DOCSLIB.ORG

Experimental Forests and Ranges of the USDA Forest Service

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Experimental Forests and Ranges of the USDA Forest Service United States Department of Experimental Forests and Ranges Agriculture Forest Service of the USDA Forest Service Northeastern Research Station General Technical Report NE-321 Abstract The USDA Forest Service has an outstanding scientific resource in the 77 Experimental Forests and Ranges that exist across the United States and its territories. These valuable scientific resources incorporate a broad range of climates, forest types, research emphases, and history. This publication describes each of the research sites within the Experimental Forests and Ranges network, providing information about history, climate, vegetation, soils, long-term data bases, research history and research products, as well as identifying collaborative opportunities, and providing contact information. The Compilers MARY BETH ADAMS, soil scientist, LINDA H. LOUGHRY, secretary, LINDA L. PLAUGHER, support services supervisor, USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, West Virginia. Manuscript received for publication 17 November 2003 Published by: For additional copies: USDA FOREST SERVICE USDA Forest Service 11 CAMPUS BLVD SUITE 200 Publications Distribution NEWTOWN SQUARE PA 19073-3294 359 Main Road Delaware, OH 43015-8640 September 2004 Fax: (740)368-0152 Visit our homepage at: http://www.fs.fed.us/ne Experimental Forests and Ranges of the USDA Forest Service Compiled by: Mary Beth Adams Linda Loughry Linda Plaugher RMRS Contents Overview ............................................................................................................................ 1 International Institute of Tropical Forestry Estate Thomas Experimental Forest (U.S. Virgin Islands) ............................................... 10 Luquillo Experimental Forest (Puerto Rico) ..................................................................... 12 North Central Research Station Argonne Experimental Forest (Wisconsin) ...................................................................... 16 Big Falls Experimental Forest (Minnesota) ...................................................................... 18 Coulee Experimental Forest (Wisconsin) ........................................................................ 19 Cutfoot Sioux Experimental Forest (Minnesota) ............................................................... 20 Dukes (Upper Peninsula) Experimental Forest (Michigan) .............................................. 22 Kaskaskia Experimental Forest (Illinois) .......................................................................... 24 Kawishiwi Experimental Forest (Minnesota) .................................................................... 26 Lower Peninsula Experimental Forest (Michigan) ............................................................ 27 Marcell Experimental Forest (Minnesota) ......................................................................... 29 McCormick Experimental Forest (Michigan) .................................................................... 32 Paoli Experimental Forest (Indiana) ................................................................................. 33 Pike Bay Experimental Forest (Minnesota) ...................................................................... 35 Sinkin Experimental Forest (Missouri) ............................................................................. 37 Udell Experimental Forest (Michigan) .............................................................................. 39 Northeastern Research Station Bartlett Experimental Forest (New Hampshire) ................................................................ 42 Fernow Experimental Forest (West Virginia) ................................................................... 44 Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest (New Hampshire) ................................................... 46 Kane Experimental Forest (Pennsylvania) ....................................................................... 48 Massabesic Experimental Forest (Maine) ........................................................................ 50 Penobscot Experimental Forest (Maine) .......................................................................... 52 Silas Little Experimental Forest (New Jersey) ................................................................. 54 Vinton Furnace Experimental Forest (Ohio) ..................................................................... 57 Pacific Northwest Research Station Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest/Caribou-Poker Creeks Research Watershed (Alaska) ..................................................................................... 60 Cascade Head Experimental Forest (Oregon) ................................................................. 63 Entiat Experimental Forest (Washington) ........................................................................ 66 H. J. Andrews Experimental Forest (Oregon) .................................................................. 68 Maybeso Experimental Forest (Alaska) ........................................................................... 70 Pringle Falls Experimental Forest (Oregon) ..................................................................... 72 South Umpqua Experimental Forest (Oregon) ................................................................. 75 Starkey Experimental Forest and Range (Oregon) .......................................................... 76 Wind River Experimental Forest (Washington) ................................................................ 78 Young Bay Experimental Forest (Alaska) ......................................................................... 80 Pacific Southwest Research Station Blacks Mountain Experimental Forest (California) ........................................................... 82 Caspar Creek Experimental Watershed (California) ........................................................ 84 Challenge Experimental Forest (California) ..................................................................... 86 Onion Creek Experimental Forest (California) ................................................................. 88 Redwood Experimental Forest (California) ...................................................................... 90 San Dimas Experimental Forest (California) .................................................................... 92 San Joaquin Experimental Range (California) ................................................................ 94 Stanislaus–Tuolumne Experimental Forest (California) ................................................... 96 Swain Mountain Experimental Forest (California) ............................................................ 98 Teakettle Experimental Forest (California) ..................................................................... 100 Rocky Mountain Research Station Black Hills Experimental Forest (South Dakota) ............................................................ 104 Boise Basin Experimental Forest (Idaho) ....................................................................... 105 Coram Experimental Forest (Montana) .......................................................................... 107 Deception Creek Experimental Forest (Idaho) ............................................................... 110 Desert Experimental Range (Utah) ................................................................................ 112 Fort Valley Experimental Forest (Arizona) ...................................................................... 114 Fraser Experimental Forest (Colorado) .......................................................................... 116 Glacier Lakes Ecosystem Experiments Site (Wyoming) ................................................ 119 Great Basin Experimental Range (Utah) ........................................................................ 122 Long Valley Experimental Forest (Arizona) .................................................................... 124 Manitou Experimental Forest (Colorado) ....................................................................... 125 Priest River Experimental Forest (Idaho) ....................................................................... 128 Sierra Ancha Experimental Forest (Arizona) .................................................................. 130 Tenderfoot Creek Experimental Forest (Montana) ......................................................... 131 Southern Research Station Alum Creek Experimental Forest (Arkansas) ................................................................. 134 Bent Creek Experimental Forest (North Carolina) ......................................................... 136 Blue Valley Experimental Forest (North Carolina) .......................................................... 138 Calhoun Experimental Forest (South Carolina) ............................................................. 140 Chipola Experimental Forest (Florida) ........................................................................... 142 Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory (North Carolina) ........................................................... 144 Crossett Experimental Forest (Arkansas) ...................................................................... 146 Delta Experimental Forest (Mississippi) ......................................................................... 148 Escambia Experimental Forest (Alabama) .................................................................... 150 Harrison Experimental Forest (Mississippi) ..................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Carson - Wind River Valley Water Supply by Ivan Donaldson Skamania County Historical Society Carson - Wind River Valley Water Supply
    Irrigation flume wends way from Panther Creek toward yet-to-be-built High Bridge over Wind River. Carson - Wind River Valley Water Supply By Ivan Donaldson Skamania County Historical Society Carson - Wind River Valley Water Supply By Ivan Donaldson Skamania County Historical Society E. J. Weigle home north of Carson. (This and other photos presented to Skamania County Historical Museum by Paul Boyd.) Much of the soil of the Carson Valley is a shallow sandy layer deposited on top of the geologically recent Trout Creek Olivine basalt lava flow. This is the lava flow which filled the Wind River canyon to a considerable depth, dammed the Columbia River, and created the Panther Creek reef or lava dike which is described later in this article. The soil, while fertile and productive, dries out quickly and crops grown in this valley require frequent watering in the summertime. Contra to this statement is the knowledge that the early strawberry fields produced well with no irrigation water. During the first decade of the 1900s, entrepreneur and promoter, B. M. Hawley of Home Valley, Washington, and his associates began action upon their dream to convert the heavily timbered Carson Valley into an agricultural paradise. These gentlemen indulged their expensive fantasy to inititate construction of an irrigation flume which to exrend from Panther Creek six to eight miles to the semi-level Carson Valley plain as we know it now in 1984. Carson Water Supply — Page 2 Skamania County records show that on 1 April 1907 B. M. Hawley filed for a water right on Panther Creek, tributary to Wind River, for 60 cubic feet per second of water, giving the point of diversion and stating it was for irrigation, power, and domestic use.
    [Show full text]
  • ªª47 ªª47 ªª63 ªª85 ªª85 ªª84 ªª84 ªª48 ªª45 ªª26 ªª56 ªª21 ªª22 ªª22 ªª55 ªª55
    Gifford Pinchot National Forest Special Forest Products Map: North Half R. 2 E. R. 3 E. R. 4 E. R. 5 E. R. 6 E. R. 7 E. R. 8 E. R. 9 E. R. 10 E. R. 11 E. Puyallup Point Lower C edar Lake N Aurora Peak Ceda r Lake 6 1 . Swa mp Lake 8 1 6 3 2 Bald Hill Glacier V8 iew 2 . 6 2 1 Alder T Shriner Peak Cou gar Lake Green Hill &M Alder Reservoir 2 6 7 2 Gla4cier View Wilderness 5 8 G 9 obblers Knob 7 2 . 0 4 Reliance H 9 ill 0 Mount Beljica 0 N Mount Wow 0 .1 9 4 0 2 5 Elbe Crag Mountain 1 7409017 &M Ashford . &M 706 5900037 T 0 0 5 Stahl Mountain Tumtum Peak 0 2 0 0 Bald Mountain 0 0 28 4 8 BIG CRE E K 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 7400000 0 52 0 6 0 7 Ladd Mou ª 42 4 ntain 5 Mineral Lake Fry "2 ingpan Moun 0 tain 0 9 9 0 Butter 3 0 4 85 Creek RNA 4 0 0 7 5 ª 2 Huckle ª berry Mountain 2 5 7 Roundtop Mo 2 4 untain 2 0 5 2 0 4 Cougar Mo 5 5 2 7 untain 0 .1 &M 5 8 1 2 4 8 50 0 O 0 L 1B 5 sborne Mountain 4 ookout Mountain 16 4 00 7 Jug Lake 41 0 Mineral 0 ª52 0 0 1 1 6 44 9 2 1 5 0 0 84 0 4 4 0 0 A .
    [Show full text]
  • Land Areas of the National Forest System, As of September 30, 2019
    United States Department of Agriculture Land Areas of the National Forest System As of September 30, 2019 Forest Service WO Lands FS-383 November 2019 Metric Equivalents When you know: Multiply by: To fnd: Inches (in) 2.54 Centimeters Feet (ft) 0.305 Meters Miles (mi) 1.609 Kilometers Acres (ac) 0.405 Hectares Square feet (ft2) 0.0929 Square meters Yards (yd) 0.914 Meters Square miles (mi2) 2.59 Square kilometers Pounds (lb) 0.454 Kilograms United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Land Areas of the WO, Lands National Forest FS-383 System November 2019 As of September 30, 2019 Published by: USDA Forest Service 1400 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20250-0003 Website: https://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/lar-index.shtml Cover Photo: Mt. Hood, Mt. Hood National Forest, Oregon Courtesy of: Susan Ruzicka USDA Forest Service WO Lands and Realty Management Statistics are current as of: 10/17/2019 The National Forest System (NFS) is comprised of: 154 National Forests 58 Purchase Units 20 National Grasslands 7 Land Utilization Projects 17 Research and Experimental Areas 28 Other Areas NFS lands are found in 43 States as well as Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. TOTAL NFS ACRES = 192,994,068 NFS lands are organized into: 9 Forest Service Regions 112 Administrative Forest or Forest-level units 503 Ranger District or District-level units The Forest Service administers 149 Wild and Scenic Rivers in 23 States and 456 National Wilderness Areas in 39 States. The Forest Service also administers several other types of nationally designated
    [Show full text]
  • Our 25Th Year of Blazing a Trail for Longleaf Restoration
    19005112_Longleaf-Leader-WINTER-2020_rev.qxp_Layout 1 1/9/20 10:44 AM Page 2 Our 25th Year of Blazing a Trail for Longleaf Restoration Volume Xii - issue 4 WiNTeR 2020 19005112_Longleaf-Leader-WINTER-2020_rev.qxp_Layout 1 1/9/20 10:44 AM Page 3 19005112_Longleaf-Leader-WINTER-2020_rev.qxp_Layout 1 1/9/20 10:44 AM Page 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 14 56 23 44 10 President’s Message....................................................2 LANDOWNER CORNER .......................................23 Calendar ....................................................................4 TECHNOLOGY CORNER .....................................26 Letters from the Inbox ...............................................5 REGIONAL UPDATES .........................................29 Understory Plant Spotlight........................................7 Wildlife Spotlight .....................................................8 ARTS & LITERATURE ........................................40 2019 – A Banner Year for Longleaf ..........................10 Longleaf Destinations ..............................................44 The Alliance Teaches its 100th Longleaf Academy: PEOPLE .................................................................47 A Look Back............................................................14 SUPPORT THE ALLIANCE ................................50 RESEARCH NOTES .............................................18 Heartpine ................................................................56 PUBLISHER The Longleaf Alliance, E D I T O R Carol Denhof, ASSISTANT EDITOR
    [Show full text]
  • Motor Vehicle Use Map 2016-2017 De Soto Ranger District De Soto National Forest Mississippi
    Motor Vehicle Use Map 2016-2017 De Soto Ranger District De Soto National Forest Mississippi United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Motor Vehicle Use Map 2016-2017 THE PURPOSE AND CONTENTS OPERATOR RESPONSIBILITIES EXPLANATION OF LEGEND ITEMS OF THIS MAP Operating a motor vehicle on National Forest Roads Open to Highway Legal Vehicles Only: System roads, National Forest System trails, and in This map dated 09/15/2016 shows the National Forest System roads, National Forest System trails, areas on National Forest System lands carries a These roads are open only to motor vehicles greater responsibility than operating that vehicle in a and the areas on National Forest System lands in the licensed under State law for general operation on all De Soto National Forest that are designated for city or other developed setting. Not only must the public roads within the State. motor vehicle operators know and follow all motor vehicle use pursuant to 36 CFR 212.51. The map contains a list of those designated roads, trails, applicable traffic laws, but they also need to show concern for the environment as well as other forest and areas that enumerates the types of vehicles Trails Open to Motorcycles Only: users. The misuse of motor vehicles can lead to the allowed on each route and in each area and any seasonal restrictions that apply on those routes and temporary or permanent closure of any designated These trails are open only to motorcycles. Sidecars road, trail, or area. Operators of motor vehicles are in those areas. are not permitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Prescribing Silvicul Treatments in Hardwood Stands of the Alleghenies
    United States Department of Prescribing Silvicul Agriculture Treatments in Hardwood Forest Service Stands of the Alleghenies Northeastern Forest Experiment Station (Revised) General Technical David A. Marquis Report NE-96 Richard L. Ernst Susan t. Stout Abstract This publication brings together the results of 20 years of research and experience in the silviculture of hardwood forests of the Allegheny region. Part I provides a brief synopsis of silvicultural knowledge and recommended practices. Part II provides guidelines, decision tables, and step-by-step .instructions for determining silvicultural prescriptions in individual stands. The Authors David A. Marquis received his bachelor of science degree in forestry from the Pennsylvania State University in 1955, and his master's and doctoral degrees in forest ecology and silviculture from Yale University in 1963 and 1973, respectively. He joined the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station's silviculture research unit in New Hampshire in 1957, where he studied problems of regeneration and thinning in northern hardwoods. Between 1965 and 1970 he served on the timber and watershed management research staff at the Station's headquarters in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania. Between 1970 and 1990, Dr. Marquis was project leader of the silviculture research unit at Warren, Pennsylvania, where he headed a program of research on problems related to the regeneration and culture of high-value hardwoods on the northern Allegheny Plateau. Currently, Dr. Marquis is Coordinator for the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station's Stand Culture Working Group, which is developing a silviculturai decision model for multi-resource management of all major forest types in the Northeastern United States. In addition, he is an Adjunct Professor of Forestry at the College of Environmental Science and Forestry, State University of New York at Syracuse, and is Forestry Director of Plessey Pension Investments, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Silvicultural Systems
    JAAKKO POYRY JAAKKO POVRV CONSULTING. INC. Silvicultural Systems A 'Background Paper for a Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Timber Harvesting and Forest Management in Minnesota Prepared for: Minnesota Environmental Quality Board 658 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 August 1992 Prepared by: J aakko Poyry Consulting 560 White Plains Road Tarrytown, NY 10591 11EL: 914-332~ FAX: 914-332-4411 .JAAKKD PDVRV JAAKKO POVRV CONSULTING, INC. 580 WhIte PlaIns Road - Tarrytown, NY 10591-5136 - Telephone (914) 332-4000 - Telefax (914) 332-4411 August 19, 1992 Dr. Michael Kilgore GElS Project Manager Minnesota Planning Office 300 Centennial Office Building 658 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Mike: Pursuant to the State of Minnesota's GElS contract with Jaakko POyry Consulting, Inc. as formally executed on May 15, 1991, the sixth task included preparation of background papers. One of these papers, Silvicultural Systems, is attached for review and approval. The material contained in the document is presented in accordance with the terms outlined in Attachment A (to the base contract), Section III, subsection F. We look forward to your approval of this work product in due course. Doug • Parsonson GElS Project Coordinator DGP/cms Attachment cc: B. Dunn J. A. McNutt A. Veverka HOME OFFICE: JAAKKO POYRY INTERNATIONAL OY HeIIInId StodchoIm London Frankfurt Melbourne Munich Madrid P.O. BOX 18 - SF-ooM1 HELSINKI- FINlAND TELEX 121088 JPCON SF Raleigh New '*"" ZurIch Sao Paulo eu..o. AIrel Paris Jakarta laaklm Pam Consulting, Inc., Minnesota GElS, Silvicultural Systems Background Paper SUMMARY The objectives of this paper are to outline and provide background information on: • the various silvicultural systems available and the factors involved in their selection in forest management; • costs for the various silvicultural operations used; • actual silvicultural systems used in Minnesota and extent used; • extent of silvicultural operations in Minnesota; and • present example silvicultural guidelines for forest covertypes in Minnesota (appendix 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Survey of North Star Area, Alaska
    United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey of In cooperation with Fairbanks North Star Borough, Fairbanks and Salcha-Big Delta North Star Area, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and University of Alaska Fairbanks Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station Alaska This soil survey is a publication of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other Federal agencies, State agencies, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Major fieldwork for this soil survey was completed in 1988. Soil names and descriptions were approved in 1989. Unless otherwise indicated, statements in this publication refer to conditions in the Survey Area in 1988. This survey was made cooperatively by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the University of Alaska Fairbanks Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, and the Fairbanks North Star Borough. The survey is part of the technical assistance furnished to the Fairbanks and Salcha-Big Delta Soil and Water Conservation District. Soil maps in this survey may be copied without permission. However, enlargement of these maps could cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping. If enlarged, maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a larger scale. 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).
    [Show full text]
  • The Black-Faced Spoonbill
    SAVE International the Black-faced Spoonbill The Black-faced Spoonbill (Platalea minor) DESCRIPTION Black-faced Spoonbills are long-legged, long-necked wading birds that resemble egrets. Their elegant feathers are snow white most of the year, but develop a shaggy, golden-yellow crest and breast patch in the summer breeding season. Their legs, feet and toes are jet-black; faces are black and bare around the FACTS eyes and across the forehead. Their black, Worldwide elongated beaks gradually narrow, status: then abruptly fl are out into a Endangered fl att ened disk with a Class: nail at the ti p. Aves CHARACTERISTICS Order: Ciconiiformes Length: 27-29 in (70-75 cm) Family: Weight: Unknown Threskiornithidae Clutch size: 3-5 eggs Subfamily: Incubati on: 21-25 days Plataleinae Diet: Small fi shes, crustaceans, insects, Genus / Species: mollusks, occasional plant material Platalea minor Habitat: Wetlands, marine estuaries Esti mated Range: Spoonbills breed in North Populati on: and South Korea, China and 2,300 Russia; and migrate to winter in Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Vietnam, and the CURRENT STATUS Philippines. Black-faced Spoonbills are the rarest, and least- studied, spoonbills in the world. They have a global populati on of around 2,000. These birds nest on cliff s with gulls and other seabirds. The only known breeding colonies are on a few small, rocky islands off the coast of the Demilitarized Zone between North and South Korea and China; in the adjacent province of Liaoning in China; and at Furugelm Island (Russia). www.saveinternational.org [email protected] SAVE International the Black-faced Spoonbill The Facts The Plight of the Black-faced Spoonbills in South Korea • A proposed development in Incheon City, South Korea, threatens one of the last remaining pieces of habitat for the endangered Black-faced Spoonbill (Platalea minor) and other ti dal bird species.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 SOUTH KOREA 22 October – 3 November, 2018
    SOUTH KOREA 22 October – 3 November, 2018 Sandy Darling, Jeni Darling, Tom Thomas Most tours to South Korea occur in May for the spring migration or in late fall or winter for northern birds that winter in South Korea. This trip was timed in late October and early November to try see both summer residents and winter arrivals, and was successful in doing so. Birds were much shyer than in North America and often were visible only briefly, so that, for example, we saw few thrushes although they could be heard. This report has been written by Sandy and includes photos from both Tom (TT) and Sandy (SD). Sandy saw 166 species adequately of which 57 were life birds. When one includes birds heard, seen by the leader or others, or not seen well enough to count (BVD), the total was about 184. From trip reports it was clear that the person to lead the tour was Dr Nial Moores, Director of Birds Korea, an NGO working to improve the environment, especially for birds, in Korea. Nial has twenty years of experience in Korea, knows where birds are, and has ears and eyes that are exceptional. He planned the trip, made all the arrangements, found birds that we would not have found on our own and was our interface with Koreans, few of whom speak English. Nial also had to rejig the itinerary when strong winds led to the cancellation of a ferry to Baekryeong Island. We drove the vehicles - confidence was needed in dealing with city traffic, which was as aggressive as other trip reports said! Some of the highlights of the trip were: About 40,000 massed shore birds on Yubu Island, including the rare Spoonbill Sandpiper, a life bird for Tom.
    [Show full text]
  • IC-62, Heat Flow Studies in the Steamboat Mountain-Lemei Rock
    ,. \\ :\ .J ~\ .... 7 \; t,6 i u2 W~~fnffl:RY u.no C ';I, .... DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES i n BERT L. COLE, Commissioner of Public Lands ; RALPH A. BESWICK Supervisor I: s DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES VAUGHN E. LIVINGSTON, JR., State Geologist INFORMATION CIRCULAR 62 HEAT FLOW STUDIES IN THE STEAMBOAT MOUNTAIN-LEMEI ROCK AREA, SKAMANIA COUNTY, WASHINGTON BY J. ERIC SCHUSTER, DAVID D. BLACKWELL, PAUL E. HAMMOND, and MARSHALL T. HUNTTING Final report to the NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION on sponsored proiect AER75 ... 02747 1978 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BERT L COLE, Commissioner of Public Lands RALPH A. BESWICK Supervisor DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES VAUGHN E. LIVINGSTON, JR., State Geologist INFORMATION CIRCULAR WA He<1.t iluw 33.J. -7 stu.diei::,; ln the .M6 t> i Stean, l:on. t --- bJ. ~uu,i ta i u-.Lem~ i 1970 Jiuck d.rea, Skaina11ia Cuunt),, W a i'ii1 i u ~ton HEAT FLOW STUDIES IN THE STEAMBOAT MOUNTAIN-LEMEI ROCK AREA, SKAMANIA COUNTY, WASHINGTON BY J. ERIC SCHUSTER, DAVID D. BLACKWELL, PAUL E. HAMMOND, and MARSHALL T. HUNTTING Final report to the NATIONAL SC !ENCE FOUNDATION on sponsored project AER75-02747 1978 CONTENTS Abstract ................. , . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 Introduction ..................................................................... , • . 2 Acknowledgments • • • • • • . • • . • . • • . • . • . • . • . • . • • • • • • . • • • • . • . 3 Geo logy • . • • • • • • . • • • • • • . • • . • • . • . • . • • . • . 4 Genera I features ............................
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated List of the Lepidoptera of Alberta, Canada
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 38: 1–549 (2010) Annotated list of the Lepidoptera of Alberta, Canada 1 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.38.383 MONOGRAPH www.pensoftonline.net/zookeys Launched to accelerate biodiversity research An annotated list of the Lepidoptera of Alberta, Canada Gregory R. Pohl1, Gary G. Anweiler2, B. Christian Schmidt3, Norbert G. Kondla4 1 Editor-in-chief, co-author of introduction, and author of micromoths portions. Natural Resources Canada, Northern Forestry Centre, 5320 - 122 St., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6H 3S5 2 Co-author of macromoths portions. University of Alberta, E.H. Strickland Entomological Museum, Department of Biological Sciences, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2E3 3 Co-author of introduction and macromoths portions. Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids and Nematodes, K.W. Neatby Bldg., 960 Carling Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6 4 Author of butterfl ies portions. 242-6220 – 17 Ave. SE, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2A 0W6 Corresponding authors: Gregory R. Pohl ([email protected]), Gary G. Anweiler ([email protected]), B. Christian Schmidt ([email protected]), Norbert G. Kondla ([email protected]) Academic editor: Donald Lafontaine | Received 11 January 2010 | Accepted 7 February 2010 | Published 5 March 2010 Citation: Pohl GR, Anweiler GG, Schmidt BC, Kondla NG (2010) An annotated list of the Lepidoptera of Alberta, Canada. ZooKeys 38: 1–549. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.38.383 Abstract Th is checklist documents the 2367 Lepidoptera species reported to occur in the province of Alberta, Can- ada, based on examination of the major public insect collections in Alberta and the Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids and Nematodes.
    [Show full text]