Subdivision North Pittsboro, NC Chatham County, North Carolina Conducted for: WithersRavenel 55 Grant Drive, Suite D Pittsboro, NC 27312 Inspection Date: June 19, 2017 Prepared By: Matthew L. Wimberly, RF, ACF Registered Forester # 1407 & Adam K. Listerman RF Registered Forester # 1731 Forest Land Resource Consultants P.O. Box 7 West End, NC 27376 (910) 673-0001 office (910) 673-3233 fax [email protected] WalterE.Thomas,RF:RegisteredForester#409•N.C.Broker#44789•[email protected] MatthewL.Wimberly,RF,ACF:RegisteredForester#1407•N.C.Broker#254183•CertifiedBurner#566•[email protected] Adam Listerman,RF: RegisteredForester# 1731•[email protected]•(704)695-2098 TerralH.Hill,RF:NCRegisteredForester#772•SCRegisteredForester#1413•CertifiedArborist#SO- 0882A•[email protected],RF:RegisteredForester#208 •[email protected]•(919)770-6285 Inspection Report Section 5.1 Subdivision North Chatham County, NC This report details the forest type and ecosystems present on the proposed Section 5.1 Subdivision North. A Systematic inventory was taken using a handheld GPS to navigate inspection lines in a northerly and southerly direction. Inventory lines were spaced approximately 175 feet apart to identify any unique trees or timber types within the proposed development area. Notes were collected in the field regarding two different timber types present. Refer to the attached map for identification of the stands. Each stand was delineated using GIS and current aerial photography, and then confirmed during the inspection. Timing of silvicultural practices was determined using aerial photography. 2016 Aerial/Survey Map 2 Historical Aerial Imagery 3 STAND TYPE (1): PINE THINNING 50.7 Acres: Current Conditions: Using historical photography, it was determined that the stand was clear-cut prior to 1993 leaving only the stream buffers. The stand was regenerated with loblolly pine and the stand was thinned in 2012-2013 time frame. The dominant species is loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), with an under and mid story of hardwood species including: white oak (Quercus alba), red oak (Quercus rubra), Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red maple(Acre rubrum), dogwood (Cornus florida), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvania), winged elm(Ulmus alata), post oak (Quercus stellata), and pignut hickory(Carya tomentosa). The forest floor consists of Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellate), muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), smilax brier, blackberry brier, and native grasses. The stand was thinned leaving approximately 60-70 square feet of basal area per acre. Tree d.b.h. (diameter at breast height) range from 10-18 inches, and tree heights range between 70-80 feet tall. The stand appears to be growing well with no insect or diseases noted in the field. Along the ridges, there is a denser component of hardwood competition in the understory and pine stocking levels are lower. A second thinning could be performed in some areas on the stand to allow for continued forest heath and tree vigor. During the inspection, no trees where identified to be significant in regard to size or species. Stand Type (1) photo: 1.1 Refer to the pictures below for current condition: 5 Stand Type (1) photo: 1.2 Stand Type (1) photo: 1.1 Stand Type (1) photo: 1.3 Stand Type (1) photo: 1.4 6 STAND TYPE (2): MIXED HARDWOOD CREEK AREAS 11.8 Acres: Current Conditions: This stand contains a variety of hardwood species, and a very small component of southern yellow pine. The hardwood species noted in the stand are: white oak (Quercus alba), red oak (Quercus rubra), Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red maple(Acre rubrum), dogwood (Cornus florida), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvania), winged elm(Ulmus alata), post oak (Quercus stellata), and pignut hickory(Carya tomentosa). The most prevalent species are yellow poplar, sweetgum and maple. These areas evolved from harvesting operation that where do in the past. Most of the areas have a creek or natural drainage area within the stand. Stand Type (2) photo: 2.1 During the timber inspection, there was no sign of recent silvicultural practices conducted in the stand. Tree d.b.h. range from 6-22 inches, and dominant tree heights are 70-80 feet tall with a significant component of hardwood regeneration that range in height from 40-50 feet tall. During the inspection, no trees where identified to be significant in regard to size or species. Stand Type (2) photo: 2.2 On the forest floor there are significant numbers of natural regeneration from the parent trees on the stand. In addition to the tree species, Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellate), native grasses and herbaceous weeds can be found on the forest floor. Stand Type (2) photo: 2.3 7 Stand Type (2) photo: 2.4 Stand Type (2) photo: 2.5 Stand Type (2) photo: 2.6 9 Summary: This entire project is contained on what would be or once considered a Dry-Mesic Oak – Hickory Forest. Refer to the following for the classification of this forest type: CLASSIFICATION OF THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF NORTH CAROLINA THIRD APPROXIMATION: by Michael P.Schafale and AlanS.Weakley1990 North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Division of Parks and Recreation Department of Environment and Natural Resources MSC 1615 Raleigh, NC 27611 DRY-MESIC OAK--HICKORYFOREST Sites: Mid slopes, low ridges, upland flats, and other dry-mesic upland areas on acidic soils. Soils: A variety of upland soils. Series include Cecil, Pacolet, Wedowee, Georgeville, Tatum, Kalmia (Typic Hapludults), Wagram (Arenic Paleudult), Tallapoosa (Ochreptic hapludult), and Stallings (Aeric Paleudult). Hydrology: Terrestrial, dry-mesic. Vegetation: Forest dominated by mixtures of oaks and hickories, with Quercus alba most prevalent, along with Q. rubra,Q. velutina, Carya alba (tomentosa), C. ovalis, and C. glabra. Pinus species, Liriodendron tulipifera, and Liquidambar styraciflua maybe common. Understoryspecies include Acer rubrum, Cornus florida,Oxydendrumarborem,Ilexopaca,and Nyssa sylvatica. Shrubs include Viburnum rafinesquianum, Vaccinium stamineum, Vaccinium pallidum (vacillans), and Evonymus americana. Vitis rotundifolia and Toxicodendron (Rhus) radicans often are present. Herbs are fairlysparse,with Hexastylis spp., Goodyera pubescens, Chimaphila maculata, Desmodium nudiflorum, and Hieracium venosum common. Dynamics: Disturbed areas have increased amounts of pines and weedyhardwoods such as Acer rubrum and Liquidambar styraciflua, with the amounts depending on the degree of canopy opening. Areas that were cultivatedare generally dominated by even-aged pine stands which are replaced by the climax oaks and hickories onlyas the pines die. Logged areas mayhave a mixture of hardwoods and pines. Under natural conditions these forests are uneven-aged, with old trees present. Reproduction occursprimarilyincanopy gaps. Rare severe natural disturbances such as wind storms mayallow pulses of increased regeneration and allow the less shade tolerant species to remain in the community. However, Skeen, Carter, and Ragsdale (1980) argued that even the shade-intolerant Liriodendron could reproduce enough in gaps to persist in the climax Piedmont forests. 10 The natural fire regime of the Piedmont is not known, but fires certainlyoccurred periodically. Most of the component trees are able to tolerate light surface fires with little effect. Regular fire may have created a more open forest, with gaps persising longer than at present and perhaps forming more frequently. In sandyparts of the Coastal Plain, fires were frequent, apparentlyevery3-5 years. Dry-Mesic Oak--HickoryForestsare confined to areas that are somewhat sheltered from fire spread. With the reduction in fire frequency in the Coastal Plain, many longleaf pine-dominated communities have been invaded by oaks and hickories, though most resemble Dry Oak--Hickory Forests rather than Dry-Mesic Oak--Hickory Forests. Range: Throughout the Piedmont and Coastal Plain, possibly in the lower parts of the Blue Ridge. Associations: Occurs in the topographic moisture gradient, between DryOak-- HickoryForestand MesicMixedHardwoods (Piedmont or Coastal Plain Subtype). May also grade into Piedmont/Coastal Plain Acidic Cliff, Piedmont/Coastal Plain Heath Bluff, Piedmont Monadnock Forest, other upland communities, or floodplain communities. Distinguishing Features: Because the overall moisture level is not easy to determine, upland hardwood forests are most easilydistinguished bythe canopycomposition. Both DryOak--Hickory Forests and Dry-Mesic Oak--HickoryForestsoften have Q. alba as the predominant tree. In Dry- Mesic Oak--HickoryForests trees more mesophytic than Q. alba predominate over those more xeric. Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest is dominated byQ. rubra, Fagus grandifolia, Liriodendrontulipifera, or other trees more mesic than Q. alba. Dry-Mesic Oak--Hickory Forest is distinguishedfrom Piedmont/CoastalPlainAcidic Cliff and Piedmont/Coastal Plain Heath Bluff by the presence of a naturally closed or nearly closed canopy. It is distinguished from Montane Oak--HickoryForest bythe absence of species typical of the BlueRidgeinNorthCarolina,such as Castanea dentata and Rhododendron calendulaceum. Variation: This type has substantial variation within it, although less than might be expected given its wide geographic range. No variants
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 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 Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSIDAD DE COSTA RICA SISTEMA DE ESTUDIOS DE POSGRADO ESTUDIO MORFOLÓGICO, FILOGENÉTICO Y FENOLÓGICO DE Smilax L. (SMILAC
    UNIVERSIDAD DE COSTA RICA SISTEMA DE ESTUDIOS DE POSGRADO ESTUDIO MORFOLÓGICO, FILOGENÉTICO Y FENOLÓGICO DE Smilax L. (SMILACACEAE) EN COSTA RICA, CON IMPLICACIONES SISTEMÁTICA~ Tesis sometida a la consideración de la Comisión del Programa de Estudios de Posgrado en la Escuela de Biología para optar al grado de Magíster Scientiae LILIAN FERRUFINO ACOST A Ciudad Universitaria "Rodrigo Facio", Costa Rica 2003 DEDICATORIA A MIS PADRES CECILO FERRUFINO Y TERESA ACOSTA A MI NOVIO GREGORIO DAUPHIN POR SU APOYO Y COMPRENSIÓN AGRADECIMIENTOS Deseo agradecer a las instituciones y personas que con su apoyo hicieron posible esta investigación A Dios quien siempre escucha mis oraciones y plegarias cada momento Al Servicio Alemán de Intercambio Académico (DAAD), por otorgarme la beca a través del programa regional para cubrir mis estudios de posgrado. A mi comité de tesis: al M. Se. Jorge Gómez-Laurito, al Dr. Osear Rocha Núñez y al Dr. Carlos O. Morales por su apoyo y asesoramiento. Al Jardín Botánico de Missouri que a través de las becas Elizabeth Bascom me apoyaron en la revisión de literatura y examinación de especímenes tipos. Al personal científico del Jardín Botánico de Missouri, en especial a la M. en C. Alina Freire­ Fiero y al Dr. Gerrit Davidse por sus comentarios en el manuscrito del tratamiento taxonómico. Al Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), al Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica sede en San Carlos, a la Finca Coope San Juan y al Jardín Agroecológico Bougainvillea por su apoyo económico y logístico. A mis amigos por su apoyo moral y logístico y en especial a Gregorio Dauphin.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Sustainability Will Probably Always Be Limited by Its Small Size and Fragmented Condition (See Section 3.5)
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service May 2011 Terrestrial Species Viability Evaluation for The Uwharrie National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Requirements in the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) ............................. 1 3.0 Ecosystem Diversity ..................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Spatial Scales for Ecosystem Diversity ................................................................... 4 3.2 Characteristics of Ecosystem Diversity ................................................................... 7 3.3 Range of Variation .................................................................................................... 9 3.4 Current Condition and Trend of Ecosystem Characteristics and Status of Ecosystem Diversity ..................................................................................................... 15 3.5 – Risks to Selected Characteristics of Ecosystem Diversity ................................... 20 3.6 Recommended Forest Plan Components ............................................................... 21 3.7 Assessing effects of Forest Plan alternatives on viability ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Inventory and Ecological Community Classification for Cumberland Gap National Historical Park
    VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY AND ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY CLASSIFICATION FOR CUMBERLAND GAP NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK Report for the Vertebrate and Vascular Plant Inventories: Appalachian Highlands and Cumberland/Piedmont Networks Prepared by NatureServe for the National Park Service Southeast Regional Office March 2006 NatureServe is a non-profit organization providing the scientific knowledge that forms the basis for effective conservation action. Citation: Rickie D. White, Jr. 2006. Vascular Plant Inventory and Ecological Community Classification for Cumberland Gap National Historical Park. Durham, North Carolina: NatureServe. © 2006 NatureServe NatureServe 6114 Fayetteville Road, Suite 109 Durham, NC 27713 919-484-7857 International Headquarters 1101 Wilson Boulevard, 15th Floor Arlington, Virginia 22209 www.natureserve.org National Park Service Southeast Regional Office Atlanta Federal Center 1924 Building 100 Alabama Street, S.W. Atlanta, GA 30303 The view and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. This report consists of the main report along with a series of appendices with information about the plants and plant (ecological) communities found at the site. Electronic files have been provided to the National Park Service in addition to hard copies. Current information on all communities described here can be found on NatureServe Explorer at www.natureserveexplorer.org. Cover photo: Red cedar snag above White Rocks at Cumberland Gap National Historical Park. Photo by Rickie White. ii Acknowledgments I wish to thank all park employees, co-workers, volunteers, and academics who helped with aspects of the preparation, field work, specimen identification, and report writing for this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: the Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2008 Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: The Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients Windy A. Bunn University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Bunn, Windy A., "Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: The Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2008. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/3658 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Windy A. Bunn entitled "Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: The Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Nathan J. Sanders, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Aimée T. Classen, Daniel Simberloff Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Windy A.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Far Western Mountains of North Carolina
    Natural vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Far Western Mountains of North Carolina A report prepared for the Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources in partial fulfillments of contract D07042. By M. Forbes Boyle, Robert K. Peet, Thomas R. Wentworth, Michael P. Schafale, and Michael Lee Carolina Vegetation Survey Curriculum in Ecology, CB#3275 University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC 27599‐3275 Version 1. April, 2011 1 INTRODUCTION In mid June 2010, the Carolina Vegetation Survey conducted an initial inventory of natural communities along the far western montane counties of North Carolina. There had never been a project designed to classify the diversity of natural upland (and some wetland) communities throughout this portion of North Carolina. Furthermore, the data captured from these plots will enable us to refine the community classification within the broader region. The goal of this report is to determine a classification structure based on the synthesis of vegetation data obtained from the June 2010 sampling event, and to use the resulting information to develop restoration targets for disturbed ecosystems location in this general region of North Carolina. STUDY AREA AND FIELD METHODS From June 13‐20 2010, a total of 48 vegetation plots were established throughout the far western mountains of North Carolina (Figure 1). Focus locations within the study area included the Pisgah National Forest (NF) (French Broad and Pisgah Ranger Districts), the Nantahala NF (Tusquitee Ranger District), and Sandymush Game Land. Target natural communities throughout the week included basic oak‐hickory forest, rich cove forest, northern hardwood and boulderfield forest, chestnut oak forest, montane red cedar woodland, shale slope woodland, montane alluvial slough forest, and low elevation xeric pine forest.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Endangered Species in South Carolina Counties
    Welcome to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Page 10f2 Cliarteston C£coCogica{ Services Office Bald E Office Facts Off Er Specil species lists Endangered Species Environmental Contaminants Welcome to the Charleston Ecological Services Web Page. Our Habitat work area covers all of South Carolina. Our mission is working Conservation with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American Partners For people. South Carolina is also home to one recovery office for It's of Fish and Wildlife Red-cockaded woodpeckers, one Law Enforcement office, eight National Wildlife Refuges, and two National Fish Hatcheries. After ne from m( Careers bald ea flourishi Funding needs t the End Ecosystem Act. Thl has rec Teams all-time nesting Hunting and Fishing an estir 9,789 b Publications today, 1: remove threatel Helpful links endang more ... Region' SOutheastReglon~ Bald EI USFWS Southeast Manage Region Website Guideli Conser USFWS National Website 176 Croghan Spur Road, Suite 200, Charleston, SC 29407, Phone: 843/727-4707, Fax: 843/727-4218 http://www.fws.gov/charleston/ 1112512008 Welcome to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Page 2 of2 Mission I Privacy I FOIA I Department of the Interior I First Gov I Regulations.gov I No Fear Act http://www.fws.gov/charleston/ 1112512008 Listed Species In SC Page 1 of2 listed Endangered Species In South Carolina Counties Camp-Jete endangered sp-ecies list for South Carolina by county Click on the county of interest to see the endangered species. A______________________________________________________________________ __ Abbeville Allendale Anderson B______________________________________________________________________ __ Bamberg Barnwell Beaufort Berkeley C__________ ~----------~----------------------------------~--~------~ Calhoun Charleston Cherokee Chester Chesterfield Clarendon ~ Darlington Dorchester Edgefield Fairfield Florence Georgetown Greenville Greenwood Hampton Horry K.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Community Monitoring at Congaree National Park: 2014 Data Summary
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Vegetation Community Monitoring at Congaree National Park 2014 Data Summary Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2016/1016 ON THIS PAGE Tiny, bright yellow blossoms of Hypoxis hirsuta grace the forest floor at Congaree National Park. Photograph courtesy of Sarah C. Heath, Southeast Coast Network. ON THE COVER Spiraling compound leaf of green dragon (Arisaema dracontium) at Congaree National Park. Photograph courtesy of Sarah C. Heath, Southeast Coast Network Vegetation Community Monitoring at Congaree National Park 2014 Data Summary Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2016/1016 Sarah Corbett Heath1 and Michael W. Byrne2 1National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, GA 31558 2National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network 135 Phoenix Drive Athens, GA 30605 May 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed.
    [Show full text]
  • Dry-Mesic Basic Oak–Hickory Forest (Piedmont Subtype)
    DRY-MESIC BASIC OAK–HICKORY FOREST (PIEDMONT SUBTYPE) Concept: Type covers dry-mesic Piedmont and Coastal Plain forests with less acidic and more fertile soils than typical, associated with mafic or intermediate crystalline rocks or occasionally calcareous sedimentary rocks. They are equivalent in moisture regime to Dry-Mesic Oak– Hickory Forest, and fall between Basic Mesic Forest and Dry Basic Oak–Hickory Forest on appropriate substrates. Subtype covers examples in the Piedmont, believed to be floristically distinct from those in the Coastal Plain. Sites: Soils: Hydrology: Vegetation: Dynamics: Range and Abundance: Ranked G3G4 Associations and Patterns: Distinguishing Features: The Dry-Mesic Basic Oak–Hickory Forest type is distinguished from Basic Mesic Forest by a drier flora and from Dry Basic Oak–Hickory Forest by a more mesic flora. The canopy is dominated by Quercus alba, along with other oaks and hickories. There is essentially no Fagus grandifolia in the canopy, and Liriodendron is scarce. Drier site oaks such as Quercus stellata, Quercus marilandica, or Quercus falcata are scarce or absent. This type is distinguished from Dry-Mesic Oak–Hickory Forest by occurrence of more base- loving flora that includes species such as Symphoricarpos orbiculatus, Frangula caroliniana, Celtis spp., Fraxinus americana, Cercis canadensis, Brachyelytrum erectum, and Dichanthelium boscii. Basic indicators also include a set of species that are characteristic of more mesic or floodplain communities but that occur in dry sites that are less acidic. These include Acer floridanum, Carya ovata, Elymus hystrix, Elymus virginicus, Phryma leptostachya, and Phegopteris hexagonoptera. Characteristic species of acidic soils, such as Oxydendrum arboreum, Vaccinium stamineum, Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium tenellum, Gaylussacia frondosa, and Chimaphila maculata may be present, but don’t predominate as they do in Dry Mesic Oak–Hickory Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Flora of The
    VASCULAR FLORA OF THE UPPER ETOWAH RIVER WATERSHED, GEORGIA by LISA MARIE KRUSE (Under the Direction of DAVID E. GIANNASI) ABSTRACT The Etowah River Basin in North Georgia is a biologically diverse Southern Appalachian River system, threatened by regional population growth. This is a two-part botanical study in the Upper Etowah watershed. The primary component is a survey of vascular flora. Habitats include riparian zones, lowland forest, tributary drainages, bluffs, and uplands. A total of 662 taxa were inventoried, and seventeen reference communities were described and mapped. Small streams, remote public land, and forested private land are important for plant conservation in this watershed. In the second component, cumulative plant species richness was sampled across six floodplain sites to estimate optimal widths for riparian buffer zones. To include 90% of floodplain species in a buffer, 60-75% of the floodplain width must be protected, depending on the stream size. Soil moisture influences species richness, and is dependent on upland water sources. An optimal buffer would protect hydrologic connections between floodplains and uplands. INDEX WORDS: Etowah River, Southeastern United States, floristic inventory, riparian buffer zone, floodplain plant species, plant habitat conservation VASCULAR FLORA OF THE UPPER ETOWAH RIVER WATERSHED, GEORGIA by LISA MARIE KRUSE B.S., Emory University, 1996 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE
    [Show full text]
  • Response Letter from Fish & Wildlife Service for Section 7 Information For
    FISH &WIVLDLWE United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 176 Croghan Spur Road, Suite 200 Charleston, South Carolina 29407 June 23, 2008 Mr. Gregory F. Suber, Branch Chief Environmental Review Branch Office of Federal and State Materials'and Environmental Management Programs U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: Oconee Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation License Renewal, Oconee Nuclear Station, Oconee County, SC, FWS Log No. 42410-2008-SL-0475 Dear Mr. Suber: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) request seeking comments and relevant environmental information regarding a proposed license, renewal-of.,the•Oconee Independent Spent Fuel Storage- Installation in Oconee County, SC.: 'The existing :facility is operated bythe Duke Power.Company, LLC, and provides for the storage of irradiated fuel assemblies, from the Oconee Power Station, located-onsite., -Pursuant to requirements ofothe National Environmental'PolicyAct, .1969, the NRC is.preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate potential issues and impacts the proposal may have, tothe surroundimg:environment. i. The NTRC is requesting identification of threatened and endangered (T&E) species or critical habitat in the action area. Please find attached a list of protected species known to. occur or that may occur withirOconee County. As the project is located within a few miles of Pickens County,. the Service believes it would be prudent to include.this County's list due to the' similarity of habitats. Please note that these lists.include federally protected and state&listed species. *The: Service recommends the Nuclear Regulatory..Commission's survey.efforts.
    [Show full text]