DOCSLIB.ORG

Acknowledgments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Acknowledgments Acknowledgments Many people contributed to the various sections of this report. The contributions of these authors, reviewers, suppliers of data, analysts, and computer systems operators are gratefully acknowl- edged. Specific contributions are mentioned in connection with the individual chapters. Chapter 1 Chapter 4 Authors: Jack Holcomb, USDA Forest Service Jack Holcomb, Team co-leader, John Greis, USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service Patricia A. Flebbe, USDA Forest Service, Chapter 5 Southern Research Station Lloyd W. Swift, Jr., USDA Forest Service, Richard Burns, USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station Morris Flexner, U.S. Environmental Chapter 2 Protection Agency Authors: Richard Burns, USDA Forest Service Patricia A. Flebbe, USDA Forest Service, Bill Melville, U.S. Environmental Southern Research Station Protection Agency Jim Harrison, Team co-leader, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chapter 6 Gary Kappesser, USDA Forest Service Jack Holcomb, USDA Forest Service Dave Melgaard, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chapter 7 Jeanne Riley, USDA Forest Service Patricia A. Flebbe, USDA Forest Service, Lloyd W. Swift, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station Southern Research Station Jack Holcomb, USDA Forest Service Chapter 3 Jim Harrison, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Jim Harrison, U.S. Environmental Lloyd W. Swift, USDA Forest Service, Protection Agency Southern Research Station Geographic Information System Liaison (graphic and database development): Dennis Yankee, Tennessee Valley Authority Neal Burns, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Jim Wang, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Don Norris, USDA Forest Service Many people, in addition to the authors and their colleagues, contributed to the preparation of this report. Special thanks are given to the people who worked on various sub-teams and to the many reviewers and scientists who helped along the way. A number of scientists and members from other agencies attended meetings, provided data, and assisted in the development of the report. Many thanks go to: Paul Hampson, Briane Adams and Joe Connell of the U.S. Geological Survey vii John Fridell of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Neal Carriker, Kurt Riitters, Richard Urban and Betsy Smith of the Tennessee Valley Authority David Melgaard, Kimberly Patrick and Ron Preston of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cindy Williams, Dave Wergowse, Leigh Ann McDougal, Cassandra Butcher, Karen Braddy, Jim Keys, acknowledgments The following people are recognized for their help in reviewing the report at various stages and providing valuable technical assistance: Team members and reviewers for this Edwards, Amy, University of Georgia Museum report are: of Natural History, Athens, GA Flather, Curtis, USDA Forest Service, Fort Adams, Marshall, Oak Ridge National Collins, CO Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN Freeman, Bud, University of Georgia Museum Ahlstedt, Steve, USDI, Geological Survey, of Natural History, Athens, GA Knoxville, TN Freeman, Mary, USDI National Biological Alderman, John, NC Wildlife Resources Service, Auburn, AL Commission, Pittsboro, NC Fridell, John, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Beiser, Gary, GA Dept. of Natural Resources, Asheville, NC Calhoun, GA Geddings, Randy, SC Wildlife and Marine Bivens, Rick, TN Wildlife Resources Agency, Resources Dept., Clemson, SC Talbott, TN Godwin, Jim, AL Natural Heritage Program, Bodie, Russ, Savannah River Ecology Lab, Montgomery, AL Aiken, SC Gordon, Mark, private consultant, Cookeville,TN Borawa, Jim, NC Wildlife Resources Goudreau, Chris, NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Asheville, NC Commission, Marion, NC Braatz, David, Duke Power Company, Habera, Jim, University of Tennessee, Huntersville, NC Knoxville, TN Brasswell, Alvin, NC State Museum of Natural Hampton, Tom, VA Dept. of Game and Inland Sciences, Raleigh, NC Fisheries, Marion, VA Bruce, R.C., Highlands Biological Station, Herrig, Jim, USDA Forest Service,Cleveland,TN Highlands, NC Hill, Donley, USDA Forest Service, Bryan, Sheryl, USDA Forest Service, Asheville, NC Burnsville, NC Hook, Donald, Clemson University, Bulak, Jim, SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Clemson, SC Dept., Columbia, SC Hubbs, Don,TN Wildlife Resources Agency, Burkhead, Noel, USDI National Biological Nashville, TN Service, Gainesville, FL Huber, Cindy,USDA Forest Service, Roanoke,VA Carter, Bart, TN Wildlife Resources Agency, Hudy, Mark, USDA Forest Service, Morristown, TN Harrisonburg, VA Carter, Marcia, USDA Forest Service, Huntley, Jimmy, USDA Forest Service, Greenville, TN Montgomery, AL Catchings, Dan, AL Dept. of Fish and Game, Hurlily, Alan, U.S. Environmental Protection Eastaboga, AL Agency, Corvallis, OR Christie, B.M., TN Dept. of Conservation, Jessee, John, VA Dept. of Game and Inland Nashville, TN Fisheries, Marion, VA Cincotta, Dan, WV Dept. of Natural Keferl, Eugene, Brunswick College, Dept. of Resources, Elkins, WV Natural Sciences, Brunswick, GA Clayton, Janet, WV Dept. of Natural Krakow, Greg, GA Dept. of Natural Resources, Resources, Elkins, WV Social Circle, GA Clemmons, Micky, NC Wildlife Resources Krotzer, Steve, AL Power Co., Birmingham, AL Commission, Waynesville, NC Kuhajda, Bernie, Univ. of Alabama Dept. of viii Denton, Greg, TN Dept. of Environment and Biological Sciences, Tuscaloosa, AL Conservation, Nashville, TN Laerm, Joshua, University of Georgia Museum Dolloff, Andy, USDA Forest Service, of Natural History, Athens, GA Blacksburg, VA Larsen, Phil, EPA, ORD, Corvallis, OR Duffield, Dan, USDA Forest Service, Elkins, WV McGrath, Chris, NC Wildlife Resources Durniak, Jeff, GA Dept. of Natural Resources, C i i A h ill NC acknowledgments Mickey, Joe, NC Wildlife Resources Seehorn, Monte, USDA Forest Service (retired), Commission, Elkins, NC Gainesville, GA Mitchell, Joe, University of Richmond, Seyle, Win, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Richmond, VA Savannah, GA Mohn, Larry, VA Dept. of Game and Inland Shute, Peggy, Tennessee Valley Authority, Fisheries, Verona, VA Norris, TN Moore, Steve, USDI National Park Service, Smith, Eric, VA Polytechnic Institute and State Gatlinburg, TN University, Blacksburg, VA Mulvey, Margaret, Savannah River Ecology Smith, Scott, VA Dept. of Game and Inland Laboratory, Aiken, SC Fisheries, Forest, VA Neves, Richard, USDI, NBS, Blacksburg, VA Tedder, Steve, NC Dept. of Env. Health, and Nodvin, Steven, University of Tennessee, Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC Knoxville, TN Tennessen, Ken, Tennessee Valley Authority, Oldham, Tom, WV Division of Natural Chattanooga, TN Resources, Elkins, WV Thomas, Cecil, USDA Forest Service, O’Neill, Pat, Geological Survey of Alabama, Marion, VA Tuscaloosa, AL Tonnessen, Kathy, USDI National Park Service, Parker, Chuck, USDI National Biological Denver, CO Service, Gatlinburg, TN Underwood, Martin, USDA Forest Service, Pauley, Tom, Marshall University, Blacksburg, VA Huntington, WV Wadja, Becky, VA Dept. of Game and Inland Penrose, David, NC Dept. of Env., Health, and Fisheries, Richmond, VA Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC Weaver, Reggie, GA Dept. of Natural Pierson, Malcolm, AL Power Co., Resources, Gainesville, GA Birmingham, AL Webb, Rick, University of Virginia, Powell, Duncan, EPA, R4, Atlanta, GA Charlottesville, VA Raschke, Ron, EPA, Region 4, Athens, GA Williams, Joe, VA Dept. of Game and Inland Redmond, Bill, TN Valley Authority Natural Fisheries, Blacksburg, VA Heritage, Norris, TN Withers, David, TN Dept. of Environment and Robinson, Bradford, Clemson University, Conservation, Nashville, TN Clemson, SC Wyatt, Pete, TN Wildlife Resources Agency, Russell, Kelly, USDA Forest Service, Nashville, TN Columbia, SC ix Figure 1 SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN ASSESSMENT AREA Executive Summary The Southern Appalachian ecosystem is those involved with resource planning for widely recognized as one of the most diverse in ecosystem management. The four SAA techni- the temperate region. The headwaters of nine cal reports address terrestrial resources, aquatic major rivers lie within the boundaries of the resources, air quality, and social/cultural/ Southern Appalachians, making it a source of economic aspects in the Southern Appalachian drinking water for much of the Southeast. Mountains. The SAA is a cooperative effort of The Southern Appalachian Assessment the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SAA) area (fig.1) includes parts of the (EPA); U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Appalachian Mountains and Shenandoah Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish Valley extending southward from the Potomac and Wildlife Service (FWS), Geological Survey River to northern Georgia and the northeastern (USGS), National Biological Service (NBS), and corner of Alabama. It includes seven states, 135 National Park Service (NPS); U.S. Department counties, and covers approximately 37 million of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; acres. The Southern Appalachians are one of Department of Commerce, Economic the world’s finest remaining ecological regions. Development Administration; Tennessee Valley Early in the 20th century, the Appalachian land- Authority (TVA); the U.S. Army Corps of scape and natural resources were being exploit- Engineers (COE); and the states of Tennessee, ed; croplands, pastures, and hillsides were Georgia, and North Carolina. eroding; and timberlands were being cut with This SAA aquatic technical report compiles little thought for sustaining the resources. existing regionwide information on aquatic National forests and national parks were creat- resource status and trends, riparian condition, ed to preserve and restore the natural
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Indiana Species April 2007
    Fishes of Indiana April 2007 The Wildlife Diversity Section (WDS) is responsible for the conservation and management of over 750 species of nongame and endangered wildlife. The list of Indiana's species was compiled by WDS biologists based on accepted taxonomic standards. The list will be periodically reviewed and updated. References used for scientific names are included at the bottom of this list. ORDER FAMILY GENUS SPECIES COMMON NAME STATUS* CLASS CEPHALASPIDOMORPHI Petromyzontiformes Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio lamprey lampreys Ichthyomyzon castaneus chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon fossor northern brook lamprey SE Ichthyomyzon unicuspis silver lamprey Lampetra aepyptera least brook lamprey Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey Petromyzon marinus sea lamprey X CLASS ACTINOPTERYGII Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser fulvescens lake sturgeon SE sturgeons Scaphirhynchus platorynchus shovelnose sturgeon Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula paddlefish paddlefishes Lepisosteiformes Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus oculatus spotted gar gars Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus shortnose gar Amiiformes Amiidae Amia calva bowfin bowfins Hiodonotiformes Hiodontidae Hiodon alosoides goldeye mooneyes Hiodon tergisus mooneye Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel freshwater eels Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris skipjack herring herrings Alosa pseudoharengus alewife X Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense threadfin shad Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum central stoneroller
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Inventory at Stones River National Battlefield
    Fish Inventory at Stones River National Battlefield Submitted to: Department of the Interior National Park Service Cumberland Piedmont Network By Dennis Mullen Professor of Biology Department of Biology Middle Tennessee State University Murfreesboro, TN 37132 September 2006 Striped Shiner (Luxilus chrysocephalus) – nuptial male From Lytle Creek at Fortress Rosecrans Photograph by D. Mullen Table of Contents List of Tables……………………………………………………………………….iii List of Figures………………………………………………………………………iv List of Appendices…………………………………………………………………..v Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...……..2 Methods……………………………………………………………………………...3 Results……………………………………………………………………………….7 Discussion………………………………………………………………………….10 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...14 Literature Cited…………………………………………………………………….15 ii List of Tables Table1: Location and physical characteristics (during September 2006, and only for the riverine sites) of sample sites for the STRI fish inventory………………………………17 Table 2: Biotic Integrity classes used in assessing fish communities along with general descriptions of their attributes (Karr et al. 1986) ………………………………………18 Table 3: List of fishes potentially occurring in aquatic habitats in and around Stones River National Battlefield………………………………………………………………..19 Table 4: Fish species list (by site) of aquatic habitats at STRI (October 2004 – August 2006). MF = McFadden’s Ford, KP = King Pond, RB = Redoubt Brannan, UP = Unnamed Pond at Redoubt Brannan, LC = Lytle Creek at Fortress Rosecrans……...….22 Table 5: Fish Species Richness estimates for the 3 riverine reaches of STRI and a composite estimate for STRI as a whole…………………………………………………24 Table 6: Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores for three stream reaches at Stones River National Battlefield during August 2005………………………………………………...25 Table 7: Temperature and water chemistry of four of the STRI sample sites for each sampling date…………………………………………………………………………….26 Table 8 : Total length estimates of specific habitat types at each riverine sample site.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Western Mosquitofish, Gambusia Affinis (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliidae): New Distributional Records for Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma
    42 Salsuginus seculus (Monogenoidea: Dactylogyrida: Ancyrocephalidae) from the Western Mosquitofish, Gambusia affinis (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliidae): New distributional records for Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma Chris T. McAllister Science and Mathematics Division, Eastern Oklahoma State College, Idabel, OK 74745 Donald G. Cloutman P. O. Box 197, Burdett, KS 67523 Henry W. Robison Department of Biology, Southern Arkansas University, Magnolia, AR 71754 Studies on fish monogeneans in Oklahoma and S. fundulus (Mizelle) Murith and Beverley- are relatively uncommon (Seamster 1937, 1938, Burton in Northern Studfish,Fundulus catenatus 1960; Mizelle 1938; Monaco and Mizelle 1955; (McAllister et al. 2015, 2016). In Kansas, a McDaniel 1963; McDaniel and Bailey 1966; single species, S. thalkeni Janovy, Ruhnke, and Wheeler and Beverley-Burton 1989) with little Wheeler (syn. S. fundulus) has been reported or no published work in the past two decades from Northern Plains Killifish,Fundulus kansae or more. Members of the ancyrocephalid (see Janovy et al. 1989). Here, we report genus Salsuginus (Beverley-Burton) Murith new distributional records for a species of and Beverley-Burton have been reported Salsuginus in Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma. from various fundulid fishes including those from Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, During June 1983 (Kansas only) and again Nebraska, New York, Tennessee, and Texas, between April 2014 and September 2015, and Newfoundland and Ontario, Canada, 36 Western Mosquitofish, Gambusia affinis and the Bahama Islands; additionally, two were collected by dipnet, seine (3.7 m, 1.6 species have been reported from the Western mm mesh) or backpack electrofisher from Big Mosquitofish, Gambusia affinis (Poeciliidae) Spring at Spring Mill, Independence County, from California, Louisiana, and Texas, and Arkansas (n = 4; 35.828152°N, 91.724273°W), the Bahama Islands (see Hoffman 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Fish Species
    The Angler’s Guide To TennesseeIncluding Aquatic Nuisance SpeciesFish Published by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Cover photograph Paul Shaw Graphics Designer Raleigh Holtam Thanks to the TWRA Fisheries Staff for their review and contributions to this publication. Special thanks to those that provided pictures for use in this publication. Partial funding of this publication was provided by a grant from the United States Fish & Wildlife Service through the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Authorization No. 328898, 58,500 copies, January, 2012. This public document was promulgated at a cost of $.42 per copy. Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency is available to all persons without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age, dis- ability, or military service. TWRA is also an equal opportunity/equal access employer. Questions should be directed to TWRA, Human Resources Office, P.O. Box 40747, Nashville, TN 37204, (615) 781-6594 (TDD 781-6691), or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office for Human Resources, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA 22203. Contents Introduction ...............................................................................1 About Fish ..................................................................................2 Black Bass ...................................................................................3 Crappie ........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Part IV: Scoring Criteria for the Index of Biotic Integrity to Monitor
    Part IV: Scoring Criteria for the Index of Biotic Integrity to Monitor Fish Communities in Wadeable Streams in the Coosa and Tennessee Drainage Basins of the Ridge and Valley Ecoregion of Georgia Georgia Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Division Fisheries Management Section 2020 Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………… ……... Pg. 1 Map of Ridge and Valley Ecoregion………………………………..……............... Pg. 3 Table 1. State Listed Fish in the Ridge and Valley Ecoregion……………………. Pg. 4 Table 2. IBI Metrics and Scoring Criteria………………………………………….Pg. 5 References………………………………………………….. ………………………Pg. 7 Appendix 1…………………………………………………………………. ………Pg. 8 Coosa Basin Group (ACT) MSR Graphs..………………………………….Pg. 9 Tennessee Basin Group (TEN) MSR Graphs……………………………….Pg. 17 Ridge and Valley Ecoregion Fish List………………………………………Pg. 25 i Introduction The Ridge and Valley ecoregion is one of the six Level III ecoregions found in Georgia (Part 1, Figure 1). It is drained by two major river basins, the Coosa and the Tennessee, in the northwestern corner of Georgia. The Ridge and Valley ecoregion covers nearly 3,000 square miles (United States Census Bureau 2000) and includes all or portions of 10 counties (Figure 1), bordering the Piedmont ecoregion to the south and the Blue Ridge ecoregion to the east. A small portion of the Southwestern Appalachians ecoregion is located in the upper northwestern corner of the Ridge and Valley ecoregion. The biotic index developed by the GAWRD is based on Level III ecoregion delineations (Griffith et al. 2001). The metrics and scoring criteria adapted to the Ridge and Valley ecoregion were developed from biomonitoring samples collected in the two major river basins that drain the Ridge and Valley ecoregion, the Coosa (ACT) and the Tennessee (TEN).
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Survey for Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia
    Blacktail Redhorse (Moxostoma poecilurum) from Oothkalooga Creek Fish Survey for Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia Prepared by: DECATUR, GA 30030 www.foxenvironmental.net January 2018 Abstract Biological assessments, in conjunction with habitat surveys, provide a time-integrated evaluation of water quality conditions. Biological and habitat assessments for fish were conducted on 3 stream segments in and around Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia on October 3 and 5, 2017. Fish, physical habitat, and water chemistry data were evaluated according to Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GADNR), Wildlife Resources Division (WRD) – Fisheries Section protocol entitled “Standard Operating Procedures for Conducting Biomonitoring on Fish Communities in Wadeable Streams in Georgia”. All of the water quality parameters at all sites were within the typical ranges for streams although conductivity was somewhat high across the sites. Fish habitat scores ranged from 80 (Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek) to 132.7 (Oothkalooga Creek). Native fish species richness ranged from 6 species (Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek) to 17 (Oothkalooga and Lynn Creeks). Index of biotic integrity (IBI) scores ranged from 16 (Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek; “Very Poor”) to 34 (Lynn Creek; “Fair”). Overall, the results demonstrate that Oothkalooga and Lynn Creeks are in fair condition whereas the Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek is highly impaired. Although the data are only a snapshot of stream conditions during the sampling events, they provide a biological characterization from which to evaluate the effect of future changes in water quality and watershed management in Calhoun. We recommend continued monitoring of stream sites throughout the area to ensure that the future ecological health of Calhoun’s water resources is maintained.
    [Show full text]
  • * This Is an Excerpt from Protected Animals of Georgia Published By
    Common Name: CHEROKEE DARTER Scientific Name: Etheostoma scotti Other Commonly Used Names: none Previously Used Scientific Names: Etheostoma coosae Family: Percidae Rarity Ranks: G2/S2 State Legal Status: Threatened Federal Legal Status: Threatened Description: The Cherokee darter has a rounded snout, a distinct dark bar beneath the eye, and 7-8 dorsal blotches that may fuse with the 7-8 lateral blotches. The lateral blotches elongate into slightly oblique greenish-olive bars in breeding males. The anterior lateral line pores are usually outlined in black. Breeding males have an anterior red window and a single broad reddish band in the first dorsal fin, red in the second dorsal fin, and a green-edged anal fin. The caudal fin may also be edged in green dorsally and ventrally. Adult size of the Cherokee darter is 40-65 mm (1.6-2.6 in) total length. A recent population genetic study of the Cherokee darter identified three distinct evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) that are geographically separated. These ESUs are genetically distinct from one another, suggesting isolation from one another for at least tens of thousands of years. A male from the Richland Creek system (lower ESU) is pictured above. A male from the uppermost ESU and a female from the middle ESU are shown at the bottom of this account. Similar Species: The Cherokee darter belongs to the subgenus Ulocentra, commonly known as snubnose darters. Two other snubnose darters occur in the upper Coosa River basin, the Coosa darter (E. coosae) and holiday darter (E. brevirostrum). Breeding males of the three snubnose darters can be distinguished based on fin pigmentation: the Coosa darter has five discrete bands in the first dorsal fin; the holiday darter has a red band appearing over bluish or gray pigment in the second dorsal fin and anal fin; the Cherokee darter has a red wash in both the first and second dorsal fins, without banding (except lower ESU).
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S
    Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4—An Update April 2013 Prepared by: Pam L. Fuller, Amy J. Benson, and Matthew J. Cannister U.S. Geological Survey Southeast Ecological Science Center Gainesville, Florida Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Cover Photos: Silver Carp, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix – Auburn University Giant Applesnail, Pomacea maculata – David Knott Straightedge Crayfish, Procambarus hayi – U.S. Forest Service i Table of Contents Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ vi INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of Region 4 Introductions Since 2000 ....................................................................................... 1 Format of Species Accounts ...................................................................................................................... 2 Explanation of Maps ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Management Indicator Species Population and Habitat Trends
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Management Indicator Species Southern Region Population and Habitat Trends Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests Revised and Updated May 2003 i CONTENTS Page Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 Documentation of Management Indicator Species Selection ......................................... 1 Management Indicator Species Habitat Relationships............................................. 8 Forestwide Management Indicator Species Habitat Monitoring and Evaluation ............. 10 Forestwide Management Indicator Species Population Trend Monitoring and Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 13 White-tailed Deer.......................................................................................................... 15 Black Bear..................................................................................................................... 19 Eastern Wild Turkey..................................................................................................... 23 Ruffed Grouse............................................................................................................... 27 Bobwhite Quail ............................................................................................................. 31 Gray Squirrel................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Riprap Volume 35
    1 RIPRAP VOLUME 35 MMXIII 3 4 RIPRAP THIRTY RIPRAP 35 FIVE LITERARY JOURNAL MMMXIII 2 3 RipRap invites submissions between September EDITORS and December. All manuscripts must be submitted electronically as Word document (.doc) attachments. Submissions should include a cover letter with the authors name, address, email, titles and genres of submission in the body of the email. Do not include authors name on the manuscript itself, all submis- Editor-In Chief Jax NTP sions are read anonymously. Staff members are prohibited from submitting to the section in which Poetry Editors Fabiola Guzman they read. Ramsey Mathews Address contact to: Department of English, RipRap Fiction Editors Monica Holmes California State University, Long Beach Jen French 1250 Bellflower Boulevard Long Beach, CA 90840 Nonfiction Editors Kevin Chidgey Mony Vong Address submissions to: [email protected] Contributing Editors Blair Ashton For further submission guidelines: www.riprapjournal.tumblr.com Shane Eaves www.facebook.com/RipRapJournal Alyssa Keyne Mary Kinard Jordan Khajavipour RIPRAP 35 Zachary Mann Renee Moulton Matthew Ramelb Mae Ramirez Rachel Ramirez Printer: University Print Shop Ryan Roderick California State University, Long Beach Olivia Somes 1250 Bellflower Boulevard Dorin Smith Long Beach, CA 90840 Design Ben DuVall Cover Image Dwight Pavlovic - It’s Not a Fish Faculty Advisor Bill Mohr RipRap Copyright 2012 Long Beach, California All rights revert to contributors upon publication 2 3 RipRap invites submissions between September EDITORS and December. All manuscripts must be submitted electronically as Word document (.doc) attachments. Submissions should include a cover letter with the authors name, address, email, titles and genres of submission in the body of the email.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Report of Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5
    Summary Report of Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 Summary Report of Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 Prepared by: Amy J. Benson, Colette C. Jacono, Pam L. Fuller, Elizabeth R. McKercher, U.S. Geological Survey 7920 NW 71st Street Gainesville, Florida 32653 and Myriah M. Richerson Johnson Controls World Services, Inc. 7315 North Atlantic Avenue Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203 29 February 2004 Table of Contents Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………... ...1 Aquatic Macrophytes ………………………………………………………………….. ... 2 Submersed Plants ………...………………………………………………........... 7 Emergent Plants ………………………………………………………….......... 13 Floating Plants ………………………………………………………………..... 24 Fishes ...…………….…………………………………………………………………..... 29 Invertebrates…………………………………………………………………………...... 56 Mollusks …………………………………………………………………………. 57 Bivalves …………….………………………………………………........ 57 Gastropods ……………………………………………………………... 63 Nudibranchs ………………………………………………………......... 68 Crustaceans …………………………………………………………………..... 69 Amphipods …………………………………………………………….... 69 Cladocerans …………………………………………………………..... 70 Copepods ……………………………………………………………….. 71 Crabs …………………………………………………………………...... 72 Crayfish ………………………………………………………………….. 73 Isopods ………………………………………………………………...... 75 Shrimp ………………………………………………………………….... 75 Amphibians and Reptiles …………………………………………………………….. 76 Amphibians ……………………………………………………………….......... 81 Toads and Frogs
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment Is Recorded in a Decision Notice
    Environmental United States Department of Assessment Agriculture Forest Service Vegetation Management in Open Areas November 2017 Ocoee Ranger District, Polk and McMinn Counties, Tennessee Tellico Ranger District, Monroe County, Tennessee Unaka Ranger District, Cocke and Greene Counties Watauga Ranger District, Carter, Johnson, Sullivan, Unicoi and Washington Counties, Tennessee For Information Contact: Mary Miller 2800 Ocoee Street North Cleveland, TN 37312 423-476-9700 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Table of Contents Glossary, Acronyms and Abbreviations ...........................................................1 Introduction .........................................................................................................7 Document Structure .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]