DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Fort Donelson National Battlefield

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Fort Donelson National Battlefield National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Fort Donelson National Battlefield Natural Resource Report NPS/FODO/NRR—2013/621 ON THE COVER Clockwise from top left: Lower River Battery overlooking Cumberland River, American Robin (Turdus migratorius) eggs inside cannon, musket demonstration, and resident Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) pair Photographs courtesy of National Park Service Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Fort Donelson National Battlefield Natural Resource Report NPS/FODO/NRR—2013/621 Gary Sundin, Luke Worsham, Nathan P. Nibbelink, Michael T. Mengak, Gary Grossman Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources University of Georgia 180 E. Green St. Athens, GA 30602 January 2013 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available from the Integrated Resource Management Applications website (http://irma.nps.gov) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). Please cite this publication as: Sundin, G., L. Worsham, N. Nibbelink, G. Grossman, and M. Mengak. 2013. Natural resource condition assessment for Fort Donelson National Battlefield. Natural Resource Report NPS/FODO/NRR—2013/621. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 328/119658, January 2013 iv Contents Page Contents .......................................................................................................................................... v Figures............................................................................................................................................. x Figures (continued) ........................................................................................................................ xi Figures (continued) ....................................................................................................................... xii Tables ........................................................................................................................................... xiii Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... xvii Chapter 1 NRCA Background Information .................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2 Introduction and Resource Setting ............................................................................... 5 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Enabling Legislation ................................................................................................. 5 2.1.2 Geographic Setting.................................................................................................... 5 2.1.3 Park History .............................................................................................................. 7 2.1.4 Soils and Geology ..................................................................................................... 7 2.1.5 Hydrology ................................................................................................................. 9 2.1.6 Visitation Statistics ................................................................................................. 11 2.2 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................... 11 2.2.1 Resource Descriptions ............................................................................................ 11 2.2.2 Ecological Units ...................................................................................................... 13 2.2.3 Resource Issues Overview ...................................................................................... 13 2.3 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................... 14 Chapter 3 Study Scoping and Design ......................................................................................... 17 3.1 Preliminary Scoping ...................................................................................................... 17 3.2 Study Design .................................................................................................................. 17 v Contents (continued) Page 3.2.1 Indicator Framework ............................................................................................... 17 3.2.2 General Approach and Methods ............................................................................. 24 3.2.3 Reporting Areas ...................................................................................................... 25 3.3 Literature Cited ................................................................................................................ 26 Chapter 4 Natural Resource Conditions ..................................................................................... 29 4.1 Air Quality ..................................................................................................................... 29 4.1.1 Ozone ...................................................................................................................... 29 4.1.2 Foliar Injury ............................................................................................................. 33 4.1.4 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 38 4.2 Water Quality ................................................................................................................... 38 4.2.1 Data ......................................................................................................................... 39 4.2.2 Parameters ............................................................................................................... 40 4.2.3. Condition and Trend .............................................................................................. 45 4.2.4 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 46 4.3 Exotic Plants .................................................................................................................... 46 4.3.1 Relevance and Context ........................................................................................... 46 4.3.2 Data and Methods ................................................................................................... 46 4.3.3 Condition and Trend ............................................................................................... 49 4.3.4 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 51 4.4 Vegetation Communities ................................................................................................. 51 4.4.1 Resource Knowledge ............................................................................................... 51 4.4.2 Condition and Trend ................................................................................................ 56 4.4.4 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 56 vi Contents (continued) Page 4.5 Rare Plants ...................................................................................................................... 57 4.5.1 Resource Knowledge .............................................................................................. 57 4.5.2 Condition and Trend ............................................................................................... 58 4.5.3 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 59 4.6 Forest Pests and Pathogens ............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Species Status Assessment Report for the Barrens Darter (Etheostoma Forbesi)
    Species Status Assessment Report for the Barrens Darter (Etheostoma forbesi) Version 2.0 Acknowledgements: This Species Status Assessment would not have been possible without the research and assistance of Dr. Richard Harrington, Yale University Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Dr. Hayden Mattingly and his students, Tennessee Tech University School of Environmental Studies, Dr. John Johansen, Austin Peay State University Department of Biology, and Mark Thurman, Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 2: Biology and Life History ........................................................................................... 4 Taxonomy ................................................................................................................................ 4 Genetic Diversity ..................................................................................................................... 5 Morphological Description ...................................................................................................... 5 Habitat ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Lifecycle .................................................................................................................................. 7 Population Needs ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Crop Profile for Alfalfa in Kansas
    Crop Profile for Alfalfa in Kansas Prepared September 2000 Updated September 2005 General Production Information The Northern and Central Plains are major regions for alfalfa production, contributing 15% and 16%, respectively, to the total U.S. production during 2002 and 2003. South Dakota led the region in alfalfa production, followed by NE, KS, and ND. SD ranked 4th in U.S. alfalfa production during 2002 and 2003 respectively, whereas NE ranked 5th/5th, KS ranked 6th/12th, and ND ranked 21st/21st during the same years. Alfalfa production varied within the region. In SD, the northwest region contributed significantly more than any other region, accounting for approximately one-fifth of total SD alfalfa production in 2003. The following table summarizes alfalfa area, yield, production, price per unit, ranks, and value of production in the Northern and Central Plains during 2002 and 2003 (http://www.nass.usda.gov:81/ipedb/grains.htm) Harvested Yield Production Price per Unit Value of production Year State Rank Acres - thousand tons 1000 tons $ / ton X $1,000 2002 KS 950 3.7 3515 97 340955 6 2002 NE 1350 3 4050 85.5 346275 5 2002 ND 1450 1.3 1885 70 131950 21 2002 SD 2250 1.5 3375 82 275520 4 2002 Total 6000 12825 1094700 2002 Proportion 26.17% 17.57% 15.22% 2002 US Total 22923 3.19 73014 100 7193786 2003 KS 1000 3.4 3400 75 255000 12 2003 NE 1450 3.6 5220 65.5 341910 5 2003 ND 1600 1.65 2640 55.5 146520 21 2003 SD 2700 1.9 5130 67 343710 4 2003 Total 6750 16390 1087140 2003 Proportion 28.63% 21.48% 15.71% 2003 US Total 23578 3.24 76307 98 6921508 Pesticide Usage on Alfalfa for Year 2003 The Crop Profile/PMSP database, including this document, is supported by USDA NIFA.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Inventory at Stones River National Battlefield
    Fish Inventory at Stones River National Battlefield Submitted to: Department of the Interior National Park Service Cumberland Piedmont Network By Dennis Mullen Professor of Biology Department of Biology Middle Tennessee State University Murfreesboro, TN 37132 September 2006 Striped Shiner (Luxilus chrysocephalus) – nuptial male From Lytle Creek at Fortress Rosecrans Photograph by D. Mullen Table of Contents List of Tables……………………………………………………………………….iii List of Figures………………………………………………………………………iv List of Appendices…………………………………………………………………..v Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...……..2 Methods……………………………………………………………………………...3 Results……………………………………………………………………………….7 Discussion………………………………………………………………………….10 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...14 Literature Cited…………………………………………………………………….15 ii List of Tables Table1: Location and physical characteristics (during September 2006, and only for the riverine sites) of sample sites for the STRI fish inventory………………………………17 Table 2: Biotic Integrity classes used in assessing fish communities along with general descriptions of their attributes (Karr et al. 1986) ………………………………………18 Table 3: List of fishes potentially occurring in aquatic habitats in and around Stones River National Battlefield………………………………………………………………..19 Table 4: Fish species list (by site) of aquatic habitats at STRI (October 2004 – August 2006). MF = McFadden’s Ford, KP = King Pond, RB = Redoubt Brannan, UP = Unnamed Pond at Redoubt Brannan, LC = Lytle Creek at Fortress Rosecrans……...….22 Table 5: Fish Species Richness estimates for the 3 riverine reaches of STRI and a composite estimate for STRI as a whole…………………………………………………24 Table 6: Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores for three stream reaches at Stones River National Battlefield during August 2005………………………………………………...25 Table 7: Temperature and water chemistry of four of the STRI sample sites for each sampling date…………………………………………………………………………….26 Table 8 : Total length estimates of specific habitat types at each riverine sample site.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi
    The University of Southern Mississippi The Aquila Digital Community Honors Theses Honors College Spring 5-2016 Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi Hanna M. Miller University of Southern Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses Part of the Biodiversity Commons, and the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Miller, Hanna M., "Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi" (2016). Honors Theses. 389. https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses/389 This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College at The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Southern Mississippi Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi by Hanna Miller A Thesis Submitted to the Honors College of The University of Southern Mississippi in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in the Department of Biological Sciences May 2016 ii Approved by _________________________________ Mac H. Alford, Ph.D., Thesis Adviser Professor of Biological Sciences _________________________________ Shiao Y. Wang, Ph.D., Chair Department of Biological Sciences _________________________________ Ellen Weinauer, Ph.D., Dean Honors College iii Abstract The North American Coastal Plain contains some of the highest plant diversity in the temperate world. However, most of the region has remained unstudied, resulting in a lack of knowledge about the unique plant communities present there.
    [Show full text]
  • WRA.Datasheet.Template (Version 1) (Version 1).Xlsx
    Assessment date 18 April 2016 Clematis terniflora ALL ZONES Answer Score 1.01 Is the species highly domesticated? n 0 1.02 Has the species become naturalised where grown? 1.03 Does the species have weedy races? 2.01 Species suited to Florida's USDA climate zones (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) 2 North Zone: suited to Zones 8, 9 Central Zone: suited to Zones 9, 10 South Zone: suited to Zone 10 2.02 Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) 2 2.03 Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) y 1 2.04 Native or naturalized in habitats with periodic inundation y North Zone: mean annual precipitation 50-70 inches Central Zone: mean annual precipitation 40-60 inches South Zone: mean annual precipitation 40-60 inches 1 2.05 Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range? y 3.01 Naturalized beyond native range y 2 3.02 Garden/amenity/disturbance weed unk 3.03 Weed of agriculture n 0 3.04 Environmental weed y 4 3.05 Congeneric weed y 2 4.01 Produces spines, thorns or burrs n 0 4.02 Allelopathic unk 0 4.03 Parasitic n 0 4.04 Unpalatable to grazing animals ? 4.05 Toxic to animals ? 4.06 Host for recognised pests and pathogens n 0 4.07 Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans unk 0 4.08 Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems unk 0 4.09 Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle n 0 4.10 Grows on infertile soils (oligotrophic, limerock, or excessively draining soils).
    [Show full text]
  • Atlas of the Flora of New England: Fabaceae
    Angelo, R. and D.E. Boufford. 2013. Atlas of the flora of New England: Fabaceae. Phytoneuron 2013-2: 1–15 + map pages 1– 21. Published 9 January 2013. ISSN 2153 733X ATLAS OF THE FLORA OF NEW ENGLAND: FABACEAE RAY ANGELO1 and DAVID E. BOUFFORD2 Harvard University Herbaria 22 Divinity Avenue Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138-2020 [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT Dot maps are provided to depict the distribution at the county level of the taxa of Magnoliophyta: Fabaceae growing outside of cultivation in the six New England states of the northeastern United States. The maps treat 172 taxa (species, subspecies, varieties, and hybrids, but not forms) based primarily on specimens in the major herbaria of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, with most data derived from the holdings of the New England Botanical Club Herbarium (NEBC). Brief synonymy (to account for names used in standard manuals and floras for the area and on herbarium specimens), habitat, chromosome information, and common names are also provided. KEY WORDS: flora, New England, atlas, distribution, Fabaceae This article is the eleventh in a series (Angelo & Boufford 1996, 1998, 2000, 2007, 2010, 2011a, 2011b, 2012a, 2012b, 2012c) that presents the distributions of the vascular flora of New England in the form of dot distribution maps at the county level (Figure 1). Seven more articles are planned. The atlas is posted on the internet at http://neatlas.org, where it will be updated as new information becomes available. This project encompasses all vascular plants (lycophytes, pteridophytes and spermatophytes) at the rank of species, subspecies, and variety growing independent of cultivation in the six New England states.
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Protection of Small Fruits and Berries, 1980-April 1989 : Citations
    Historic, Archive Document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. Small Fruits and Berries, 1980-April 1989 Citations from AGRICOLA Concerning Diseases and Other Environmental Considerations United States Department of Agriculture The Protection of National Agricultural Small Fruits and Berries, Library United States Environmental 1980-April 1989 Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Citations from AGRICOLA Bibliographies and Literature Concerning Diseases and Other of Agriculture Number 81 Environmental Considerations Compiled and Edited by Charles N. Bebee National Agricultural Library United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Library Beltsville, Maryland 20705 and United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Washington, DC 20460 FOREWORD This is the 26th volume in a series of commodity-oriented environmental bibliographies resulting from a memorandum of understanding between the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library (USDA-NAL), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs (EPA-OPP). This close working relationship between the two agencies will produce a series of bibliographies which will be useful to EPA in the regulation of pesticides, as well as to any researcher in the field of plant or commodity protection. The broad scope of information contained in this series will benefit USDA, EPA, and the agricultural community as a whole. The sources referenced in these bibliographies include the majority of the latest available information from U.S. publications involving commodity protection throughout the growing and processing stages for each agricultural commodity. We welcome the opportunity to join this cooperative effort between USDA and EPA in support of the national agricultural community.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant List for Web Page
    Stanford Working Plant List 1/15/08 Common name Botanical name Family origin big-leaf maple Acer macrophyllum Aceraceae native box elder Acer negundo var. californicum Aceraceae native common water plantain Alisma plantago-aquatica Alismataceae native upright burhead Echinodorus berteroi Alismataceae native prostrate amaranth Amaranthus blitoides Amaranthaceae native California amaranth Amaranthus californicus Amaranthaceae native Powell's amaranth Amaranthus powellii Amaranthaceae native western poison oak Toxicodendron diversilobum Anacardiaceae native wood angelica Angelica tomentosa Apiaceae native wild celery Apiastrum angustifolium Apiaceae native cutleaf water parsnip Berula erecta Apiaceae native bowlesia Bowlesia incana Apiaceae native rattlesnake weed Daucus pusillus Apiaceae native Jepson's eryngo Eryngium aristulatum var. aristulatum Apiaceae native coyote thistle Eryngium vaseyi Apiaceae native cow parsnip Heracleum lanatum Apiaceae native floating marsh pennywort Hydrocotyle ranunculoides Apiaceae native caraway-leaved lomatium Lomatium caruifolium var. caruifolium Apiaceae native woolly-fruited lomatium Lomatium dasycarpum dasycarpum Apiaceae native large-fruited lomatium Lomatium macrocarpum Apiaceae native common lomatium Lomatium utriculatum Apiaceae native Pacific oenanthe Oenanthe sarmentosa Apiaceae native 1 Stanford Working Plant List 1/15/08 wood sweet cicely Osmorhiza berteroi Apiaceae native mountain sweet cicely Osmorhiza chilensis Apiaceae native Gairdner's yampah (List 4) Perideridia gairdneri gairdneri Apiaceae
    [Show full text]
  • Pest Risk Analysis for Microstegium Vimineum
    EUROPEAN AND MEDITERRANEAN PLANT PROTECTION ORGANIZATION ORGANISATION EUROPEENNE ET MEDITERRANEENNE POUR LA PROTECTION DES PLANTES 16-21488 Pest Risk Analysis for Microstegium vimineum Microstegium vimineum in the USA. © Luke Flory September 2015 EPPO 21 Boulevard Richard Lenoir 75011 Paris www.eppo.int [email protected] This risk assessment follows the EPPO Standard PM 5/3(5) Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests (available at http://archives.eppo.int/EPPOStandards/pra.htm) and uses the terminology defined in ISPM 5 Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms (available at https://www.ippc.int/index.php). This document was first elaborated by an Expert Working Group and then reviewed by the Panel on Invasive Alien Plants and if relevant other EPPO bodies. The PRA was reviewed by the EU IAS Scientific Forum in 2016. Cite this document as: EPPO (2014) Pest risk analysis for Microstegium vimineum. EPPO, Paris. Available at http://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/Pest_Risk_Analysis/PRA_intro.htm 16-21488 (15-21051) Pest Risk Analysis for Microstegium vimineum This PRA follows the EPPO Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests PM 5/3 (5). A preliminary draft was prepared by Ms Asuman Ergün (PPO of Turkey). This document has been reviewed by an Expert Working Group (EWG) that met at the EPPO Headquarters in Paris, France on the 2014-10-21/24. This EWG was composed of: Mr Giuseppe Brundu, University of Sassari, Italy Ms Asuman Ergün, Plant Protection Organization of Turkey Mr Luke Flory, University of Florida, USA Mr Ari Novy, US Botanic Garden, USA Mr Johan van Valkenburg, Plant Protection Organization of the Netherlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S
    Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4—An Update April 2013 Prepared by: Pam L. Fuller, Amy J. Benson, and Matthew J. Cannister U.S. Geological Survey Southeast Ecological Science Center Gainesville, Florida Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Cover Photos: Silver Carp, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix – Auburn University Giant Applesnail, Pomacea maculata – David Knott Straightedge Crayfish, Procambarus hayi – U.S. Forest Service i Table of Contents Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ vi INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of Region 4 Introductions Since 2000 ....................................................................................... 1 Format of Species Accounts ...................................................................................................................... 2 Explanation of Maps ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]