DOCSLIB.ORG

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT and NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Water Quality Environmental Sciences Section

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT and NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Water Quality Environmental Sciences Section NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Water Quality Environmental Sciences Section April 2005 This page was intentionally left blank NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – Little Tennessee River Basin – April 2005 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF APPENDICIES ........................................................................................................................3 LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................................4 LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................4 OVERVIEW............................................................................................................................................5 LITTLE TENNESSEE RIVER SUBBASIN 01........................................................................................6 Description......................................................................................................................................6 Overview of Water Quality..............................................................................................................7 River and Stream Assessment.......................................................................................................8 LITTLE TENNESSEE RIVER SUBBASIN 02......................................................................................24 Description....................................................................................................................................24 Overview of Water Quality............................................................................................................25 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................27 LITTLE TENNESSEE RIVER SUBBASIN 03......................................................................................40 Description....................................................................................................................................40 Overview of Water Quality............................................................................................................41 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................42 LITTLE TENNESSEE RIVER SUBBASIN 04......................................................................................45 Description....................................................................................................................................45 Overview of Water Quality............................................................................................................46 River and Stream Assessment.....................................................................................................46 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................50 GLOSSARY .........................................................................................................................................51 NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – Little Tennessee River Basin – April 2005 2 LIST OF APPENDICIES Appendix Page B-1 Benthic macroinvertebrate data, sampling methods, and criteria..................................................54 F-1 A summary of fish community assessment data ...........................................................................58 F-2 Habitat evaluations and stream and riparian habitats at 22 fish community monitoring sites In the Little Tennessee River basin................................................................................................60 F-3 Fish community sampling methods and criteria.............................................................................64 F-4 Fish community data collected from the Little Tennessee River basin, 1993 – 2004 ...................70 F-5 Fish community metric values from 22 wadeable streams in the Little Tennessee River Basinwide monitoring program, 2004 ............................................................................................71 F-6 Fish distributional records for the Little Tennessee River basin ....................................................72 F-7 Water quality at fish community sites in the Little Tennessee River basin, 2004..........................73 F-8 Web links........................................................................................................................................77 NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – Little Tennessee River Basin – April 2005 3 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Land use in Subbasin 01.................................................................................................................. 7 2 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 01 in the Little Tennessee River basin for basinwide assessment, 1999 and 2004............................................................................................................ 8 3 Land use in Subbasin 02................................................................................................................ 24 4 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 02 in the Little Tennessee River basin for basinwide assessment, 1999 and 2004.......................................................................................................... 26 5 Land use in Subbasin 03................................................................................................................ 41 6 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 03 in the Little Tennessee River basin for basinwide assessment, 1999 and 2004.......................................................................................................... 41 7 Land use in Subbasin 04................................................................................................................ 46 8 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 04 in the Little Tennessee River basin for basinwide assessment, 1999 and 2004.......................................................................................................... 46 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Sampling sites in Subbasin 01 in the Little Tennessee River basin ................................................6 2 Sampling sites in Subbasin 02 in the Little Tennessee River basin ..............................................24 3 Little Tennessee River at SR 1113, number of EPT taxa collected and the North Carolina Biotic Index.....................................................................................................................................28 4 Sampling sites in Subbasin 03 in the Little Tennessee River basin ..............................................40 5 Sampling sites in Subbasin 04 in the Little Tennessee River basin ..............................................45 NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – Little Tennessee River Basin – April 2005 4 OVERVIEW The Little Tennessee River basin is located within the Blue Ridge Province of the Appalachian Mountains of western North Carolina. It encompasses about 1,800 mi2 in Swain, Macon, Clay, Graham, Cherokee, and Jackson counties (Figure 1). Much of the land within the basin is federally owned (49%) and in the U.S. Forest Service’s Nantahala National Forest (including the Joyce Kilmer/Slick Rock Wilderness Area) or the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). The basin also includes the Cherokee Indian Reservation. Subbasins within the Little Tennessee River basin are described by a six digit code (040401 - 040404), but are often referred to by their last two digits (e.g. Subbasin 01). The North Carolina section of the Little Tennessee River is typical of many other mountain rivers. The gradient is relatively steep in most reaches of the river and the substrate is dominated by riffle habitats. The headwater reaches of the Little Tennessee River are located in Georgia. Most tributaries are high gradient streams capable of supporting trout populations in the upper reaches. Most of the basin is forested. However, lower reaches of many tributary catchments are farmed or developed resulting in the increased potential for nonpoint source problems. The Little Tennessee River is one of three major tributaries of Fontana Lake. The other two are the Nantahala River and the Tuckasegee River. The Cheoah River, the fourth major tributary of the Little Tennessee River in North Carolina, has its confluence with the river below Fontana Lake. In the upper section of the Little Tennessee River watershed, twenty of the 27 sites monitored for benthic macroinvertebrates or fish were rated Good or Excellent; no sites were rated Poor. The two sites rated Fair were the Little Tennessee River near the NC-GA state line and the upper reaches of the Cullasaja River near the Town of Highlands. Streams that have consistently been rated Excellent were Coweeta, Turtle Pond, Burningtown, and Tellico Creeks. This area is within the Nantahala National Forest and most tributaries are high gradient streams capable of supporting trout populations in the upper reaches. The water quality of rivers and streams in this area is generally high. Principal tributaries to the Little Tennessee River in the middle watershed area are the Oconaluftee River, the Tuckasegee River,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • USDA, Forest Service Forest Health Protection GSA Contract No
    SERA TR 02-43-13-03b Triclopyr - Revised Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments Final Report Prepared for: USDA, Forest Service Forest Health Protection GSA Contract No. GS-10F-0082F USDA Forest Service BPA: WO-01-3187-0150 USDA Purchase Order No.: 43-1387-2-0245 Task No. 13 Submitted to: Dave Thomas, COTR Forest Health Protection Staff USDA Forest Service Rosslyn Plaza Building C, Room 7129C 1601 North Kent Street Arlington, VA 22209 Submitted by: Patrick R. Durkin Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. 5100 Highbridge St., 42C Fayetteville, New York 13066-0950 Telephone: (315) 637-9560 Fax: (315) 637-0445 E-Mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.sera-inc.com March 15, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF APPENDICES ...................................................... iv LIST OF WORKSHEETS ...................................................... v LIST OF ATTACHMENTS .................................................... v LIST OF TABLES ............................................................ v LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................... viii ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS .............................. ix COMMON UNIT CONVERSIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................... xi CONVERSION OF SCIENTIFIC NOTATION .................................... xii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................... xiii 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................ 1-1 2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ................................................ 2-1 2.1. OVERVIEW
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2013 Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina Gabrielle Casio Purcell [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Purcell, Gabrielle Casio, "Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2013. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2447 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 Gabrielle Casio Purcell entitled "Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina." 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 equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Kandace D. Hollenbach, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Gerald Schroedl, Michael Logan 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.) i Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina A Thesis Presented for the Master of Arts Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Gabrielle Casio Purcell August 2013 ii Copyright © 2013 by Gabrielle Casio Purcell All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • “Two-Tailed” Baetidae of Ohio January 2013
    Ohio EPA Larval Key for the “two-tailed” Baetidae of Ohio January 2013 Larval Key for the “two-tailed” Baetidae of Ohio For additional keys and descriptions see: Ide (1937), Provonsha and McCafferty (1982), McCafferty and Waltz (1990), Lugo-Ortiz and McCafferty (1998), McCafferty and Waltz (1998), Wiersema (2000), McCafferty et al. (2005) and McCafferty et al. (2009). 1. Forecoxae with filamentous gill (may be very small), gills usually with dark clouding, cerci without dark band near middle, claws with a smaller second row of teeth. .............................. ............................................................................................................... Heterocloeon (H.) sp. (Two species, H. curiosum (McDunnough) and H. frivolum (McDunnough), are reported from Ohio, however, the larger hind wing pads used by Morihara and McCafferty (1979) to distinguish H. frivolum have not been verified by OEPA.) Figures from Ide, 1937. Figures from Müller-Liebenau, 1974. 1'. Forecoxae without filamentous gill, other characters variable. .............................................. 2 2. Cerci with alternating pale and dark bands down its entire length, body dorsoventrally flattened, gills with a dark clouded area, hind wing pads greatly reduced. ............................... ......................................................................................... Acentrella parvula (McDunnough) Figure from Ide, 1937. Figure from Wiersema, 2000. 2'. Cerci without alternating pale and dark bands, other characters variable. ............................
    [Show full text]
  • Check List 4(2): 92–97, 2008
    Check List 4(2): 92–97, 2008. ISSN: 1809-127X NOTES ON GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION Insecta, Ephemeroptera, Baetidae: Range extensions and new state records from Kansas, U.S.A. W. Patrick McCafferty 1 Luke M. Jacobus 2 1 Department of Entomology, Purdue University. West Lafayette, Indiana 47907 USA. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Biology, Indiana University. Bloomington, Indiana 47405 USA. The mayfly (Ephemeroptera) fauna of the U.S.A. other central lowland prairie states as well state of Kansas is relatively poorly documented (McCafferty et al. 2001; 2003; Guenther and (McCafferty 2001). With respect to small minnow McCafferty 2005). Some additionally common mayflies (family Baetidae), only 16 species have species will be evident from the new data we been documented with published records from present herein. Kansas. Those involve Acentrella turbida (McDunnough, 1924); Acerpenna pygmaea Our examination of additional unidentified (Hagen, 1861); Apobaetis Etowah (Traver, 1935); material of Kansas Baetidae housed in the Snow A. lakota McCafferty, 2000; Baetis flavistriga Museum, University of Kansas, Lawrence, McDunnough, 1921; B. intercalaris McDunnough, Kansas, and collected mainly by the State 1921; Callibaetis fluctuans (Walsh, 1862); C. Biological Survey of Kansas, has led to the pictus Eaton, 1871; Centroptilum album discovery of 19 additional species of Baetidae in McDunnough, 1926; C. bifurcatum McDunnough, Kansas, resulting in a new total of 35 species of 1924; Fallceon quilleri (Dodds, 1923); Baetidae now known from the state. The records Paracloeodes minutus (Daggy, 1945); P. given alphabetically below also represent the first dardanum (McDunnough, 1923); P. ephippiatum Kansas records of the genera Camelobaetidius, (Traver, 1935); P.
    [Show full text]
  • Download BALMNH No 08 1984
    Bulletin Alabama Museum of Natural History BULLETIN ALABAMA MUSEUM NATURAL HISTORY is published by the Alabama Museum of Natural History, The University of Alabama. The BULLETIN is devoted primarily to the subjects of Anthropology, Archaeology, Botany, Geology and Zoology of the Southeast. The BULLETIN appears irregularly in consecutive­ ly numbered issues. Manuscripts are evaluated by the editor and an editorial com­ mittee selected for each paper. Authors are requested to conform generally with the Council of Biological Editors Style Manual, Fourth Edition, 1978, and to consult recent issues of the BULLETIN as to style for citing literature and the use of abbreviations. An informative abstract is required. For information and policy on exchanges, write to the Librarian, The Univer­ sity of Alabama, Box S, University of Alabama, University, AL. 35486. Numbers may be purchased individually; standing orders are accepted. Remit­ tances should accompany orders and made payable to The University of Alabama. Communication concerning manuscripts, editorial policy, and orders for in­ dividual numbers should be addressed to the editor: Herbert Boschung, Alabama Museum of Natural History, The University of Alabama, Box 5987, University, AL. 35486. When citing this publication. authors are requested to use the following ab­ breviation: Bull. Alabama Mus. Nat. Hist. Price this Number: $6.00 NUMBER 8, 1984 Description, Biology and Distribution of the Spotfin Chub, Hybopsis monacha, a Threatened Cyprinid Fish of the Tennessee River Drainage Robert E. Jenkins and Noel M. Burkhead Department of Biology, Roanoke College, Salem, Virginia, 24153 ABSTRACT: Jenkins, Robert E. and Noel Burkhead, 1984. Description, biology and distribution of the spotfin Chub, Hybopsis monacha.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete 00-01
    Contents Personnel Administration 2 School of Agriculture Faculty 3 Agricultural and Biological Engineering – ABE Agricultural Economics – AG ECON Agronomy – AGRY Animal Sciences – ANSC Biochemistry – BCHM Botany and Plant Pathology – B&PP Entomology – ENTM Food Science – FS Forestry and Natural Resources – F&NR Horticulture and Landscape Architecture – H&LA School of Consumer and Family Sciences Faculty 9 School of Veterinary Medicine Faculty 11 Research Projects School of Agriculture 16 Agricultural and Biological Engineering Agricultural Economics Agronomy Animal Sciences Biochemistry Botany and Plant Pathology Entomology Food Science Forestry and Natural Resources Horticultural and Landscape Architecture School of Consumer and Family Sciences Faculty 25 School of Veterinary Medicine Faculty 27 Publications 29 Financial Support Government 61 Non-Government 76 Agricultural Research Programs Graduate Opportunities Doctoral Programs 96 Graduat e Opportunities Masters Program 96 Lynn Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship 96 Agricultural Research Programs Assistantship Grants 96 Purdue Research Foundation Grants 97 Center for Food Safety Engineering Projects 98 Expenditures 99 1 Administration Agriculture Victor L. Lechtenberg, Dean William R. Woodson, Associate Dean and Director, Agricultural Research Programs David C. Petritz, Associate Dean and Director, Cooperative Extension Service Dale Whittaker, Associate Dean and Director, Academic Programs David J. Sammons, Associate Dean and Director, International Programs in Agriculture Agricultural Research Programs William R. Woodson, Director Marshall A.Martin, Associate Director Richard H. Linton, Assistant Director, Food Safety Lesley Oliver, Assistant Director, Sponsored Program Development Ron Turco, Assistant Director, Environmental Sciences Lynn Okagaki, Assistant Director, Consumer & Family Sciences Greg Stevenson, Assistant Director, Veterinary Medicine Jerry Fankhauser, Director, Purdue Agricultural Centers Steve Hawkins, Assistant Director, Purdue Agricultural Centers Agriculture Departments Chris W.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [Show full text]
  • EASTERN CHEROKEE by HARRIET JANE KUPFERER
    SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology BuUetin 196 Anthropological Papers, No. 78 THE "PRINCIPAL PEOPLE," 1960: A STUDY OF CULTURAL AND SOCIAL GROUPS OF THE EASTERN CHEROKEE By HARRIET JANE KUPFERER 215 CONTENTS PAGE Introduction 221 The setting 221 The problem 223 Techniques of the study 226 Acknowledgments 227 The Cherokee 228 The past 228 The present 233 The people 234 The daily bread 235 Not by bread alone 240 As others see them 241 Ideal types 242 The typology as an approach to cultural differentiation 243 The Thomas continuum 245 Portraits of four families 247 John and Liza Runner (Conservative) 247 George and Emma Weaver (Generalized Indians) 250 Ed and Martha McVey (Rural White) 252 Richard and Polly King (Middle Class Indians) 254 Health and medical practices 255 Environmental sanitation and home hygienic practices 255 Category 1. Inadequate 256 Category 2. Minimal 257 Category 3. Adequate 259 Category 4. Very adequate 260 Clinic behavior 260 Category 1. Passive 261 Category 2. Active 262 Responses to school health program 263 Category 1. Passive 264 Category 2. Active 265 Behavior prompted by illness 266 Category 1. Patients of Indian "doctors" 267 Category 2. Patients of Public Health Medical Services 271 Category 3. Patients of private physicians 272 Conclusions 274 Educational aspirations and experiences 279 Aspiration levels 279 Category 1. High school oriented 279 Category 2. Post-high-school vocational training oriented 282 Category 3. College oriented 283 217 1 218 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 196 Educational aspirations and experiences—Continued page Reflections on educational experiences 285 Group 1. Resentful 286 Group 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Empirically Derived Indices of Biotic Integrity for Forested Wetlands, Coastal Salt Marshes and Wadable Freshwater Streams in Massachusetts
    Empirically Derived Indices of Biotic Integrity for Forested Wetlands, Coastal Salt Marshes and Wadable Freshwater Streams in Massachusetts September 15, 2013 This report is the result of several years of field data collection, analyses and IBI development, and consideration of the opportunities for wetland program and policy development in relation to IBIs and CAPS Index of Ecological Integrity (IEI). Contributors include: University of Massachusetts Amherst Kevin McGarigal, Ethan Plunkett, Joanna Grand, Brad Compton, Theresa Portante, Kasey Rolih, and Scott Jackson Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management Jan Smith, Marc Carullo, and Adrienne Pappal Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Lisa Rhodes, Lealdon Langley, and Michael Stroman Empirically Derived Indices of Biotic Integrity for Forested Wetlands, Coastal Salt Marshes and Wadable Freshwater Streams in Massachusetts Abstract The purpose of this study was to develop a fully empirically-based method for developing Indices of Biotic Integrity (IBIs) that does not rely on expert opinion or the arbitrary designation of reference sites and pilot its application in forested wetlands, coastal salt marshes and wadable freshwater streams in Massachusetts. The method we developed involves: 1) using a suite of regression models to estimate the abundance of each taxon across a gradient of stressor levels, 2) using statistical calibration based on the fitted regression models and maximum likelihood methods to predict the value of the stressor metric based on the abundance of the taxon at each site, 3) selecting taxa in a forward stepwise procedure that conditionally improves the concordance between the observed stressor value and the predicted value the most and a stopping rule for selecting taxa based on a conditional alpha derived from comparison to pseudotaxa data, and 4) comparing the coefficient of concordance for the final IBI to the expected distribution derived from randomly permuted data.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity of Minnesota Caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera)
    Conservation Biology Research Grants Program Division of Ecological Services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources BIODIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CADDISFLIES (INSECTA: TRICHOPTERA) A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY DAVID CHARLES HOUGHTON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Ralph W. Holzenthal, Advisor August 2002 1 © David Charles Houghton 2002 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As is often the case, the research that appears here under my name only could not have possibly been accomplished without the assistance of numerous individuals. First and foremost, I sincerely appreciate the assistance of my graduate advisor, Dr. Ralph. W. Holzenthal. His enthusiasm, guidance, and support of this project made it a reality. I also extend my gratitude to my graduate committee, Drs. Leonard C. Ferrington, Jr., Roger D. Moon, and Bruce Vondracek, for their helpful ideas and advice. I appreciate the efforts of all who have collected Minnesota caddisflies and accessioned them into the University of Minnesota Insect Museum, particularly Roger J. Blahnik, Donald G. Denning, David A. Etnier, Ralph W. Holzenthal, Jolanda Huisman, David B. MacLean, Margot P. Monson, and Phil A. Nasby. I also thank David A. Etnier (University of Tennessee), Colin Favret (Illinois Natural History Survey), and Oliver S. Flint, Jr. (National Museum of Natural History) for making caddisfly collections available for my examination. The laboratory assistance of the following individuals-my undergraduate "army"-was critical to the processing of the approximately one half million caddisfly specimens examined during this study and I extend my thanks: Geoffery D. Archibald, Anne M.
    [Show full text]
  • TB142: Mayflies of Maine: an Annotated Faunal List
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Technical Bulletins Maine Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station 4-1-1991 TB142: Mayflies of aine:M An Annotated Faunal List Steven K. Burian K. Elizabeth Gibbs Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/aes_techbulletin Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Burian, S.K., and K.E. Gibbs. 1991. Mayflies of Maine: An annotated faunal list. Maine Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 142. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Technical Bulletins by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ISSN 0734-9556 Mayflies of Maine: An Annotated Faunal List Steven K. Burian and K. Elizabeth Gibbs Technical Bulletin 142 April 1991 MAINE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Mayflies of Maine: An Annotated Faunal List Steven K. Burian Assistant Professor Department of Biology, Southern Connecticut State University New Haven, CT 06515 and K. Elizabeth Gibbs Associate Professor Department of Entomology University of Maine Orono, Maine 04469 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Financial support for this project was provided by the State of Maine Departments of Environmental Protection, and Inland Fisheries and Wildlife; a University of Maine New England, Atlantic Provinces, and Quebec Fellow­ ship to S. K. Burian; and the Maine Agricultural Experiment Station. Dr. William L. Peters and Jan Peters, Florida A & M University, pro­ vided support and advice throughout the project and we especially appreci­ ated the opportunity for S.K. Burian to work in their laboratory and stay in their home in Tallahassee, Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL FORESTS /// the Southern Appalachians
    NATIONAL FORESTS /// the Southern Appalachians NORTH CAROLINA SOUTH CAROLINA, TENNESSEE » » « « « GEORGIA UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE National Forests in the Southern Appalachians UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE SOUTHERN REGION ATLANTA, GEORGIA MF-42 R.8 COVER PHOTO.—Lovely Lake Santeetlah in the iXantahala National Forest. In the misty Unicoi Mountains beyond the lake is located the Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest. F-286647 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OEEICE WASHINGTON : 1940 F 386645 Power from national-forest waters: Streams whose watersheds are protected have a more even flow. I! Where Rivers Are Born Two GREAT ranges of mountains sweep southwestward through Ten­ nessee, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Centering largely in these mountains in the area where the boundaries of the four States converge are five national forests — the Cherokee, Pisgah, Nantahala, Chattahoochee, and Sumter. The more eastern of the ranges on the slopes of which thesefo rests lie is the Blue Ridge which rises abruptly out of the Piedmont country and forms the divide between waters flowing southeast and south into the Atlantic Ocean and northwest to the Tennessee River en route to the Gulf of Mexico. The southeastern slope of the ridge is cut deeply by the rivers which rush toward the plains, the top is rounded, and the northwestern slopes are gentle. Only a few of its peaks rise as much as a mile above the sea. The western range, roughly paralleling the Blue Ridge and connected to it by transverse ranges, is divided into segments by rivers born high on the slopes between the transverse ranges.
    [Show full text]