DOCSLIB.ORG

A 0 0 0 REVIEW and APPROVALS SANTEE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Summerton, South Carolina ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A 0 0 0 REVIEW and APPROVALS SANTEE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Summerton, South Carolina ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year a REVIEW AND APPROVALS SANTEE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Summerton, South Carolina 0 ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1994 0 0 ,L1Q. ~ll3/gs Refu Manager Date District anager Date Regional Office Approval Date Acting ARD-Refuges and Wildlife E T. PAUL 02 .2 127 JaCk'a VIS CROSSROADS Cf..k 973 127 559 95 Cantey Bay Nat- . Trail 2 . f Riataric Sit. 260 Scott Lake OlticelWiaitor C .nte DINGLE'POND UNIT 010 LAKE PUBLIC USE NATURAL AREA PINE MARION UNTO 301 I .iJ Ua 15 95 Pully l ni Nut Sanannan Branch Black d Bottom 1 T tte Pasture LEGEND I NTEE • Refuge Boundary Boat Ramp Pan .d Road r - • --- • Dirt Road . Nature Trail 1 SCALE I _ 3eee LAKE MARION SANTEE National Wildlife Refuge DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service INTRODUCTION TABLROFCOITIITS A . HIGHLIGHTS 2 B . CLIMATIC CONDITIONS . 2 C . LAID ACQUISITION 1 . Fee Title Nothing to Report 2 . laments 3 3 . Other 4 4 . Farsers Hove Adtinistration Conservation Masevents 5 D . PLAIIIIG 1 . Master Plan Nothing to Report 2 . Managetent Plan Nothing to Report 3 . Public Participation Nothing to Report 4 . Cotpliance with Rnvironaental and Cultural Resources Mandates 7 5 . Research and Investigation 1 5 . Other Nothing to Report 1 . 'MINISTRATION 1 . Personnel 8 2 . Youth Progravs Nothing to Report 3 . Other Manpower Prograis Nothing to Report 4 . Volunteer Prograt 9 5 . funding 9 6 . Safety I@ 1 . Technical Assistance Nothing to Report 8 . Other Nothing to Report F . HABITATMAIAGHMBIT 1 . General 2 . Wetlands I@ 3 . forests 12 4 . Croplands 12 5 . Grasslands Nothing to Report 6 . Other Habitats Nothing to Report 1 . Grazing Nothing to Report 8 . Haying lothing to Repo L 9 . Fire Managevent I4 18 . Pest Control 11 . later Rights lothing to Report 12 . Wilderness and Special Areas 15 13 . IPA Rasevent Monitoring Nothing to Report 14 . Farters Bove Advinistration Conservation lasenents . .Nothing to Report 15 . Private Lands lothing to Report 16 . Other laments Nothing to Report G . WILDLIFE • 1 . Wildlife Diversity Iathin9 to RePart 2 . Endangered and/or Threatened Species 15 3 . Waterfo,l 11 4 . Marsh and later Birds 22 5 . Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns and Allied Species 23 6 . Raptors 23 1 . Other Migratory Birds 24 8 . Game Mammals 24 9 . Marine Mammals lathing to Report 18 . Other Resident Wildlife 25 11 . fisheries Resources lathing to Report 12 . Wildlife Propagation and Stocking 25 13 . Surplus Animal Disposal lathing to Report 14 . Scientific Collections Nothing to Report 15 . Animal Control Nothing to Report • 16 . Marking and Banding 26 17 . Disease Prevention and Control lathing to Report H . PUBLIC USE 1 . General 27 2 . Outdoor Classrooms - Students lathing to Report 3 . Outdoor Classrooms - Teachers Nothing to Report 4 . Interpretive Foot Trails 27 5 . Interpretive ?our Trails lathing to Report 6 . Interpretive Ezhibits/Demonstrations 28 7 . Other interpretive Programs 28 B . Bunting 29 9 . Fishing 31 11 . Trapping lathing to Report 11 . Wildlife Observation Nothing to Report 12 . Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation Nothing to Report 13 . Camping, Nothing to Report 14 . Picnicking Nothing to Report 15 . Off-Road Yehicling Nothing to Report S 16 . Other Ion-Wildlife Oriented Recreation lathing to Report 17 . Lay Enforcement 32 18 . Cooperating Associations lathing to Report 19 . Concessions lathing to Report I . EQUIPMEIT AID FACILITIES 1 . lev Construction Nothing to Report 2 . Rehabilitation Nothing to Report 3 . Major Maintenance 34 4 . Equipment Utilization and Replacement 36 5 . Communications Systems lo thing to Report 6 . Computer Systems Nothing to Report 7 . Energy Conservation lathing to Report 8 . Other lathing to Report Is ii 3 . OTHER ITEMS 1 . Cooperative Prograis Nothing to Report 2 . Other Econoiic Uses Nothing to Report 3 . Iteis of Interest 40 4 . Credits 42 I . FEEDBACI iii 1 INTRODUCTION The Santee National Wildlife Refuge is located in Clarendon County in the upper coastal plains region of South Carolina . The refuge was established on January 1, 1942, primarily to alleviate the loss of natural waterfowl habitat in the Santee delta caused by the construction of Lakes Marion and Moultrie . The lakes were part of the hydroelectric power and navigation projects on the Santee and Cooper Rivers . The original refuge consisted of 74,352 acres, including most of the open water area of Lake Marion and part of Lake Moultrie . Most of the refuge consists of lands and waters owned by the South Carolina Public Service Authority (SCPSA) . Throughout the years, most of the original acreage has been returned to SCPSA, reducing the size of the refuge to its' current 15,095 acres . Of this, 4,400 acres are owned in fee title . A fifty-year lease agreement between the USFWS and the SCPSA became effective in 1975 . This lease altered much of the water and land boundaries from the original lease . Provisions in the lease permitted the posting of mutually agreed upon boundaries which would become official refuge boundaries after being surveyed . The survey was completed in 1985 and final boundary lines approved in 1986 . The refuge is physically divided into four geographically separated management units . The four units are the Bluff unit, where the refuge office/visitors center and maintenance facilities are located, Dingle Pond, a Carolina bay, the Pine Island unit, where the red-cockaded woodpecker colony is located and the Cuddo unit . Habitat types consist of 9,000 acres of open water, 1,445 acres of shallow freshwater marsh, 2,350 acres of timberland, 750 acres of agricultural lands and 1,550 acres of early successional fields, The primary objective of Santee is to annually provide wintering habitat for some 8,000 Canada geese and 50,000 ducks . Additional emphasis is placed on managing specific habitat for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker and the wood duck . Several areas of the. refuge have been designated or proposed for designation for their special values . Dingle Pond is a designated Public Use Natural Area . Being a Carolina bay, it is of local geological significance . The 163 acre Plantation Islands and Little Pine Island are proposed for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System . Historic sites on the refuge listed in the National Register of Historic Places include the Santee Indian Mound . This is also the site of the British Fort Watson of Revolutionary War fame . This site is also listed in the South Carolina register of historical sites . 0 2 A. HIGHLIGHTS Lease agreement between Santee NWR and South Carolina Public Service Authority mutually terminated . (C .2) Timber harvest violation occurs on FmHA easement . (C .4) Manager Bond to take early retirement buy out . (E .1) Bald eagle nest found just off Pine Island boundary . (G .2) Waterfowl use increases slightly . (G .3) Two antlered does taken during Cuddo unit primitive weapons hunt. (H .8) New pump installed at Timber Island field . (1 .4) Largest boat launching facility in South Carolina constructed adjacent to the Cuddo unit . (J .4) B . CLIMATIC CONDITIONS Normal climatic conditions for central South Carolina typically consist of hot humid summers and mild winters . Rainy seasons normally occur during late winter and late summer . Annual mean temperature and precipitation based on a 30-year average is 63 .5 degrees F . and 46 .35 inches, respectively . This turned out to be a wet year . Every month received average or above precipitation, except for a dry period in April and May . Total precipitation for the year was 55 .57 inches, 16 .39 inches over last year and 9 .22 inches above the 30-year average . Fortunately, the dry times occurred during our planting season, permitting us to prepare fields and plant crops without any problems . Heavy rains during the deer hunts resulted in considerable road damage on the Pine Island and Cuddo units due to the traffic . Summer temperatures were hot, as usual, but never hit the century mark . The year's high only reached 99 degrees F on several days in June and July . The low temperature for the year was 14 degrees F occurring in early January . Lake Marion water levels can have a major affect on our management practices . Normally, lake water levels are low in the winter and high in the summer . This is usually opposite of how we want to manage water in our impoundments and greentree reservoirs (GTRs), flood in the winter and drain in the summer . The SCPSA has complete control over manipulating the lake level . This year lake levels followed the traditional pattern . No major problems resulted from SCPSA's water regime . 3 Table 1 . Climatological Data on Santee NWR - 1994 Temperatures Lake Marion water level Precipitation (Degrees F) MSL Month (Inches) Max . Min . Hi Lo JAN 4 .89 73 14 73 .80 73 .00 FEB 2 .04 80 26 74 .85 73 .30 MAR 5 .92 86 29 76 .40 74 .90 APR 1 .16 90 42 76 .00 75 .20 MAY 0 .62 97 46 75 .60 74 .90 JUNE 7 .52 99 65 75 .60 74 .90 JULY 3 .86 99 67 76 .00 75 .20 AUG 4 .79 97 60 76 .60 75 .20 SEP 8 .46 97 54 76 .50 74 .90 OCT 8 .51 85 39 75 .70 75 .00 NOV 2 .42 84 28 75 .00 74 .40 DEC 5 .38 75 29 75 .85 73 .70 Total 55 .57 r C . LANDACQUISITION 2 . Easements On May 21, 1984, a Park and Recreational Lease was signed between the SCPSA and USFWS . The 40 year lease stipulated that a 1 .789 acre parcel of land, known as Log Jam Landing, would be " . .used for the operation of recreational facilities for use by the general public and to gain access to Lake Marion, said facilities to consist of a boat launching ramp and parking area ." The refuge has maintained a boat ramp and parking area on the site since the agreement was signed .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • South Carolina Department of Natural Resources
    FOREWORD Abundant fish and wildlife, unbroken coastal vistas, miles of scenic rivers, swamps and mountains open to exploration, and well-tended forests and fields…these resources enhance the quality of life that makes South Carolina a place people want to call home. We know our state’s natural resources are a primary reason that individuals and businesses choose to locate here. They are drawn to the high quality natural resources that South Carolinians love and appreciate. The quality of our state’s natural resources is no accident. It is the result of hard work and sound stewardship on the part of many citizens and agencies. The 20th century brought many changes to South Carolina; some of these changes had devastating results to the land. However, people rose to the challenge of restoring our resources. Over the past several decades, deer, wood duck and wild turkey populations have been restored, striped bass populations have recovered, the bald eagle has returned and more than half a million acres of wildlife habitat has been conserved. We in South Carolina are particularly proud of our accomplishments as we prepare to celebrate, in 2006, the 100th anniversary of game and fish law enforcement and management by the state of South Carolina. Since its inception, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) has undergone several reorganizations and name changes; however, more has changed in this state than the department’s name. According to the US Census Bureau, the South Carolina’s population has almost doubled since 1950 and the majority of our citizens now live in urban areas.
    [Show full text]
  • A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States And
    t a AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY QL 614 .A43 V.2 .A 4-3 AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY Special Publication No. 2 A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes -^ ru from the United States m CD and Canada (SECOND EDITION) A/^Ssrf>* '-^\ —---^ Report of the Committee on Names of Fishes, Presented at the Ei^ty-ninth Annual Meeting, Clearwater, Florida, September 16-18, 1959 Reeve M. Bailey, Chairman Ernest A. Lachner, C. C. Lindsey, C. Richard Robins Phil M. Roedel, W. B. Scott, Loren P. Woods Ann Arbor, Michigan • 1960 Copies of this publication may be purchased for $1.00 each (paper cover) or $2.00 (cloth cover). Orders, accompanied by remittance payable to the American Fisheries Society, should be addressed to E. A. Seaman, Secretary-Treasurer, American Fisheries Society, Box 483, McLean, Virginia. Copyright 1960 American Fisheries Society Printed by Waverly Press, Inc. Baltimore, Maryland lutroduction This second list of the names of fishes of The shore fishes from Greenland, eastern the United States and Canada is not sim- Canada and the United States, and the ply a reprinting with corrections, but con- northern Gulf of Mexico to the mouth of stitutes a major revision and enlargement. the Rio Grande are included, but those The earlier list, published in 1948 as Special from Iceland, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Cuba Publication No. 1 of the American Fisheries and the other West Indian islands, and Society, has been widely used and has Mexico are excluded unless they occur also contributed substantially toward its goal of in the region covered. In the Pacific, the achieving uniformity and avoiding confusion area treated includes that part of the conti- in nomenclature.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Electric & Gas Company
    SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 516 STUDY PLAN INSTREAM FLOW OF THE LOWER SALUDA RIVER FINAL FEBRUARY 2007 Prepared By: SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 516 STUDY PLAN INSTREAM FLOW OF THE LOWER SALUDA RIVER FINAL FEBRUARY 2007 Prepared by: SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA SALUDA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC NO. 516) STUDY PLAN INSTREAM FLOW OF THE LOWER SALUDA RIVER TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 1.1 Existing Operations..................................................................................................1 1.2 Study Objective........................................................................................................2 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA ...................................................................................3 2.1 Upstream and Downstream Boundaries...................................................................3 2.2 Habitat and Geomorphology....................................................................................3 2.3 Fishery, Fish Management Objectives, and Seasonal Habitat Uses ........................4 3.0 PROPOSED METHODS.....................................................................................................9 3.1 Field Reconnaissance and Habitat Mapping............................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Carolina Darter Etheostoma Collis
    Supplemental Volume: Species of Conservation Concern SC SWAP 2015 Carolina Darter Etheostoma collis Contributor (2005): Gene Hayes and Jason Bettinger [SCDNR] Reviewed and Edited (2013): Mark Scott, Andrew R. Gelder, and M. Troy Cribb [SCDNR] DESCRIPTION Taxonomy and Basic Description The Carolina Darter is a member of the perch family, Percidae. It is classified in the subgenus Hololepis, which contains 3 species in South Carolina (Rohde et al. 1994). At one point it was incorrectly called the Saluda Darter. The Carolina Darter is a resident of the Yadkin, Pee Dee, and Catawba drainages in North and South Carolina (Cloutman 1979). Carolina Darters reach a length of 60 mm (2.4 in.) (Rohde et al. 1994). The fish has a small head and mouth with a highly arched, incomplete lateral line (Kuehne and Barbour 1983). The brown-spotted sides are marked with a median dark stripe that breaks into blotches on the peduncle (Eddy and Underhill 1979). A primary basicaudal spot has two spots of lesser intensity above and below (Rohde et al. 1994). Breeding males do not develop bright colors but may have breeding tubercles on the pelvic fin spine and rays as well as on all anal fin rays (Kuehne and Barbour 1983). Status The Carolina Darter has received legal status as a federal species of concern and a species of concern in South Carolina. It was identified as a species vulnerable to imperilment in a recent assessment of southeastern freshwater fishes (Warren et al. 2000). The species is considered vulnerable (S3) in North Carolina, imperiled (S2) in Virginia, and is currently not ranked (SNR) in South Carolina (NatureServe 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Selected Aquatic Ecology, Surf Ace-Water Quality, and Ground-Water Studies in the Santee River Basin and Coastal Drainages, North and South Carolina, 1996
    Selected Aquatic Ecology, Surf ace-Water Quality, and Ground-Water Studies in the Santee River Basin and Coastal Drainages, North and South Carolina, 1996 By Thomas A. Abrahamsen, W. Brian Hughes, Eric J. Reuber, and Terry L. Sicherman U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 97-115 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Columbia, South Carolina 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government. For addtional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Stephenson Center-Suite 129 Box 25286 720 Gracern Road Denver, CO 80225-0268 Columbia, SC 29210-7651 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Describe how water quality is changing over (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the time. earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ Improve understanding of the primary natural tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- and human factors that affect water-quality ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound conditions. decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and This information will help support the development trends is an important part of this overall mission. and evaluation of management, regulatory, and moni­ One of the greatest challenges faced by water- toring decisions by other Federal, State, and local resources scientists is acquiring reliable information agencies to protect, use, and enhance water resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    VITAE OF Jay Richard Stauffer, Jr. Business Address: The Pennsylvania State University Ecosystem Science and Management 432 Forest Resources Building University Park, PA 16802 Office Telephone: (814) 863-0645 EMAIL [email protected] FAX (814) 865-3725 Education: Cornell University - B. S., December 1972 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University - Ph.D., June 1975 Doctoral Dissertation: The influence of temperature on the distribution, community structure and condition of fish of the New River, Glen Lyn, Virginia. Positions Held: Ichthyological Associates, Lancaster, Pennsylvania Junior laboratory and field biologist, June - September 1968 Ichthyological Associates, Lancaster, Pennsylvania Field biologist in charge of collection, identification of seine collections and larval fish, June - September 1969 Ichthyological Associates, Lancaster, Pennsylvania Biologist - larval fish collection, seine collections, age and growth studies on Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, May - September; December - January 1970 Ichthyological Associates, Lancaster, Pennsylvania Biologist - seine and larval fish collections, population studies on Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, May - September; December - January 1971 Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Laboratory assistant - identification of rotifers and zooplankton, January - May 1972 2 Ichthyological Associates, Lancaster, Pennsylvania Biologist in charge of Laboratory - sorting and identification of all fish; curator of museum specimens; population studies on Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir,
    [Show full text]
  • REGIONAL INFLUENCE of LANDSCAPE FEATURES and PROCESSES on FLUVIAL FISH ASSEMBLAGES by Darren Jay Thornbrugh
    REGIONAL INFLUENCE OF LANDSCAPE FEATURES AND PROCESSES ON FLUVIAL FISH ASSEMBLAGES By Darren Jay Thornbrugh A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Fisheries and Wildlife - Doctor of Philosophy 2014 ABSTRACT REGIONAL INFLUENCE OF LANDSCAPE FEATURES AND PROCESSES ON FLUVIAL FISH ASSEMBLAGES By Darren Jay Thornbrugh Habitat fragmentation, degradation and loss are dominant reasons for global declines in biodiversity of fishes in stream systems, and humans have drastically modified landscapes drained by streams due to activities including urbanization and agriculture. Such human land uses are known to change stream habitats through inputs of excess nutrients, sediments, or toxics and through changes in stream flow and thermal regimes, and human land uses have been shown in many studies to negatively affect stream habitats and the fishes they support. Despite this understanding, degradation of stream habitats and fishes continues globally, and freshwater fishes remain one of the most threatened groups of organisms on the planet. Less understood are the specific mechanisms by which land uses affect stream habitats and how these can vary by region, and how additional landscape-scale characteristics may alter effects of human land uses, resulting in regionally-specific responses in stream fishes to stressors. Such differences across regions may render one locale more sensitive to biodiversity loss or fish assemblage change from the same magnitude of anthropogenic disturbance in the landscape and confound efforts to develop and apply specific actions to conserve biodiversity of stream fishes. The goal of this study is to help address these limitations in understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Irnpacts of Irnpoundments on Six Small Watersheds in Pennsylvanial
    American Fisheries Societg Wamwater Streams Symposium, 198I, pp. 291-302 Irnpacts of Irnpoundments on Six Small Watersheds in Pennsylvanial Fnro J. BnruNrn Biology Department, Grove City College, Grove City, Pennsylvania 16127 Ansrnecr Six reservoirs on 3 watersheds in Mercer County, Pennsylvania, were studied from 1972 to 1979. No significant differences in water chemistry occurred above or below the impoundments between sampling intervals or watersheds. The biological oxygen demand of the bottom sedi- ments was significantly correlated with the volatile solids and phosphorus concentrations within the sediments, and was inversely correlated with the dissolved oxygen concentrations immedi- ately off the bottoms of the reservoirs. The reservoirs acted as lagoons, reducing coliform con- centrations significantly in the streams below. The reduction of coliforms was directly related to the turnover time of the reservoir. The diversity and biomass of invertebrates and fish pop- ulations were greater in streams below than above the structures. Recommendations are offered for the improvement of such areas as fish and wildlife habitat as well as overall stream ecology. IxrnopuctloN The irnpacts of 6 reservoirs in 3 watersheds Floodplains have traditionally been the first in Mercer County, Pennsylvania (Fig. 1) were topographic areas settled for a variety of rea- assessed frorn October 1972 through Septem- sons, not the least of which is that the rich ber 1979. Two reservoirs, Mathay Run and alluvial land has an abundant water supply, Saul Run in the Saul-Mathay watershed, were high fertility, and a level contour for ease of chosen for study because of the diversity of development. Approximately 7 percent of the land use and the flood protection they provid- total land area of the contiguous United ed for the communities of Greenville and States, with an estimated 22,0OO comrnunities Hempfield Township.
    [Show full text]
  • Christmas Darter Etheostoma Hopkinsi Saluda Darter Etheostoma Saludae (Form of E
    Highest Conservation Priority – Other Species Christmas Darter Etheostoma hopkinsi Saluda Darter Etheostoma saludae (form of E. collis) Redeye Bass Micropterus coosae Contributors: Dan Rankin and Jason Bettinger DESCRIPTION Christmas Darter Taxonomy and Basic Description The Christmas darter (Rohde et al. 1994) is a member of the family Percidae; this diverse family contains approximately 150 species of darters, all of which are found in rivers, lakes, swamps and springs of eastern North America. The Christmas darter belongs to the genus Etheostoma, the largest genus of North American fishes (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). The Christmas darter is the only South Carolina representative of the subgenus Oligocephalus, one of the largest subgenera of Etheostoma. Two subspecies have been identified: E. binotatum from the Savannah River drainage in both Georgia and South Carolina and E. hopkinsi from the Altamaha and Ogeechee river drainages in Georgia. Kuehne and Barbour (1983) have hypothesized possible species level differentiation of E. binotatum and E. hopkinsi due to marked differences in appearance of breeding males. The colorful Christmas darter ranges in length from 41 to 71 mm (1.6 to 2.8 inches). As is typical of other members of the subgenus Oligocephalus, the Christmas darter has a small conical head, broad frenum and two anal spines. Breeding males have a blue marginal and a red sub-marginal band on the spiny dorsal fin (Kuehne and Barbour 1983). This darter has 10 to 12 dark green bars on its side, separated by a red bar in a mature male and a yellow bar in the female. Its greenish back has eight dark saddles and its belly is light green.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies Into a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan a Joint Project Of
    Incorporating State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies into a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan A joint project of and June 2007 1 Incorporating State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies into a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan A joint project of the Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership and The Nature Conservancy This project was conducted with the generous financial support of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) under NFWF grant agreement 2005-0005-002. Recommended Citation: Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership and The Nature Conservancy. 2007. “Incorporating State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies into a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan.” Nashville, TN. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was funded by a National Fish and Wildlife Federation grant, sponsored by the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, to the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency acting on behalf of the Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP). Additional funding for this grant was provided through in-kind contributions from the SARP member agencies. The Nature Conservancy (TNC) led this project in collaboration with the SARP regional aquatic habitat planning committee. The TNC project lead was Sally Palmer, and Joey Wisby of TNC led the CWCS integration database development. SARP Coordinator Scott Robinson, along with Marilyn O’Leary and Ed Comstock assisted in meeting facilitation, logistics, and collecting feedback from SARP member-state CWCS planners. Finally, this project is built upon the expertise of the literally hundreds of participants in the 2003-2005 CWCS planning efforts of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Southeast is a region with more aquatic diversity than any other area of the continental United States (Palmer et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Review and Approvals Santee National Wildlife Refuge
    REVIEW AND APPROVALS SANTEE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Summerton, South Carolina ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1991 171. Ao - 7 ?z Refuge Manager~ /-Da e ssociate Manager Date INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS A. HIGHLIGHTS 1 B. CLIMATIC C0NNDITIONS 2 C . LAND ACQUISITION 1 . Fee Title Nothing to Report 2. Easements Nothing to Report 3 . Other 3 4. Farmers Home Administration Conservation Easements 3 D . PLANNING 1. Master Plan Nothing to Report 2. Management Plan Nothing to Report 3. Public Participation 4 4. Compliance with Environmental and Cultural Resources Mandates 5 5 . Research and Investigation 5 5. Other Nothing to Report E. ADMINISTRATION Personnel 9 Youth Programs 12 Other Manpower Programs Nothing to Report Volunteer Program 13 Funding 14 Safety 14 Technical Assistance Nothing to Report Other Nothing to Report F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT 1. General 17 2 . Wetlands 17 3 . Forests 24 4 . Croplands 24 5 . Grasslands Nothing to Report 6 . Other Habitats Nothing to Report 7 . Grazing Nothing to Report 8 . Haying Nothing to Report 9 . Fire Management 26 10 . Pest Control 26 11 . Water Rights Nothing to Report 12 . Wilderness and Special Areas 28 13 . WPA Fasanent Monitoring Nothing to Report 14. Farmers Home Administration Conservation Easements 28 15 . Private Lands 28 Page 16 . Other Fasements Nothing to Report G . WILDLIFE 1 . Wildlife Diversity Nothing to Report 2 . Endangered and/or Threatened Species 28 3 . Waterfowl 30 4 . Marsh and Water Birds 32 5 . Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns and Allied Species 33 6 . Raptors 33 7 . Other Migratory Birds 34 8 . Game Mammals 34 9 . Marine Mammals Nothing to Report 10 .
    [Show full text]
  • 316(B) Supporting Documentation for NPDES Nutrien Ltd
    316(b) Supporting Documentation for NPDES Nutrien Ltd. Permit Renewal Kennewick Fertilizer Operations NPDES Permit WA0003671 – Kennewick Facility and NPDES Permit WA0003727 – Finely Facility 30 June 2020 Project No.: 0549532 The business of sustainability Signature Page 30 June 2020 316(b) Supporting Documentation for NPDES Permit Renewal Kennewick Fertilizer Operations NPDES Permit WA0003671 – Kennewick Facility and NPDES Permit WA0003727 – Finely Facility Kennewick, Washington David P. Edwards, L.G. Mich ael F. Mendes, L. G. Partner Project Manager Kurtis Schlicht Suzanne Dolberg, P.E. Technical Lead Deputy Project Manager Environmental Resources Management 1218 3rd Avenue, Suite 1412 Seattle, Washington 98101 T: +1 425 462 8591 F: +1 425 455 3573 © Copyright 2020 by ERM Worldwide Group Ltd and / or its affiliates (“ERM”). All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, without the prior written permission of ERM. www.erm.com Version: 1.0 Project No.: 0549532 Client: Nutrien Ltd. 30 June 2020 Page iii Seattle\Projects\0549532\DM\28730H(316b).docx 316(B) SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR NPDES PERMIT CONTENTS RENEWAL CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 2. §122.21(R)(2) SOURCE WATER PHYSICAL DATA ........................................................................ 3 3. §122.21(R)(3) COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE DATA .................................................
    [Show full text]