Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 466 A Final Canaan Valley View George Constantz1,2,* and Ronald Preston1,3 We conclude this Special Issue by summarizing the 36 papers contributed by 60 authors, and by offering a few recommendations about research and management priorities. This is our personal view; this summary paper has not been peer reviewed nor does it represent the opinions of the conference sponsor. Summary Geologic Origins Canaan Valley (hereafter, the Valley) is an oval basin 12 mi (19 km) long and 1.2–2.5 mi (1.9–4.0 km) wide located in the Central Appalachian Mountains (southeastern Tucker County, north-central WV). Topographically, the Valley is sited in the Allegheny Highlands Section of the Appalachian Plateau Physiographic Province, a zone characterized by peaks and ridges of relatively uniform heights and deeply incised streams that are arranged in a dendritic network. This physiographic province is underlain by sedimentary rock strata that are mildly deformed into broad open folds. The Valley is geographically unique in two ways. First, at 3218–4501 ft (975–1372 m) above sea level, it is the highest intermontane valley of its size (34,594 ac [14,000 ha]) east of the Rocky Mountains. The average elevation of The Valley’s floor is 3300 ft (1000 m). Second, the Valley holds the largest (7083 acres [2833 ha]) complex of freshwater wetlands in the eastern US. As a part of the continent’s oldest highlands, the Appalachian Mountains, the Valley has its origins in deep time (Matchen 2015 [this issue]). The area eventually delineated as West Virginia joined North America by the accretion of terranes about 1.1 billion years ago when a smaller offshore continent collided with and became sutured onto the larger continent. In the Middle Cambrian Period, 545 million years ago, today’s West Virginia rested on the southwestern edge of the future North American continent. Between 450 and 270 million years ago, three orogenies, or mountain-building episodes, uplifted mountains in the region. The first two orogenies were followed by their mountains’ almost complete erosional decay. About 340 million years ago, Greenbrier Limestone formed at the bottom of the Mississippian Sea, which covered the region; Pottsville Sandstone formed during the Early to Middle Pennsylvania Period, 320 to 300 million years ago. The third orogeny, called the Alleghenian, occurred 270 million years ago during the Early Permian Period and it uplifted the Appalachians to the heights of the Himalayas, about 5 mi (8 km) above sea level. Canaan Valley & Environs 2015 Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):466–485 1Canaan Valley Institute, PO Box 673, Davis, WV 26261. 2Current address - 351 North Back Creek Road, High View, WV 26808. 3Current address - 112 Cole Street, Barnesville, OH 43713. *Corresponding author - constantz@frontiernet.net. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 467 The Upper Freeport Coal Bed of the Allegheny Group and the Bakerston Coal Bed in the Glenshaw Formation formed in shallow marine environments during the Late Pennsylvanian Period, 290 million years ago. Both seams have been surface-mined in the Valley area. Viewed from above, these strip mines form a horseshoe from Pendleton Creek, west of Davis, to south of the Mount Storm Power Station. About 10 million years ago, a sandstone anticline called the Old Blackwater Ridge spanned the location destined to become the Valley. The Valley opened when this sandstone arc was breached lengthwise and the rocks eroded along the fissure. Since then, the Valley’s floor has been eroding faster than the rocks forming its outlet gap, a general geologic cause of the ponding that has enabled formation of the Valley’s wetlands. The ridges enclosing the Valley, like Cabin and Canaan mountains, are supported by remnant strips of the erosion-resistant Pottsville sandstones, whereas red mudstones form the Valley’s walls and Greenbrier Limestone underlies the Valley’s floor. In the Late Pleistocene Epoch, 20,000 years ago, the Laurentide Ice Sheet reached its southern limit in northern Pennsylvania and thus did not scour the Valley. Rather, a periglacial environment characterized the Valley’s region. Relicts of that permafrost persist as patterned ground; two examples are the stone nets and stone stripes that are evident on Cabin Mountain. The region’s periglacial environment supported a tundra-like plant community and dozens of species of large-bodied mammals, including Mammuthus primigenius Blumenbach (Woolly Mammoth), Arctodus simus Cope (Giant Short-faced Bear), and Smilodon fatalis Leidy (Saber-toothed Cat) (Pielou 1991). Climate As the climate warmed after the Pleistocene, the region’s plant community underwent succession from the Cyperaceae (sedge family) tundra of 20,000 years ago, through the Picea (spruce) forests of 13,000 years ago and the Pinus (pine)- Betula (birch)-Tsuga (hemlock) forests of 10,000 years ago, to today’s Quercus (oak)-Castanea (chestnut) forest that developed 5000 years ago. Classified just two biomes warmer than tundra, the Valley’s present coldhumid climate is similar to that of eastern Canada, with cool summers and moderate to severe winters (Vogel and Leffler 2015 [this issue]). The Valley’s high-elevation climate can cause large day-night thermal fluctuations. The Valley receives an average of 55 in (135 cm) of precipitation per year. Comparable annual totals at Clarksburg, about 50 mi (80 km) westward, and Petersburg, 20 mi (32 km) eastward in the Alleghenies’ rain-shadow, are 45 and 33 in (114 and 84 cm), respectively. The Valley has a growing season of 92 frost-free days, which is fewer than in Fairbanks, AK. Snowfall averages 11.2 ft (3.4 m) per year, more than a foot (0.3 m) higher than the snowiest part of Maine. Snow cover is intermittent through the winter (Vogel and Leffler 2015 [this issue]). The Valley’s climate, like that of other land-based places, is influenced by its location, elevation, and topography. The Valley is sited on the crest of the Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 468 Alleghenies. Moisture-laden air moving toward the Valley rises and cools, causing water vapor to condense, followed by liquid or frozen water precipitation. Air masses from relatively warm-moist (Gulf of Mexico) and cold-dry (Canada) sources alternately flow across the region, creating a large day-to-day variation in the Valley’s weather. Because of its elevation, the Valley is 10–15 °F (6–8 °C) cooler than surrounding places. Due to the Valley’s bathtub shape, cold air drains off the slopes onto the Valley’s floor. Ice can form in this ”frost hollow” during any month (Vogel and Leffler 2015 [this issue]) . Soils In general, soils reflect the interactions of topography and parent rock materials, climatic forces, resident organisms, and the length of time these factors have been interacting (Sencindiver et al. 2015 [this issue]). The sandy soils of the ridges surrounding the Valley formed from Pottsville Sandstone. The sandy ridgetop soils where Picea rubens Sarg. (Red Spruce) and Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrière (Eastern Hemlock) grow are acidic and have a low water-holding capacity. Because the soils of the side-slopes formed from shales and sandstones, they are usually drier than the soils of the Valley’s floor. Mineral soils have formed over clayey subsoils on some of the Valley’s terraces and floodplains, so these sites are poorly drained. In contrast, the soils of the Valley’s floor are wet and organic. Muck and peat soils have formed where water is ponded over Greenbrier Limestone. If exposed to air and water by surface disturbance, some soils, especially the young Upper Freeport Coal minesoils, can yield acidic drainage (Lanham et al. 2015 [this issue]). Waters As the Old Blackwater Ridge was breaking down, the Blackwater River captured tributaries flowing off the decaying arc mountain. This explains why the Valley’s major rivers run down its length, and the smaller tributaries draining the ridge flanks are perpendicular to those rivers. The Valley’s streams convey dilute calcium- and magnesium carbonatetype waters, and thus are low in alkalinity and dissolved solids (Chambers et al. 2013 [this issue]). Because the Valley’s streams are relatively low in nutrients, they are classified as oligotrophic. The main stream flowing through the Valley, the Blackwater River, originates on Canaan Mountain and then flows through the Monongahela National Forest, Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge, and Blackwater Falls State Park. The Blackwater River has two major tributaries: the Little Blackwater and North Branch. Small springs issue from the contact planes of alternating sandstone and shale strata along the Valley’s side-slopes. With their headwaters on the Valley’s sides, these small tributaries speed down high gradients to the Valley’s floor. The small tributaries are more turbulent than the larger, low-gradient river. Thus, the dissolved oxygen concentrations, which are in part a function of turbulence, are normally higher in the side-slope tributaries than in the streams meandering Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 469 across the Valley’s floor. Dissolved oxygen can also be elevated by benthic photosynthesis and depressed by the respiring organisms in ponds built by Castor canadensis Kuhl (North American Beaver). At base-flow, the water quality and discharge volumes of the Valley’s streams are strongly influenced by groundwater contributions. As it flows through joints, faults, and bedding planes, the groundwater's constituents come to reflect the mineral composition of its source rocks. Two elements taken up in the Valley’s groundwater, radon and manganese, are of concern to humans. Watersheds As is typical of streams in general, the Valley's headwater streams and their adjacent forest corridors function as zones where organic matter is deposited, processed, and transported (Wallace and Eggert 2015 [this issue]). In streams draining deciduous forests, this organic matter provides the major fuel for the stream’s ecosystem. Leaves from the forest fall and blow into the streams, where they are shredded into fine fragments by macroinvertebrates. This fine particulate organic matter then washes downstream and becomes food for filter-feeding invertebrates. The shredders and collectors, in turn, are eaten by predatory aquatic insects and fish. Many of these aquatic insects metamorphose and emerge from streams as winged adults in the early spring, just as some land-based predators like amphibians and birds are preparing to breed. Further, the flying adult insects are often abundant and come as bite-sized pieces of protein and fat. Through these transformations, a healthy montane stream imports low-quality leaves and branches from the adjacent forest, processes them into high-quality food, and then exports the food back to the land-based forest. From our human point of view, such streams also perform valuable ecosystem services including: nutrient, hydraulic, and sediment retention; the conservation of cool water and moderation of its thermal extremes; and the production of food for fish and game animals. The Valley’s wetlands also perform crucial ecological functions; the mosaic of bogs, marshes, and streams supports notable biodiversity, especially of amphibians and birds. In addition, wetlands moderate stream flow, neutralize pollutants, and recharge the groundwater (Brooks 1989). In some parts of the Valley, ponding has maintained chemical and hydrologic environments favorable for the formation of peat. Peat is partially decomposed organic matter that develops in anaerobic conditions caused by waterlogging. Although peatlands are common in recently glaciated zones, such as the Northern Appalachians, they are rare in unglaciated North America. Twelve peat deposits, some dated at about 5250 years old, have been mapped in the Valley (Chambers et al. 2015 [this issue]). Actively growing Sphagnum (peat moss) blankets the decomposed peat. Five of these peat patches occur in the broad terraces in the northern part of the Valley, are 5–13 ft (1.5–4 m) thick, and could be harvested for fuel or as a soil additive. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 470 Plants Before the arrival of Europeans, the Valley’s floor was clothed in a dense mixed spruce-hemlock forest, while the surrounding mountains supported Red Spruce stands. Today, the Valley’s upland slopes are covered primarily by northern hardwoods. The ridges support patches of boreal-like spruce-Abies (fir) forest, a southern outlier of the vast northern boreal forest. The communities of plants scattered throughout the Valley have attracted the attention of botanists for four reasons (Fortney et al. 2015 [this issue]). First, much of the Valley’s flora is recognized as northern—a remnant of the influence of the region’s Pleistocene conditions. Many plant species are near the southernmost limits of their distributions. Second, the Valley cradles the largest freshwater wetland complex in the eastern United States and supports diverse wetland plant assemblages. Third, its uplands once hosted one of the continent’s most highly developed Red Spruce forests. And fourth, the Valley features a rich medley of plant communities, which reflects the place’s great variety of landforms, surface rocks, and soils found in the upland, wetland, and stream habitats, as well as various human disturbances in these environments. In some places, especially where peat has formed over sandstone, the wetlands are acidic, nutrient-poor, and support peat moss-Polytrichum (haircap moss) bogs. Other wetlands that are underlain by Greenbrier Limestone and the Mauch Chunk Group of limestones, shales, and sandstones, have a circumneutral pH and more mineral-rich waters (Sencindiver et al. 2015 [this issue]). Some of the Valley’s plant communities are rare, particularly in wetlands (Fortney et al. 2015 [this issue]). All of the plant communities associated with the Valley’s cold peatlands are rare, including 1) the mixed conifer swamp forest with Red Spruce, Abies balsamea (L.) Mill. (Balsam Fir), and Eastern Hemlock; (2) the mixed conifer-Fraxinus nigra Marshall (Black Ash) bog forest; and (3) the peat moss-haircap moss bog. Also rare are shrub communities with (1) Alnus rugosa (Du Roi) Spreng. (Speckled Alder), Viburnum recognitum Fernald (Smooth Arrowwood), and/or Salix discolor Muhl. (Glaucous Willow); (2) Populus tremuloides Michx. (Trembling Aspen) groves; and (3) the Poaceae (true grasses)- and forb-dominated balds on surrounding ridges. Tucked amidst the Valley’s wetland plant communities are several rare plant species (McDonald 2015 [this issue]). For example, Abe’s Run (Rentch et al. 2015 [this issue]), located in Canaan Valley State Park is a 75-acre (30-ha) wetland complex that features marsh, wet meadow, peat bog, scrub-shrub thicket, and forest swamp communities. These diverse communities include several rare plant species like Polemonium vanbruntiae Britton (Jacob’s Ladder), Cypripedium reginae Walter (Showy Lady’s-slipper), and Rhamnus alnifolia L’Her. (Alderleaved Buckthorn). Over time these wetland plant communities change through the engineering actions of North American Beaver, changes that include both the initial pond formation from dam construction and the subsequent conversion of ponds to grassy meadows after the dams are abandoned. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 471 Depending upon the criteria used, the Valley supports 38, 40, or 49 species of rare plants (Bartigis et al. 2015 [this issue], McDonald 2015 [this issue]) in various habitat types. For example: Cacalia suaveolens L. (Sweet-scented Indian-plantain), Glyceria grandis S. Wats. (Large Mannagrass), and Balsam Fir occur in wetlands; Drosera rotundifolia L. (Roundleaf Sundew), Pogonia ophioglossoides (L.) Ker (Rose Pogonia), and Vaccinium oxycoccos L. (Small Cranberry) are found in peatlands; Veronica scutellata L. (Marsh Speedwell) and Viburnum lentago L. (Nannyberry) inhabit wet meadows; Euphorbia purpurea (Raf.) Fernald (Glade Spurge), Lonicera canadensis Bartram (American Fly Honeysuckle), and Cornus canadensis L. (Dwarf Dogwood) occur in uplands; and Eupatorium pilosum Walt. (Vervain Thoroughwort), Stachys tenuifolia Willd. (Smooth Hedge-nettle), and Viola appalachiensis Henry (Appalachian Blue Violet) are found in riparian/open habitats. Much of the place’s rare flora can be attributed to hydrophytic genera, such as Scirpus spp. (bulrushes), Juncus spp. (rushes), Carex (sedges), and Glyceria spp. (mannagrasses) that are affiliated with northern latitudes. Three plants are classified as globally uncommon: Gymnocarpium appalachianum Pryer & Haufler (Appalachian Oak Fern), Glade Spurge, and Jacob’s Ladder. Many of the rare plant species are concentrated over Greenbrier Limestone in the southern part of the Valley. One group of the Valley’s plants has yielded an interesting finding (Faust and Peterson 2015 [this issue]). Osmundastrum claytoniana L. (Interrupted Fern) grows in elliptical colonies. Each colony consists of several ramets interconnected by branching rhizomes. That is, each plant lives as several independent aboveground leafy green parts that remain connected to each other by horizontally creeping subterranean stems. By dividing a colony’s mean radius by its rhizome’s annual growth rate, it is possible to calculate a colony’s age. Some colonies have been estimated to be 414 years of age, making them among the oldest plants in eastern North America. Vertebrate animals The Blackwater River, a tributary of the Cheat River, hosts a modest ichthyofauna (Cincotta et al. 2015 [this issue]). The three most common fish families are Cyprinidae (minnows, including Campostoma anomalum Rafinesque [Central Stoneroller]), Centrarchidae (sunfishes such as Lepomis cyanellus Rafinesque [Green Sunfish]), and Percidae (perches, e.g., Etheostoma flabellare Rafinesque [Fantail Darter]). In the Blackwater River, 20 native and 10 introduced fish species have been reported above the Falls, and 26 native and three introduced fishes have been documented below the Falls. Compared to other similar-sized rivers of the region, the Blackwater River holds a low diversity of native fishes. This depauperate condition is due in part to the river’s drainage history. Specifically, it was once part of the northeasterly flowing ancient St. Lawrence River, which naturally hosted few fish species. As one might expect, the Valley’s wetland complex offers a splendid variety of habitats for amphibians (Pauley 2015 [this issue]). The Red Spruce forests along the ridges host several species of Urodela (newts and salamanders), including Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 472 Plethodon cinereus (Green) (Red-backed Salamander), P. nettingi (Green) (Cheat Mountain Salamander), P. glutinosus (Green) (Slimy Slamander), and P. wehrlei Fowler & Dunn (Wehrle’s Salamander). Species of Anura (frogs and toads) such as Bufo americanus Holbrook (American Toad), B. fowleri Hinckley (Fowler’s Toad), Rana sylvatica LeConte (Wood Frog), R. palustris LeConte (Pickerel Frog), and Lithobates pipiens (Schreber) (Northern Leopard Frog) live in the uplands’ old fields. Notophthalmus viridescens (Rafinesque) (Red-spotted Newt), Ambystoma maculatum (Shaw) (Spotted Salamander), and Hemidactyimm scutatum (Four-toed Salamander) occur in the fens, beaver ponds, road-rut pools, and permanent pools of the Valley’s floor. The Valley’s amphibian fauna also includes Hyla crucifer Wied-Neuwied (Spring Peeper), H. versicolor Le Conte (Gray Treefrog), Rana catesbeiana Shaw (Bullfrog), R. clamitans Latreille (Green Frog), Gyrinophilus porphyriticus (Green) (Spring Salamander), Desmognathus ochrophaeus Cope (Allegheny Mountain Dusky Salamander), D. monticola Dunn, 1916 (Seal Salamander), and Eurycea bislineata (Green) (Northern Twolined Salamander). Although this Special Issue does not include a paper on the Valley’s reptiles, the Wildlife Refuge’s website (Michael 1993) and Dr. Thomas Pauley’s unpublished field notes report the following species: Chelydra serpentina (L.) (Common Snapping Turtle), Terrapene carolina (L.) (Box Turtle), Chrysemys picta (Schneider) (Painted Turtle), Sceloporus undulatus (Bosc and Daudin) (Eastern Fence Lizard), Eumeces laticeps (Schneider) (Broad-headed Skink), Nerodia sipedon (L.) (Northern Water Snake), Storeria occipitomaculata (Storer) (Redbelly Snake), Thamnophis sirtalis (Garter Snake), Heterodon platirhinos (Latreille) (Eastern Hog-nosed Snake), Carphophis amoenus (Say) (Worm Snake), Coluber constrictor L. (Black Racer), Diadophis punctatus (L.) (Ringneck Snake), Opheodrys vernalis (Harlan) (Smooth Green Snake), Elaphe obsoleta (Say in James) (Black Rat Snake), Lampropeltis triangulum (Lacepede) (Milk Snake), and Crotalus horridus L. (Timber Rattlesnake). Compared to the lower-lying surrounding areas, the Valley hosts depauperate turtle and lizard faunas. These poorly represented reptile groups, which rely on basking, may find it hard to maintain the minimal body temperatures needed for activity in the Valley’s high, cold, wet environment. Three reptiles—the Broad-headed Skink, Hog-nosed Snake, and Timber Rattlesnake— are rare and receive legal protection. A total of 181 species of birds has been recorded in the Valley (Northeimer 2015 [this issue]). The most common families of neotropical migrants include the Cuculidae (cuckoos), Tyrannidae (flycatchers), Turdidae (thrushes), Vireonidae (vireos), and Parulidae (wood warblers). In the last family, Geothlypis trichas (L.) (Common Yellowthroat), Setophaga magnolia (Wilson) (Magnolia Warbler), S. coronata (L.) (Yellow-rumped Warbler), Cardellina canadensis (L.) (Canada Warbler) and Parkesia noveboracensis (Gmelin) (Northern Waterthrush) are most frequent. Each bird has a preferred breeding habitat in the Valley—e.g., (a) coniferous forest: Oreothlypis ruficapilla (Wilson) (Nashville Warbler) and Junco hyemalis (L.) (Northern Junco); (b) hardwood Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 473 forest: Troglodytes hiemalis Vieillot (Winter Wren) and Catharus ustulatus (Nuttall) (Swainson's Thrush); (c) forest-field edge: Spizella pusilla (Wilson) (Field Sparrow) and Passerina cyanea (L.) (Indigo Bunting); (d) alder-Spirea meadow-thicket: Empidonax alnorum (Brewster) (Alder Flycatcher), and Melospiza georgiana (Latham) (Swamp Sparrow); and (e) old field: Dolichonyx oryzivorus (L.) (Bobolink) and Passerculus sandwichensis (Gmelin) (Savannah Sparrow). Two warblers, Setophaga caerulescens (Gmelin) (Black-throated Blue Warbler) and S. virens (Gmelin) (Black-throated Green Warbler), are frequent fall migrants. Common winter birds include Buteo lagopus (Pontoppidan) (Rough-legged Hawk), Poecile atricapillus (L.) (Black-capped Chickadee), Coccothraustes vespertinus (W. Cooper) (Evening Grosbeak), Carduelis flammea (L.) (Common Redpoll), and C. pinus (Wilson) (Pine Siskin). In the last few decades Coragyps atratus (Bechstein) (Black Vulture), Spizella pallida (Swainson) (Clay-colored Sparrow), and Ammodramus henslowii (Audubon) (Henslow’s Sparrow) have expanded their ranges into the Valley. The most abundant species of waterfowl that nest in the Valley are Branta canadensis (L.) (Canada Goose), Anas platyrhynchos L. (Mallard), Aix sponsa (L.) (Wood Duck) and Anas rubripes (Brewster) (American Black Duck) (Michael and Brown 2015 [this issue]). Thirteen other waterfowl species have also been observed in the Valley. The most common wading birds in the Valley are Ardea herodias L. (Great Blue Heron), Butorides virescens (L.) (Green Heron), and Gallinago delicata Ord (Wilson’s Snipe); six other species of wading birds are less frequent. Scolopax minor Gmelin (American Woodcock) is a noteworthy game bird (Steketee et al. 2015 [this issue]). the Valley lies at the southern edge of the species’ geographic range. Some writers have opined that its population in the Valley has at times experienced the species’ most intense hunting pressure. American Woodcock primarily use woody wetlands that include young forest with alder and scattered openings. In 1966 and 1967, the number of male Woodcock singing throughout the Valley was estimated to be 146; based on banding and kill numbers the total population was calculated at 1300 birds [(Steketee et al. 2015 [this issue]). Land development and natural succession have impacted American Woodcock habitat, likely reducing the population in the Valley, a local change that mirrors its losses across the East. The Valley’s grasslands, which can be classified as either pastures or hayfields, provide important habitat for grassland birds (Chadbourne and Anderson 2015b [this issue]) . Twenty-eight bird species have been recorded in the Valley’s grasslands. The most common are Agelaius phoeniceus (L.) (Red-winged Blackbird), Bobolink, Sturnella magna (L.) (Eastern Meadowlark), and Savannah Sparrow; Circus cyaneus (L.) (Northern Harrier) and Ammodramus savannarum (Gmelin) (Grasshopper Sparrow) are less prevalent. The summertime densities of grassland birds are greatest in July. Summertime fluctuations in the numbers, diversity, and richness of grassland birds are correlated with changes in local precipitation and land uses. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 474 As is the case with reptiles, this Special Issue does not include a paper on the Valley’s mammals. Based on Dr. Edwin Michael's research, the Wildlife Refuge's website lists 49 mammal species known or expected to live in the Valley. Dominant taxa include six species of Soricidae (shrews), l0 species of Chiroptera (bats), 17 species of Rodentia (rodents), and nine species of Carnivora (carnivores) (Michael 1993). As with boreal plants, Valley occurrences of some mammals, such as Glaucomys sabrinus (Shaw) (Northern Flying Squirrel), Synaptomys cooperi (Baird) (Southern Bog Lemming), and Lepus americanus Erxleben (Snowshoe Hare), represent southern range extensions of northern species. The Valley hosts 15 species of vertebrates that have been ranked as rare in West Virginia (McDonald 2015 [this issue]). Listed by habitat type these include: (a) cold-water streams: Clinostomus elongatus (J.P. Kirtland) (Redside Dace); (b) upland forests: Cheat Mountain salamander, Accipiter gentilis (L.) (Northern Goshawk), Certhia americana Bonaparte (Brown Creeper), Northern Flying Squirrel, and Sylvilagus obscurus Chapman, Cramer, Dippenaar, & Robinson (Appalachian Cottontail); (c) shrub wetlands: Alder Flycatcher; and (d) streamside and open habitats: Northern Harrier, Northern Waterthrush, Nashville Warbler, Bobolink, Pooecetes gramineus (Gmelin) (Vesper Sparrow), Neotoma magister Baird (Allegheny Woodrat), Sorex hoyi Baird (Pygmy Shrew), and Zapus hudsonius (Zimmermann) (Meadow Jumping Mouse). Humans A broadly accepted but still controversial hypothesis posits that people first arrived in the Central Appalachians about 12,000 years ago (Constantz 2015 [this issue]). These prehistoric big-game hunters, the Clovis people, occupied the region’s periglacial environment. By 3000 years ago, Native Americans had deemphasized big-game hunting and instead increasingly relied on cultivated and wild-gathered plant material. They also used specialized tools like mortar and pestle, stone axe, and twist drill. They migrated annually between winter villages in floodplains and upland camps in summer and engaged in trade through a continent-wide network of trails. By 1200 AD, Native Americans grew corn, beans, and squash, lived in large settlements, and made pottery vessels. Major archaeological sites in the Valley region include Cheat Lake, Burnsville Reservoir, and Tygart Valley. A new site in the Valley yielded 15 prehistoric artifacts that are probably from the Archaic Period, which spanned from 9500 to 3000 years ago. The site’s pattern of lithic scatter suggests that it was visited during brief, occasional stopovers by small bands pursuing fish and game, and was not used as a permanent settlement (Constantz 2015 [this issue]). The Native Americans’ minimal use of the Valley can be interpreted by applying the theory of optimal foraging behavior. Groups of hunter-gatherers may have traveled between settlements in the optimal habitats of lower river valleys, like the Cheat River’s floodplain at Horseshoe Bend, and suboptimal upland areas to exploit ephemeral foods, such as chestnuts. This vertical movement may have been a form of seasonal migration, short-term central-place foraging, or both. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 475 The first Europeans in the Valley were land surveyors in the late 1740s, hunters began visiting in the mid-l800s, and the Valley’s first permanent settlement was established in 1867 (Carvell 2015 [this issue]). The earliest settlers subsisted by hunting and gathering, whereas people who arrived later farmed specific plots of land. Around 1900, the Valley began attracting recreational visitors who came for the cool climate and good fishing. Along with much of the Appalachians, the Valley was heavily logged from the 1890s through the early 1920s (Carvell 2015 [this issue]). Completion of the railroad through the Valley in the mid-1880s catalyzed the growth of industrial logging. Wood hicks and their logging camps, Shay engines, vast clearcuts, and runaway wildfires followed the train tracks. When Europeans first visited the Valley, the Blackwater River's summer water temperature probably did not exceed 61 °F (16 °C) because of shading by the intact tree canopy and the upland’s thick water-laden duff (Zurbuch 2015 [this issue]). Streams held many macroinvertebrates and Salvelinus fontinalis Mitchill (Brook Trout), but likely no other game fishes (Zurbuch 2015 [this issue]). Skilled anglers could have caught 100 deep-bodied Brook Trout per day, many of which were 12–13 inches (30.5–33.0 cm) long. Other native fishes may have included the Redside Dace, Etheostoma nigrum Rafinesque (Johnny Darter), E. blennioides Rafinesque (Greenside Darter), and Cottus bairdii Girard (Mottled Sculpin). The era of intense logging and repeated fires degraded the Blackwater River watershed. Probable effects included higher summer water temperatures, increased siltation, less buffering capacity, wider and shallower stream channels, and less watershed storage capacity. After logging and fires reduced riparian tree-cover and upland duff, the water warmed and Brook Trout were relegated to higher-elevation stream reaches (Jones et al. 1999; TU, no date). These changes allowed Semotilus atromaculatus (Mitchill) (Creek Chub), Pimephales notatus (Rafinesque) (Bluntnose Minnow), Catostomus commersonii Lacepede (White Sucker), and the Central Stoneroller—all warm-water fishes—to increase through former Brook Trout habitat. Today, the forest has partly recovered and much of the Valley is managed as hayfields and pasture, changes that have allowed water quality to recover enough to sustain a fishery based on stocked Brook Trout, Salmo trutta L. (Brown Trout), and Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum (Rainbow Trout). Some of the coal mines that were excavated in the early 20th century are still releasing acid mine drainage (AMD) (Clayton et al. 2015 [this issue], Viadero and Fortney 2015 [this issue]). This poison is impacting Beaver Creek and, to an even greater extent, the North Fork of the Blackwater River. AMD from the North Fork severely limited aquatic life in the mainstem of the Blackwater River below the North Fork. Beaver Creek and its major tributaries have a pH of 5.1, a limited capacity to buffer pH changes, and high levels of metals from mine discharges. In an effort to reduce acidity, calcium carbonate has been added since 1994 to the Blackwater River at Davis immediately upriver of the mouth of Beaver Creek. Has the remediation been effective? Although there were no differences in the Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 476 bioaccumulation of metals by the freshwater mussel Strophitus undulatus Say (Creeper), there were significant improvements in the River’s water quality, other invertebrates, and fishes. At a site 2.3 mi (3.9 km) below the treatment point, the River's pH increased from 6.2 to 7.2, and the number of fish species rose from 11 to 17, an increase of 55%. Considered additively, AMD, logging, and other human activities have impacted the Valley’s fishes. Some species, including Nocomis micropogon (Cope) (River Chub), Hypentelium nigricans (Lesueur) (Northern Hogsucker), Fantail Darter, and Percina maculata (Girard) (Blackside Darter) have probably been extirpated; other species, such as the Brook Trout and Redside Dace, persist in contracted ranges. Because AMD remediation has improved the water quality of the Blackwater River below Davis, the Blackwater Canyon offers a regionally notable coldwater fishery once again. The populations of several of the Valley’s game mammals have also crashed and rebounded (Lesser and Cromer 2015 [this issue]). By 1825, early trappers had almost completely exterminated the North American Beaver from West Virginia. Several were released in Tucker County in 1935, and by 1962 there were 32 active Beaver dams on the Blackwater River’s tributaries. Findings from a study in the Valley in 1973 and 1974 indicated that there were 0.90 and 1.27 Beaver colonies per stream mile, respectively, an increase of 40% in just one year. By the early 1900s, Odocoileus virginianus Zimmermann (White-tailed Deer) were nearly extirpated by overhunting. Restocking of deer started in 1930 and was so successful that by 1950 an antlerless season was held. Today many parts of the Valley show signs of overbrowsing, suggesting that the deer population is too large. During the years between removal of the virgin forest and the establishment of the second-growth forests, the slopes around the Valley underwent succession. Many of these fields were used to pasture cattle and are now undergoing succession from grassland to forest. Mowing has been used to maintain some of these open habitats for grassland animals. As the region’s ecosystems have recovered from past disturbance, public lands have been designated in and around the Valley. The Monongahela National Forest was established in 1920, Blackwater Falls State Park in 1934, Canaan Valley State Park in 1963, and most recently, the Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge was designated in 1994. The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was established in 1933 as a youth agency for men of 17 to 25 years in age (Sypolt 2015 [this issue]). In the Monongahela National Forest, the CCC reforested sites and fought fires; they also constructed buildings, roads, and fire towers. Many of these structures continue to serve the National Forest today. Located 12 mi (19 km) west of the Valley, the Fernow Experimental Forest, one of the USDA Forest Service’s 80 experimental forests and ranges, has, from its start in 1934, hosted research projects relevant to the Valley’s natural resources (Adams and Kochenderfer 2015 [this issue]). The environmental history of this 4700-acre (1880-ha) outdoor laboratory has followed that of the whole region, Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 477 from its original virgin hardwoods-hemlock forest, through the clear-cutting and wildfire era, to today’s partial recovery. Early research focused more on immediate needs, such as fire in hardwood forests, crop-tree release, and reforestation of burned-over Red Spruce stands. Early Fernow research sought to determine forest management strategies to produce diverse stands of high-value trees. Since 1948, the Fernow’s research projects have fit into the twin themes of forest and watershed management. Current projects examine topics such as the affect of forestry operations on streamflow. As we have mentioned, habitats in the Valley continue to mature, and early successional habitats are disappearing. For example, through natural succession the Crataegus (hawthorn)-dominated savannahs are being replaced (Anderson and Chadbourne 2015a [this issue]). Six species of birds—Bombycilla cedrorum Vieillot (Cedar Waxwing), Turdus migratorius L. (American Robin), Vesper Sparrow, Tyrannus tyrannus (L.) (Eastern Kingbird), Spizella passerina (Bechstein) (Chipping Sparrow), and Common Yellowthroat—nest within the protective hawthorn trees (Anderson and Chadbourne 2015b [this issue]). After assessing the value of savannah bird communities, land managers may choose to maintain these habitats by arresting further succession. Some of the Valley’s rare plant species are dwindling because of several contemporary stressors. Balsam Fir, a relic of the southward dispersal during the Pleistocene, was abundant in the prehistoric forest and then it was subjected to turn-of-the-century logging and fires (Cherefko et al. 2015 [this issue]). More recently, the combined impact of Adelges piceae (Ratzeburg) (Balsam Woolly Adelgid), an introduced sap-sucking true bug, and excessive wintertime browsing by White-tailed Deer have further reduced Balsam Fir populations. Of these two herbivores, the insect is considered to be the more serious stressor. Threats to other native plants include Beaver-induced hydrologic changes, the legacy of logging impacts, and ongoing anthropogenic land-use changes. Invasive plant species, of both exotic and native types, are also impacting the Valley’s ecosystems (Grafton and Fortney 2015 [this issue]). As of 2002, 109 species of exotic plants had been documented in the Valley. Most of these non-native species colonize disturbed ground. The Valley’s northern 8 mi (13 km), designated as a National Natural Landmark in 1974, hold large wetlands that support plant species with northern affiliations. Although the area offers an exceptionally high diversity of habitats and great natural beauty, the ecosystem is being threatened by several invasive species, including Rosa multiflora Thunb. (Multiflora Rose), Iris pseudacorus L. (Yellow Iris), Phalaris arundinacea L. (Reed Canary Grass), Lonicera morrowii A. Gray (Morrow’s Honeysuckle), Lythrum salicaria L. (Purple Loosestrife), and Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Stud. (Common Reed). Rare plants must compete with the invasive native Typha latifolia L. (Common Cattail) and non-native Centaurea stoebe L. (Spotted Knapweed). Two other stressors, acid deposition and the activities of Beaver, have impacted the Valley’s aquatic organisms. In 2002, nearly 34 mi (56 km), or 46%, of the Valley’s streams carried a pH that was too low to support the survival and Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 478 reproduction of Brook Trout, a relatively acid-tolerant fish (Snyder et al. 2006). In Canaan Valley State Park, the North American Beaver, a keystone species, had converted 2.8 mi (4.7 km), or 17%, of stream length to pond habitat, a change with both negative and positive aspects (Snyder et al. 2006). On the negative side, pond establishment reduces the amount of habitat for stream organisms, depresses dissolved oxygen levels in streams, and alters or eliminates lowland wetlands. And, of course, Beavers kill riparian trees. On the positive side, additional ponds create greater habitat heterogeneity, which supports higher biodiversity. Beaver ponds may also raise the acid neutralizing capacity of streams affected by acid deposition (Snyder et al. 2006). As we said earlier, the Blackwater River supported an excellent Brook Trout fishery prior to the advent of industrial logging and mining. More recently this resource has been degraded by land development and off-road vehicles. Even so, between 1980 and 1993 the water quality of most of the Blackwater River and its tributaries showed upward, desirable trends in pH and alkalinity (Smith et al. 2015 [this issue]). An exception was Beaver Creek, which had not recovered because of legacy impacts from coal mining. As part of the Valley’s overall recovery, game species populations have also increased (Michael et al. 2015 [this issue]). Under scientific management, the annual harvests of game animals, including Meleagris gallopavo L. (Wild Turkey), North American Beaver, White-tailed Deer, Lynx rufus (Schreber) (Bobcat), Ursus americanus (Pallas, 1780) (American Black Bear), and Martes pennanti (Erxleben) (Fisher), increased steadily from 1927 to 2002. Game species such as Canada Goose and Snowshoe Hare, as well as important habitat species such as Speckled Alder, have also been actively managed in the Valley. Further, trails and potholes have been manipulated to improve access and habitat, respectively. As of 2002, the Valley’s human community was not being served by a central wastewater treatment system. Rather, some package sewage plants were not in compliance and were discharging pollutants into the Blackwater River and some of its tributaries. In some stream reaches, excess sewage caused high fecal coliform bacteria counts and low dissolved oxygen concentrations (Smith et al. 2015 [this issue]). A public sewage district was recently established in the Valley. What does the future hold for the Blackwater River’s fishery? As the number of people in the Valley and their associated environmental disturbances increase, there will be greater competition for the Valley’s surface water, and summer flows may decrease and degrade water quality. These changes, in turn, would depress the fishery that has just made a recovery. Diligent monitoring of the delicate relationship among land-use changes, water quantity and quality, and fish populations should be undertaken and appropriate management actions be carried out as needed. In contrast to the Valley’s central and northern sections, which remain remote and forested, the southern and most-visited area supports an economy that is transitioning from resource extraction to year-round recreation. In the winter of 1949–1950, skiers from Washington, DC drove through the area looking for Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 479 snow (Lutz 2015 [this issue]). The next winter they installed a rope-tow in the Valley. Many consider the Valley’s two ski areas—the Canaan Valley Resort and Conference Center, and Timberline—to offer the best skiing in the East south of New England. In the winter of 2001–2002, about 200,000 skiers visited the Valley, providing a significant benefit to the local economy. Tucker County continues to move from an emphasis on resource extraction to an economy based on government and services (Selin and Zepeda 2015 [this issue]). About 60% of the county’s land area is owned by federal and state governments. With the Valley’s mix of services, infrastructure, and public lands, outdoor recreation tourism will surely play a growing role in the local economy. The population of Tucker County peaked at 19,000 in 1910; for several decades since 1950 it fluctuated around 8000. Between 1990 and 2000, the County’s population dropped from 7710 to 7299, a decrease of 5.6% for the decade. Countering this backdrop of human exodus, the increased tourisn due to the Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge is anticipated to boost the local economy via direct effects, like the Refuge’s jobs and purchases, and by indirect effects such as its visitors’ expenditures. Because 60% of the nation’s population lives within a day’s drive of the Valley, the Refuge's economic impact on the local economy will likely grow. Potential annual economic benefits for the County from the Refuge’s operations and maintenance, plus local visitation, have been estimated at 134–268 jobs and $3.4–6.6 million (Selin and Zepeda 2015 [this issue]). These revenues would grow the local economy by 6% (range = 4–9%). By including revenue sharing and tax payments, the Refuge would become a national, not just a local, economic asset, with a projected annual value of $155 million. However, it is hard to predict when these economic benefits might be real ized. Recommendations The findings in this Special Issue lead us to offer two kinds of recommendations. Some point to further research needs and others to management options. Research This Special Issue summarizes a significant body of scientific information that has been assembled about the Valley. We have gained knowledge of the geology, soils, and waters; species inventories of vascular plants and vertebrate animals have been completed; and the distribution of plant communities has been described. However, we believe that significant knowledge gaps persist. The following questions offer research opportunities: • What is the hydrology of the northern part of the Valley? • How do the various kinds of wetlands control the chemical qualities of downstream reaches? • What is the ongoing water quality of the Blackwater River? • How do the various parts of the Valley’s entire stream network interact ecologically? Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 480 • How do Beaver activities affect the water quality, specifically the water temperature and dissolved oxygen concentration, of the Blackwater River? • What are the distributions and abundances of the Valley’s non-vascular plants and fungi? • How can we restore Balsam Fir? For example, what environmental factors limit the populations of Balsam Woolly Adelgid? • How can we protect the Valley’s rare plant communities? • What species of invertebrate animals, like mollusks, crustaceans, and insects, live in the Valley? And what is their status? • How can land be developed while preserving the ecological functions of the Valley? • Are the organisms in the Valley being affected by climate change? And this question, in turn, leads to three more specific questions: a. If the air is warming, will the ranges of sensitive species, like Dwarf Dogwood and Brook Trout, shift upwards in elevation? b. If growing seasons lengthen, will life cycle steps fall out of synchrony with vital environmental factors? Some temperature-dependent life stages may provide quick indicators of climate change, e.g., leaf-out and blooming times of Acer pensylvanicum L. (Striped Maple), or the timing of species-specific autumnal leaf-color changes. c. Will some species’ phenology become decoupled from their relevant environmental cues? If snow melts earlier, for instance, but the Snowshoe Hare continues to change its pelt color in response to photoperiod, will the Hare’s pelage create less effective camouflage? Other decouplings could involve mutually dependent species. If the eggs of forest moths hatch seven to 10 days earlier, will their caterpillars continue to be available as food for northward-migrating birds? The Valley offers ideal subjects for studying decoupled phenology, a key topic in the field of climate change. The Valley region offers an attractive place for such field research projects to address these questions because of the abundant baseline data presented in this special issue, the Valley’s plentiful federal and state public lands, and the campus of the Canaan Valley Institute. Management We also offer management recommendations for working towards the Valley’s long-term sustainability: 1. Use a peer-accepted method to maintain a digital, updatable map of plant community distributions. Defensible polygons of rare plant communities will minimize environmental conflicts. 2. Monitor the status of rare plant species. Periodic assessments will enable land managers to intervene with timely, appropriate protection actions. 3. Minimize surface disturbance. Exposed soil allows invasive plants to become established. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 481 4. Monitor the status of invasive plants and animals. An early-warning system helps to prevent their expansion. 5. Continue neutralizing acid in the upper Blackwater River watershed. Add lime at strategic sites to restore fish habitats. 6. Avoid logging within 300 ft (90 m) of amphibian habitats. This includes wetlands, streams, pools, and Red Spruce forests. 7. Actively manage habitats for American Woodcock. Intervene to stop the natural succession of plant communities. 8. Evaluate the ecological values of grasslands and hawthorn-savannahs. If deemed important, manipulate succession accordingly. 9. Limit the density of White-tailed Deer in areas with rare plants. An obvious example is excluding deer from sites replanted with Balsam Fir. Raising bag limits, chemically sterilizing does, and augmenting predation are worth considering as strategies to control the deer population and to protect plant populations. 10. Implement ecosystem-scale management. It will be easier to devise management actions that are compatible with non-target but vital species, communities, and ecosystem functions if the Valley is treated as an integrated ecosystem. Enhanced cooperation across jurisdictional boundaries will be important for Valley-wide management to succeed. 11. Support an organization focused on the Valley’s long-term sustainability. The group should be inclusive, consensus-based, and locally led. 12. Consider repeating the CCC model. It could once again provide the labor for projects aimed at the Valley’s sustainability goals. 13. Exploit the body of scientific knowledge accumulated at the Fernow Experimental Forest. Their findings enhance the options available to the Valley’s stakeholders. 14. Develop a geographic information system focused on the Valley’s sensitive natural resources in order to inform land-use decisions. Use the ecological data in this Special Issue to begin to identify such places. 15. Use this information to develop a plan for the future of the Valley. We develop this, our highest priority recommendation, in moderate detail below. An important lesson from the profession of land-use planning is that ecological data must be understood by those who will be affected by the land-use decisions. Because a longstanding tradition in the US extends authority for landuse choices to local levels of government, ecological information needs to be incorporated in bottom-up planning. Unfortunately, local land-use planning has rarely included the best available scientific information, partly because access to the technical data is limited. The body of scientific information in this Special Issue can serve as a valuable resource for creating a plan for a sustainable place. Such a plan should be guided by a citizens’ advisory committee (item # 11 above)—a group of local stakeholders who want the Valley to offer a certain quality of life. Collaboration is needed among the various stakeholder groups—including the relevant elected Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 482 officials, federal, state, and local government agencies, corporations, businesses, land owners, and developers—to build a sustainable environment and a sustainable economy in the Valley. Through an inclusive, consensus-based process, citizens would express their values and the goals for the Valley. The ecological data would inform the stakeholders' choices as they devise a vision, develop strategies, and propose on-the-ground projects. This Special Issue is important because it collects many of the research findings in one place, and it would serve as a significant reference for land-use planning. This is not a new idea; similar land-use planning processes have been used successfully in other places. For example, the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan is being implemented by Pima County, AZ (Pima County 2012). For several decades Pima County, which includes the Tucson metropolitan area, was experiencing swift population growth. Development was consuming 10 mi2 (26 km2) of biologically rich desert per year. From the start of the planning process, the County’s Board of Supervisors recognized that the success of any resulting plan would need the support of the residents. Public participation included a citizens’ steering committee, technical advisory teams, educational workshops, public meetings, and comment periods. By dedicating time and ideas, numerous individuals, nonprofit organizations, and government agencies listened to each other and inserted their diverse views into the process. The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan was developed by incorporating science-based principles into the public discussion, an approach that departed from prioritizing political considerations in land-use decision-making. More than 150 scientists, including the senior author of this paper, contributed technical information. The availability of high-quality data led to ecologically sound land-use decisions. Because it integrates natural resource protection and land-use planning, the Plan is not about whether Pima County will continue to grow, rather it is about where the county grows. The second example, which may seem more analogous to the the Valley’s situation, is the South Burlington, VT Comprehensive Plan (SBURL 2011). Located in northwestern Vermont, the city of South Burlington, especially its Southeast Quadrant (SEQ), was being stressed by intense urban and residential development. People felt a need to direct growth to appropriate places and away from natural and archaeological resources, to protect open space as well as streams and wetlands, to provide for outdoor recreation, and to promote agriculture. Their 35-year-long planning process included special studies, committee work, and public meetings, with discussion and debate. Extensive public input was received from citizens, city officials (including the water, transit, and waste authorities), regional organizations, and local schools, businesses, and utility companies. Significantly, the planners worked hard to maximize compatibility with the land uses of adjoining jurisdictions. To protect the SEQ’s areas of ecological significance, create a cohesive system of open space and trails, maintain farms, and guard pleasing vistas, the city developed the Southeast Quadrant Zoning Map. The map shows four zones: Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 483 natural resources protection, neighborhood residential, village commercial, and village residential. When we asked Juli Beth Hinds, Senior Project Manager in the city’s Planning Department, to evaluate the plan’s success, she answered, "The SEQ zoning map has been strictly adhered to....". We offer these two case studies to show that land-use plans that incorporate ecological data have been implemented successfully in other places. Similarly, we hope that assembling this Special Issue will help to bring scientific understanding into a planning process that will ultimately result in a sustainable Canaan Valley. Literature Cited Adams, M.B., and J.N. Kochenderfer. 2015. The Fernow Experimental Forest and the Canaan Valley: A history of research. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):433–440. Anderson, J.T., and K.A. Chadbourne. 2015. Nesting birds in hawthorn-savannah habitats in Canaan Valley, Tucker County, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):357–364. Bartgis, R.L., E.A. Byers, R.H. Fortney, W. Grafton, and M.A. Berdine. 2015. Rare plants of Canaan Valley, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7): 158–186. Broioks, R.P. 1989. An overview of ecological functions and economic values of welands. Pp. 11–20, In S.K. Majumdfar, R.P. Brooks, F.J. Brenner, and R.W. Tiner (Eds.). Wetlands Ecology and Conservation: Emphasis on Pennsylavania. Pennsylvania Adademy of Sciences, Philadelphia, PA> Carvell, K.L. 2013. An environmental history of Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):428–432. Chadbourne, K.A., and J.T. Anderson. 2015a. Vegetation of managed grasslands in the Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):187–202. Chadbourne, K.A., and J.T. Anderson. 2015b. Temporal variation in songbird abundance on grasslands in Canaan Valley, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):344–356. Chambers, D.B., J.B. Wiley, and M.D. Kozar. 2015. Overview of hydrologic and geologic investigations conducted in Canaan Valley, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):87–102. Cherefko, C., C. Fridley, J. Medsger, M. Woody, and J.T. Anderson. 2015. White-tailed Deer and Balsam Woolly Adelgid Effects on Balsam Fir in Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):218–231. Cincotta, D.A., S.A. Welsh, D.P. Wegman, T.E. Oldham, and L.B. Hedrick. 2015. Fishes of the Blackwater River drainage, Tucker County, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):297–312. Clayton, J.L., S.A. Miller, and R. Menendez. 2013. In-situ bioassay response of freshwater mussels to acid mine drainage pollution and its mitigation. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):261–275. Constantz, G.D. 2013. Prehistory of Canaan Valley: An ecological view. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):405–427. Faust, A., and R.L. Peterson. 2013. Longevity of interrupted fern colonies. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):203–209. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 484 Fortney, R.H., S.L. Stephenson, and J.S. Rentch. 2015. Rare plant communities in Canaan Valley, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):121–135. Grafton, W.N., and R.H. Fortney. 2015. Exotic and invasive plants in Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):210–217. Jones, E.B.D., III. G.S. Helfman, J.O. Harper, and P.V. Bolstad. 1999. Effects of riparian forest removal on fish assemblages in southern Appalachian streams. Conservation Biology 13:1454–1465. Lanham, J. Sencindiver, and J. Skousen. 2015. Characterization of Soil Developing in Reclaimed Upper Freeport Coal Surface Mines. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):58–64. Lesser, W.A., and J.I. Cromer. 2015. A history of wildlife management in Canaan Valley and environs. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):372–381. Lutz, J. 2015. Skiing from top to bottom: The history of skiing in Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):447–454. Matchen, D.L. 2015. The geology of Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):7–17. McDonald, B. 2015. Rare plant and animal species of Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):232–251. Michael, E. 1993. Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge Vertebrate List, US Fish and Wildlife Service. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/canaanvalley/CVNWRvertebrates. html. Accessed 3 September 2013. Michael E.D., and S.L. Brown. 2015. Waterfowl surveys in Canaan Valley: 1979–1993. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):365–371. Michael, E.D., S.L. Brown, and W.S. Brown. 2015. Historic game harvests in Canaan Valley and Tucker County, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):382–404. Northeimer, J. 2015. A general overview of the birds of Canaan Valley and Tucker County. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):323–330. Pauley, T.K. 2015. Amphibians in the Canaan Valley drainage. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):314–322. Pileou, E.C. 1991. After the Ice Age: The Return of Life to Glaciated North America. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. 366 pp. Pima County. 2012. Multi-species Conservation Plan for Pima County, Arizona: Public Draft. Submitted to the Arizona Ecological Services office of the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Tucson, AZ. Available online at https://webcms.pima.gov/cms/one.aspx?po rtalId=169&pageId=52674. Rentch, J.S., R.H. Fortney, J.T. Anderson, and W.N. Grafton. 2015. Plant communities of Abe’s Run wetland, Canaan Valley State Park, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):136–157. Selin, S.W., and N. Zepeda. 2015. Canaan Valley: Promised land or battleground for outdoor recreation and nature-based tourism. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):455–465. Sencindiver, J., K. Thomas, and J. Teets. 2015. Soils of Canaan Valley and adjacent mountains. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):33–39. Smith, J., S.A. Welsh, J.T. Anderson, and R.H. Fortney. 2015. Water quality trends in the Blackwater River watershed, West Virginia. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7): 103–111. Southeastern Naturalist G. Constantz and R. Preston 2015 Vol. 14, Special Issue 7 485 Snyder, C.P., J. Young, and B.M. Stout III. 2006. Aquatic habitats of Canaan Valley, West Virginia: Diversity and environmental threats. Northeastern Naturalist 13:334–353. South Burlington, VT (SBURL). 2011. City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Adopted by the City Council of South Burlington, Vermont, on 9 Mar 2011. Available online at http://www.sburl.com/vertical/Sites/%7BD1A8A14E-F9A2- 40BE-A701-417111F9426B%7D/uploads/%7BB8D4F8EE-6C94-4FF5-8C82- 13B2975E2AC2%7D.PDF. Steketee, A.K., I. Gregg, and P.B. Wood. 2015. American Woodcock habitat changes in Canaan Valley and environs. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):331–343. Stephens, K., J. Sencindiver, and J. Skousen. 2015. Characteristics of wetland soils impacted by acid mine drainage. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue):40–57. Sypolt, L. 2015. The Civilian Conservation Corps in Tucker County, West Virginia. 1933–1942. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):441–446. Trout Unlimited (TU). No date. Eastern Brook Trout: Status and threats. Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture, c/o Trout Unlimited, Atlington, VA. 36 pp. Viadero, R.C., and R.H. Fortney. 2015. Water-quality assessment and environmental impact minimization for highway construction in a mining-impacted watershed: The Beaver Creek Drainage. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):112–120. Vogel, C.A., and R.J. Leffler. 2015. Climate of Canaan Valley. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):18–32. Wallace, J.B., and S.L. Eggert. 2015. Terrestrial and longitudinal linkages of headwater streams. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue):65–86. Zurbuch, P.E. 2015. Historic fishery of the Blackwater River. Southeastern Naturalist 14(Special Issue 7):276–296.