ORDES
PENNSYLVANIA BASELINE
Part 2 - Impact Assessment Data Base
Chapter 1 - Characteristics and Human Utilization
Of Natural Ecosystems
Section k - Terrestrial Ecology
PHASE II
OHIO RIVER DASIK ENERGY STUDY
-------
June, 1979
PENNSYLVANIA BASELINE
Part 2 - Impact Assessment Data Base
Chapter 1 - Characteristics and Human Utilization
Of Natural Ecosystems
Section k - Terrestrial Ecology
By
George P. Kay
Jan L. Sykora
Maurice A. Snap!ro
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261
Prepared for
Ohio River Basin Energy Study (ORBES)
Grant Number R805608-01-3
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMEN'
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEN'
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.1.4. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
2.1.4.1 VASCULAR FLORA 1
A. Prehistoric Forest Composition 1
B. Pre-settlement Forest Composition -1
C. Past Impacts 2
D. Current Degree of Forestation -10
E. Modern Forest Composition 10
F. Herbaceous Flora of the Forest-- 16
G. The Field Community 16
H. Endangered Plant Species 16
I. Beneficial .Aspects of Natural Vegetation 23
2.1.4.2 VERTEBRATE FAUNA - 32
A. Amphibians and Reptiles 32
B. Avifauna 37
C. Mammals --47
2.1.4.3 SPECIFIC HABITATS --55
REFERENCES 59
APPENDIX-WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY NATURAL A-l
AREAS IN THE PA ORBES REGION
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page
2.1.4.-1 Potential Natural Vegetation of 3
Western Pennsylvania
2.1.4.-2 Pennsylvania Lumber Production 7
and National Rank
2.1.4.-3 Historical Overview of Forestation 12
in the Pennsylvania ORBES Region
2.1.4.-4 Percent of County Land in the Forested 14
Condition PA ORBES Region - 1974
2.1.4.-5. Major Forest Types of the Pennsylvania 20
ORBES Region
2.1.4.-6 County Level Herpetological Records 36
for Rare Snakes in the Pennsylvania
ORBES Region
2.1.4.-7 Provisional Life-Zone Avifauna! Map 39
of the PA ORBES Region
2.1.4.-8 State Game Lands of the Pennsylvania 56
ORBES Region
2.1.4.-9 State and National Forests/Parks of 57
the Pennsylvania ORBES Region
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. TU1e Page
2.1.4.-1 Potential Natural Vegetation of 4-5
Pennsylvania Study Region (Kuchler
Types)
2.1.4.-2 List of Commercial Tree Species 8-9
Found on Forest Survey Sample Plots
in the State of Pennsylvania
2.1.4.-3 1964 Harvest Rankings for ORBES 11
Counties Among the Top Ten in the
State
2.1.4.-4 Historical Trends in County-Specific 13
Forestation
2.1.5.-5 Ownership of Commercial Forest 17
Lands in.ORBES - Pennsylvania
2.1.4.-6 Definitions of Forest Cover Types 18
Appearing in Table 2,1.4.-7
2.1.4.-7 ORBES - Pennsylvania Commercial 19
Forest Composition by Tree
Association
2.1.4.-8 Endangered and Threatened Plant 21-22
Species in the'State of Pennsylvania
2.1.4.-9 Rare Plants of the Pennsylvania 24-25
ORBES Region
2.1.4.-10 Rare Plants of Counties Near the 26-28
Pennsylvania ORBES Region
2.1.4.-11 Representative Erosion Rates for 30
Various Land Uses
2.1.4.-12 1974 Land Use and Calculated Erosion 31
Rates in Western Pennsylvania
2.1.4.-13 Pennsylvania Fish Commission List 34
of Endangered, Threatened, or Status
Indeterminate Amphibians and Rep-
tiles
2.1.4.-14 Key to Legend of Provisional Life- 40
Zone Avifauna Map
i 11
-------
Table No. Title Page
2.1.4.-15 Ring-Necked Pheasant Population 43
Data for Pennsylvania ORBES
Counti es
2.1.4.-16 Ruffed Grouse Population Data 44
for Pennsylvania ORBES Counties
2.1.4.-17 Wild Turkey Population Data for 45
Some Pennsylvania ORBES Counties
2.1.4.-18 Gray Squirrel Population Data 49
for Pennsylvania ORBES Counties
2.1.4.-19 Cottontail Rabbit Population 50
Data for Pennsylvania ORBES
Counties
2.1.4.-20 White-Tailed Deer Population 51
Data for Pennsylvania ORBES
Counties
2.1.4.-21 Average Annual Reported White- 53
Ta.iled Deer Mortalities Due to
Traffic Mishaps in the Pennsylvania
ORBES Region
2.1.4.-22 State and National Park Land of 59
the Pennsylvania ORBES Region
IV
-------
2.1.4. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
2.1.4.1. VASCULAR FLORA
A. Prehistoric Forest Composition
Subsequent to the final retreat of the ice from the Wisconsin
Glaciation, Pennsylvania was subjected to a series of definite
climatic fluctuations (1,2). Indeed, pollen studies (3,4,5)
have indicated that five different postglacial, climatic periods
occurred in this region. Generalized temperature and humidity
regimes have been inferred (3,6) from the dominant forest assoc-
iations as follows:
I. Following the retreat of ice, a spruce-fir forest
(moist and cool climate)
II. A pine forest with substantial quantities of oak
(dry, probably warmer climate)
III. An oak-beech-hemlock forest (moist and warm climate)
IV. An oak-hickory forest (dry and distinctly warm
climate)
V. The present - oaks, beech, and hemlock prominent
(more available moisture and probably cooler)
Approximately, four thousand years ago, during the warm and
dry postglacial period IV, a "prairie peninsula" extended from
the Mississippi River eastward through the state of Ohio (7).
Certain species of prairie plants indigenous to the western U.S.
are believed to have utilized this peninsula as a migratory route
to the east (6, 7, 8). Even today, relict populations of the
blazing star (Liatri s spicata) , a prairie flower, exist in north-
western Butler County at the Jennings Blazing Star Nature Reserve
(8, 9) and a few miles to the east along what were the shores of
glacial Lake Arthur (10). Other prairie plants which still in-
habit western Pennsylvania include: gray-headed coneflower
(Ratibidia pinnata), green milkweed (Asclepiasviridiflora) ,
false boneset (Kunnia eupatoriodes), and big bluestem grass
(Andropogon furcatus)(9, 10).
Although the prairie community is a negligible floristic
group in our region today, the same xerothermic climatic period
that favored its development also favored a northeastern migration
of the white oak-hickory forest association into Pennsylvania (11)
This forest is still the dominant association on the hilltops and
uplands in the southwestern portion of the state.
B. Pre-settTement Forest Composition
The "potential natural vegetation" of western Pennsylvania
1
-------
has been mapped (Fig. 2.1.4.-1) along with the rest of the
coterminous United States (12). This- format presents a repre-
sentation of the'plant life"...that w;ould exist today if man
were removed from the scane and if the resulting plant succession
were telescoped into a single moment.-" Emphasis has been placed
on this denotation of "potential natural vegetation" because the
exact influence of the American Indian upon forest composition
and species distribution, although often assumed to be minimal,
is unknown. It is known that the Indians often set fire to the
woods to increase berry production, facilitate travel, and increase
visibility (perhaps as an aid in hunting). Furthermore, many
Indian tribes were nomadic, so that the total land area affected
was considerably larger than would be expected (13). It has
been speculated that the presence of oak forest along the Allegheny
River and its tributaries is the result of fires set by Indians
(14). Nonetheless, it has been estimated that more than 97% of
the total state acreage was forested before the coming of the
white man (15). The major non-forested areas are believed to
have been a few natural meadows and extremely rugged mountain
tops.
In spite of the scarcity of information regarding pre-
settlement vegetation, it is known that many of the trees common
today were also prevalent at the time of European colonization.
Hough and Forbes (16) recognized three basic types of stands in
the pre-settlement Allegheny High Plateau* region: white pine,
hemlock-beech, and beech-maple. Early Pennsylvania pioneers
were known to have utilized several types of trees including:
maple (Acer) for sugar and timber; white oak (Quercus aljja) for
the construction of cabins; other oak species for firewood and
fencing; chestnut (Castanea dentata) for fencin-g; walnut (Jug! ans)
for gun stocks; and hickory(Carya), though not abundant, for
fashioning farm tools and wagon axles (17). The presence and
relative abundance of these trees in Pennsylvania at the time of
European colonization suggests that Kuchler's map of potential
vegetation is a reasonable approximation of pre-settlement species
with the notable exception of chestnut. The association that
Kuchler designates as Appalachian Oak Forest (Fig. 2.1.4.-1;
Table 2.1.4.-1) was actually an oak-chestnut (Quercus - Castanea)
forest prior to the chestnut blight of the early twentieth century
(6). In fact, chestnut may have been the most common tree in pre-
settlement Pennsylvania (18).
C. Past Impacts
ern
The Pennsylvania lumber industry had its origins in the east-
portion of the state prior to the 1682 arrival of William Penn.
*Venango, Forest, Elk, Upper Jefferson, Clearfield, and Clarion
Counties are the Pennsylvania ORBES counties contained within this
physiographic section.
-------
FIGURE 2,1,4,-1
POTENTIAL NATURAL VEGETATION OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
mwwyw-'
^-^bi^^-'xV:
,---/ N', 'NJ/ /A ^X""' '
V / - / X O^ ]/ -/ I ' / \ -*/ '
'. > / t^'s^ ;U /' / %x . s-
- Kill
LEGEND: FOR DESCRIPTION OF K-TYPES SEE TABLE 2.1.4.-1
Mi:
40 MILES TO THE INCH
ADAPTED FROM KUCHLER (12),
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-1
POTENTIAL NATURAL VEGETATION
OF THE ORBES-PENNSYLVANIA
STUDY REGION
(KUCHLER TYPES)
K102. Beech - Maple Forest (Fagus - Acer)
Physiognomy: Sugar maple (Acer saccharum); Beech (Fagus
grandifolia).
Associated Species: Ohio buckeye (Aesculus glabra);
Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata);
White ash (Fraxinus amerlcana);
Black walnut(Juglans nigra);
Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera).
K103. Mixed Mesophytic Forest (Acer - Aesculus - Fagus Liriodendron
Quercus - Tilia)
Physiognomy: Tall, broadleaf deciduous forest..
Dominants: Sugar maple (Acer saccharum); Beech (Fagus
grandifolia); Basswood (Tilia heterophylla);
Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera); Sweet
buckeye (Aesculus octandra);Northern red oak
(Quercus rubra) ;~~White oak- (;Q. alba) .
Associated Species: Service-berry (Amelanchier arborea); Black
birch (Betula lenta);American hornbeam
(Carpinus caroliniana); Bitternut (Carya
cordiformis); Pignut (C_. glabra); Shagbark
hickory (C_. ovata); Redbud(Cercis
canadensis'); Flowering dogwood (Cornus
florida); White ash (Fraxinus americana);
Black walnut (Juglans nigra)T Cucumber
tree (Magnolia acuminata)-; Umbrella tree
(Magnolia tripetala); Slack gum (Nyssa
sylvatica); American Hop Hornbeam (Ostrya
virginiana); Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum);
American basswood (Tilia americanaT;Hemlock
(Tsuga canadensis).
K104. Appalachian Oak Forest (Quercus)
Physiognomy: Tall broadleaf deciduous forest..
-------
TABLE 2.1.H.-1
Continued
Dominants: White Oak (Quercus alba);
(Quercus rubra),.
Northern Red Oak
Associated Species:
Red maple (Acer
(A. saccharum);
rubrum); Sugar maple
Black birch (Betula
Bitternut (Carya cordiformis)
lenta) ;
Pignut (C_. glabra) ;
tormentosa) ; Chestnut
dentatal formerly
Mockernut (C_
(Castanea
a co-dominant but
now insignificant; Beech (Fagus grand-
ifolia) ; Tulip tree (Liriodendron
White Pine (Pinus strobus)
(Quercus coccinea) ;
tulipifera),
Scarlet oak
oak (0. velutina);
canadensis).
and Hemlock
Black
(Tsuga
K106. Northern Hardwoods (Acer - Betula - Fagus -
Physiognomy:
Dominants
Tall, broadleaf deciduous forest with an
admixture of needleleaf evergreen trees.
Sugar maple (Acer saccharum);Yellow birch
(Betula allegheniensis); Beech (Fagus grand-
ifolia); Hemlock (Tsug'a canadensis
Associated Species:
Striped maple (Acer pennsylvanicum);
Red maple (A. rubrum); Mountain maple
(A. spicatum); White ash (Fraxinus
americana); Mountain laurel (Kalmia
latifolia); White pine (Pinus strobus)
Wild black cherry (Prunus serotina);
Basswood (Tilia americana); American
elm (Ulmus americana).
Kill. Oak - Hickory - Pine (Quercus - Carya - Pinus)
Physiognomy:
Dominants:
Medium tall to tall forest of broadleaf
deciduous and needleleaf evergreen trees
Hickory (Carya sp.); Shortleaf Pine (Pinus
echinata); Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda); White
oak (Quercus alba); Post oak (Q. stellata).
Associated Species
Bitternut (Carya cordiformis); Pignut
(C_. glabra); Shagbark hickory (C. ovata!
Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida);
Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera);
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica); Virginia
pine (Pinus virginiana); Scarlet oak
(Quercus coccinea);BTack oak (Q.
velutina).
SOURCE: Kuchler (12)
-------
Sawmills did not become established in the Pennsylvania ORBES
region until 1776 (Allegheny County),. 1805 (Clarion County) and
1825 (Elk County). The industry enjoyed increasing total lumber
productivity after the Civil War. National demand for lumber
soared at this time due to intensive rebuilding efforts (19).
The strain on Pennsylvania's forest resources was augmented by
exportation to foreign markets that "...clamored for our forest
products, the finest trees and lumber to be purchased on the
world's market" (20).
This overzealous lumbering had deforested much of Pennsylvania
by the beginning of the twentieth century. Marquis (14) notes
that "between 1890 and 1920," the virgin and partially cut forests
were almost completely clear-cut in what must have been the highest
degree of forest utilization the world has ever seen in any commer-
cial lumbering area." In addition, the presence of good farming
.soils in western Pennsylvania and the proximity of the area to a
big market place (Pittsburgh) further prompted the clearing of
forested lands during the nineteenth century. -The industrializa-
tion and urbanization of Allegheny County also resulted in the de-
forestation of considerable tracts of land in the southwestern
corner of the Commonwealth. The surface mining of coal has been,
and continues to be, an activity which temporarily 'removes parcels
of land from the forested condition.
The sharp decline in total lumber production (Fig. 2.1.4.-2)
evident throughout the early 1900's was due to a decrease in soft-
wood production. Softwood constituted as much as three-fourths
of the total lumber production in the late 1800's, but had plum-
meted to less than one-fourth of the total by 1969 (24). Pine
and hemlock comprised the bulk of softwood used as lumber during
this period. Table 2.1.4.-2 delineates hard-.'-and softwood species
found on commercial forest lands in Pennsylvania.
Hardwood production has remained relatively constant over
the last century. Although Pennsylvania was nationally ranked
sixteenth in total lumber production for 1969 (see Fig. 2.1.4.-2),
it merited second place in hardwood production for the same year.
Consequently, the decline in national rank for total lumber pro-
duction was due to a combination of excessive softwood harvesting
and the expansion of the lumber industry in the Pacific Northwest.
Our forest lands are still well suited for timber production.
Approximately 98% of the state is theoretically capable of grow-
ing commercial timber (27). The net volume of total growing
stock on commercial forest land within the Pennsylvania ORBES
region in 1965 amounted to 5.15 billion cubic feet or 28.9% of
the state total. Modern forest management and controlled harvest-
ing has greatly improved the quantity and quality of Pennsylvania's
forested lands. Between the 1955 and 1965 forest surveys, the
statewide average for annual net growth of the growing stock
(615 million cubic feet) was three times the cut (204 million
cubic feet) (25). Six of the top ten lumber harvest counties
-------
FIGURE 2.1.4.-2
PENNSYLVflNIfl LUMBER PRODUCTION
flND NflTIONflL RflNK
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-.-2
LIST OP COMMERCIAL TREE SPECIES?FOUND ON FOREST SURVEY
SAMPLE PLOTS IN THE STATE OF .
PENNSYLVANIA
SOFTWOODS
Virginia pine
Other yellow pines:
Pitch pine
Table-Mountain pine
Eastern, white pine
Red pine
Eastern hemlock
Other softwoods:
Spruce
Tamarack
Eastern redcedar
Northern white-cedar
Pinus virginiana
Pinus rigida
Pinus pungens
Pinus strobus
Pinus resinosa
Tsuga canadensis
Picea sp.
Larix laricina
Juniperus virginiana
Thuja occidentalis
HARDWOODS
Select white oaks:
White oak
Swamp white oak
Bur oak
Select red oaks:
Northern red oak
Other white oaks:
Chestnut oak
Post oak
Other red oaks:
Black oak
Scarlet oak
Pin oak
Willow oak
Hickory
Yellow birch
Quercus alba
Quercus bicolor
Quercus macrocarpa
Quercus rubra
Quercus prinus
Quercus stellata
Quercus velutina
Quercus coccinea
Quercus palustris
Quercus phellos
Carya sp.
Betula allegheniensis
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-2 (Cont.)
Sugar maple
Soft maples:
Red maple
Silver maple
American beech
Blackgum
Sweetgum
Ash
Aspen
American basswood
Yellow-popular
Black walnut
Black cherry
American sycamore
Black locust
Other hardwoods:
Butternut
Cucumbertree
Elm
Flowering dogwood
Paper birch
Sweet birch
Willow
Yellow buckeye
Acer saccharum
Acer rubrum
Acer saccharinum
Fagus grandifolia
Nyssa sylvatica
Liquidambar styraciflua
Fraxinus sp.
Populus sp.
Tilia americana
Llriodendron tulipifera
Juglans nigra
Prunus .. serotina
Platanus occidentalis
Robinia oseudoacacia
Juglans cinerea
Magnolia acuminata
Ulmus sp.
Cornus florida
Betula papyrifera
Betula lenta
Salix sp.
Aesculus octandra
SOURCES: Ferguson (25); Little (26)
-------
(total lumber) were contained within the ORBES region in 1964
(see Table 2.1.4.-3}. - Somerset County is an exceptionally impor-
tant harvest site; it yields substantial quantities of a wide
variety of tree types. Several :;countaies with high human popula-
tion densities (Allegheny, Beaver, Lawrence, and Washington) have
low growing stocks and consequently are of minimal importance as
lumber producers. Conversely, Elk County has a very high growing
stock (608-.4 million cubic feet) and .yet it is harvested for only
small to modest quantities of timber.;
D. Current Degree of Forestation
At the present time, forested lands are defined as those
areas in which: (a) at least ten percent of the land is stocked
with trees of any size and are capable of producing timber or
other wood products, or of exerting an influence on the climate
or on the water regime; (b) land from which the trees described
in (a) have been removed to less than ten percent stocking and
that has not been developed for other use; and (c) afforested
areas. Forest tracts of less than one acre, isolated strips of
timber less than one hundred and twenty feet wide, and abandoned
fields and pastures not yet stocked to ten percent with trees are
not considered to be forested lands.
Surprisingly, the amount of forested land in the entirety of
the Pennsylvania ORBES region has been increasing during the last
century (see Fig. 2.1.4. -3)'. The highest rate of increase (sharp-
est slope) in Figure 2.1.4.-3 occurs during the 1950's and 60's.
This dramatic increase has been ascribed to a widespread abandon-
ment of cropland and treeless pasture land due to the migration of
much of the agriculture industry to the midwestern states (25).
Not only has the totality of the Pennsylvania ORBES region
undergone a reforestation, but each of the individual counties
within the region have also experienced increases in forested land
(see Table 2.1.4.-4). The current degree of county-specific
forestation is depicted in Figure 2.1.4.-4.
E. Modern. Forest Composition :
The four generalized forest associations depicted in Figure
2.1.4.-1 and Table 2.1.4.-1 roughly 'approximate the major forest
communities present in our region today. However, the characteri-
zation of the majority of the Pennsylvania ORBES region as either
Appalachian Oak Forest (12) or Mixed Mesophytic Forest (6) is an
oversimplification. Localized variations in abiotic factors
(climate, soils, etc.) have permitted considerable interdigita-
tion and mixing of forest types. Furthermore, the land-use var-
iations imposed by man have severely limited certain types and
have largely restricted endemic species to areas of rugged topo-
graphy. The available data from both old growth stands and mature
second growth stands indicates that dry, upland areas are oak-
10
-------
TABLE 2.1 .4.-3
1964 HARVEST RANKINGS FOR ORBES COUNTIES AMONG
THE TOP TEN COUNTIES IN THE STATE
ALLE
ARMS
BEAV
BUTL
CAMB
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
FA YE
FORE
GREE
HUM
JEFF
LA'/IR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
a
o
i/> o O
-C 10 0) t-
<< CO CO CO
-
-
-
- . . 4
3
-
r - -
-
3 - -
10
-
7 - -
-
-
.
44-9
.
.
_
1_ 0) 0)
O) r- i
_c a. o.
o >- m nj
Ji O *" "~
LJ uf "O *-*
ID U I. to S
-
.
' -
-
_
61-1-
7 - - 2
-
- 9 1 9
9
7
8 6 - -
4 .
-
_
8 2 2 - -
2 3
_
4
C JD
<^ 3
§tj ~*
0 ^
r- f-; 0
> X H-
.
.
-
-
9
7 4
6 1 8
-
5
-
-
9
10
-
.
2
-
-
-
(-) County was not ranked among top ten
SOURCE: Pa. Dept. of Commerce (21).
-------
PJGURE;2.1..-3
COo
Oca
U_
o
bJ
cn
uj.
CD
-------
TABLE 2.1.1.-1J
HISTORICAL THEN08 IN COUNTY-SPECIFIC FORESTATION
(ACRES X tiOOU)
COUNTY
NAME
ALLE
ARMS
1IEAV
HUTL
CAHB
CLAK
CLEA
ELK
FAYE
FORE
UREE
I NO I
JEFF
LAHH
MERC
SOME
VENA
HASH
HEST
TOT*L
TOTAL
LAND
ACRES
465, 9
417, J
2fll.6
500.2
442.9
3*2.1
729.0
516.5
513. J
268.2
369.9
528,0
417.5
234.9
420.6
689,9
413.9
540.5
655.4
8831.6
ESTIMATED FOREST ACREAGE
YEAR
1922 1934 1947 1951 1958 J968 1974
109.2 74.6 135.0 147.5 171.4 191.2 206.3
»?7.9 127.9 198.1 J70.7 211.7 23J.6 234.7
77.4 77.4 104.4 100.4 116.7 16J.I 179.3
105.6 150.8 156.4 t«»2.0 20?. 8 204.9 292.5
257.0 249.3 270.7 259.0 315.5 308.4 319.7
153.0 159.3 193.2 189.6 204.9 290.0 291.6
500.0 535.8 527,5 541,5 601.4 611.5 644.8
417.0 443.5 458.4 456.3 447.9 480.6 491.1
315.0 230.0 297.0 264.5 326.4 351.2 355. 0
£13.6 236.2 245.5 247.8 242.5 250.6 2S0.3
89.4 .47.9 9Q.7 115.5 137.8 157.0 150.1
176.0 212.4 249.4 221.7 251.7 316.9 316.7
221.0 233.6 232,1 203.4 262.9 314.1 317.4
49.0 43.0 40,2 SO. 3 55.2 101.9 102.2
106.7 90.4 97.0 86.6 91.7 166.4 168.1
400.0 354.3 372, 0 379.0 431.8 467.0 466.8
176.0 251.3 239.3 278.8 29fe.O 371.4 372.3
76.9 98.2 129.5 122.0 132.1 213. 0 215.0
215. 5 242.1 302.7 239.1 J17.1 354.7 362.7
3026.2 3874.0 4339.9 4346.5 4825.5 5660.3 5734.6
ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE FORESTED
YEAR
|922 |934 1947 195| |958 (960 (97«
23.4 16.0 2"».0 31.7 36.0 41,0 44,3
30.6 30.6 47.5 40.9 50.7 56.0 56,3
27.5 27.5 37.1 35.7 41.4 57. 9 63,7
20.0 29.7 30.0 37.0 39,9 56.1 57.6
50.0 56,3 61.1 50, 5 7|,2 69.6 72.2
40.0 41,7 50.6 49.6 51,6 76.1 76,3
68,6 73.5 72.4 74.3 02.8 08.3 00.4
00.7 05.9 00.0 08.3 06.7 93.1 95. 2
65.3 46.4 S7.9 51.5 63.6 60.4 69,2
07.1 80.1 91.5 92.4 90.4 93.4 91.3
24,2 12. <» 24.5 31.2 37.2 42.4 42.7
33,5 40.2 47.2 42.0 48.0 6Q.O 60.0
53.0 56.0 55.6 67.9 63.0 7S.3 76.1
20.9 10.3 17.1 21.4 23.5 43.4 43.5
24.9 22.9 22.6 20.2 21.0 3e.O 39.2
58.0 51.4 54.0 54.9 62.9 67.7 67.7
40.6 57.9 55.2 64.3 60.2 05.6 05.8
14,0 17.9 23.6 22. <| 24.1 3fl.8 39.2
32.9 36.9 46.2 36.5 40.4 54.1 55.3
43.5 43. » 49.1 49.2 54.6 64.1 64,9
SOURCES: Adapted from data in Illick (28); Pa. Dept. of Forests and Waters (29); U.S. Forest Service
(30); Soil Conservation Service (31).
-------
FIGURE 2.1.4. - 4
PERCENT OF COUNTY IAND
IN THE FORESTED CONDITION
PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION - 1974
Source: Adapted from data in Table 2.1.4- - 4
-------
Pin n f\ V _ _
beech
...... ._.,*hi ^ WP pf n iim
(33, 34).
dominated, whereas .moist slopes and gentle river valleys are mixed
mesophytic or occasionally beech-maple. The hemlock-hardwood
association can still be found on steep ravines and plateau summits
(32).
The Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers course through a
belt of low hills. The flood plain and riparian vegetation cradled
by these hills includes: silver maple, willow, sycamore, American
elm, sweet gum, cottonwood, and river birch. Patches of alder
and bands of red maple are also important constituents. Secondary
growth stands are comprised of beech, white oak, black oak, and
hickory. The old valley flatland areas are forested with pin oak,
sweet gum, and red maple. The dry sections of this flatland con-
tain considerable numbers of tulip tree, white oak, and beech.
The developmental sequence for the remnants of the primary commun-
ities appears to be as follows:
red maple
sweet
The upland areas along the Ohio River are typically dominated
by oak-hickory associations. The same situation is true of such
areas along the middle and lower reaches of the Allegheny and
Monongahela Rivers.
The land surrounding the headwaters of the Allegheny River is
dominated by northern hardwood species. Similarly, the drainage
basins of the major tributaries are vegetated with typical species
of the Northern Hardwood Forest Association (K106). Yellow birch
and sugar maple are common. Tulip trees are frequently encountered
on the southern range of the Allegheny Plateau and Mountains.
Secondary oak stands are common around the periphery of the plateau.
Although the northern forest of this region has been modified by
lumbering activities and the intrusion of more southern tree species,
the original forest in Cook Forest State Park has been preserved.
This large, virgin forest borders the Clarion River and contains
approximately equal numbers of white pine and hemlock. This primeval
forest association has been designated as a national natural land-
mark by the National Park Service.
Lumbering and other human activities have eliminated much of
the Mixed Mesophytic Forest Association (K103) from our area.
Tracts of land in the vicinity of the Upper Monongahela River, in
addition to the eastern slope and valleys of the Allegheny Front,
support remnant examples of this association. Ohiopyle State
Park along the Upper Youghiogheny River contains an especially
representative example of the mixed mesophytic type. A hemlock-
white pine-northern hardwoods association also exists in the Ohio-
pyle region; it intergrades and interfingers with the more southern
mesophytic forest. This mixing and interdigitation of forest
types is more characteristic of our middle and southern latitudes,
where the north-south trends in mountain ridges and valleys induce
-------
relative uniformity in climate and. soil types. Individual plant
species and entire forest associations thereby have access to a
continuous migratory route; (.6 > >9). 3
Commercial forest lands consist of those areas which: (a) are
producing, or are potentially capable of producing, usable crops
of wood; (b) are economically available now or prospectively; and
(c) are not withdrawn from timber utilization. This definition
encompasses the overwhelming majority of all forested land in
Pennsylvania. Indeed, approximately 98% of all forested land
within Pennsylvania ORBES region is deemed to be commercial forest
(21). The ownership of commercial forest lands within the Pennsyl-
vania ORBES region is delineated in.Table 2.1.4.-5. Table 2.1.4.-6
describes the principal tree associations which occur on our com-
mercial forest lands within each of the nineteen Pennsylvania
ORBES counties. Table 2.1.4.-7 quantitatively distributes these
association types within each of the nineteen Pennsylvania ORBES
counties. A simplified overview of modern association dominance
is presented in Figure 2.1.4.-5.
F. Herbaceous Flora of the Forest
Irrespective of association type, the mature forests of our
region are characterized by an almost continuous crown cover with
little solar radiation reaching the forest floor. Consequently,
understory shrubs and herbs undergo maximal growth during the
spring. Magnificent woodland flowers such as spring beauty,
trillium, hepatica, anemone, and violets are typical woodland
flowers. Flowering shrubs such as azalea, mountain laurel, and
rhododendron are also aesthetic treasures of this region. Many
of our flowering plants are currently on the endangered species
list (Table 2.1.4.-8). This is especially true of the orchids
(Family Orchidae).
G. The Field Community
The clearing of Pennsylvania's forests for agriculture
established numerous grasslands and fields during the last century,
especially in the counties of Somerset, Butler, Washington, West-
moreland, Mercer, and Indiana. Herbaceous species such as golden-
rods (Solidago) and other members of the aster family, which pre-
fer open, sunny areas, are believed to be more abundant today than
in pre-settlement times. Dewberries and black raspberries (Rubus)
are also characteristic of our field communities. These fruits
serve as food for a wide variety of wildlife. However, the over-
whelming majority of Pennsylvania's grasslands and fields are
merely transitional communities which, if left undisturbed, will
eventually revert to secondary woodland.
H. Endangered Plant Species
"The Endangered Species Act of 1973" (PL 93-205) directed
16
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-5
OWNERSHIP1 OP COMMERCIAL FOREST LANDS
IN ORBES-PENNSYLVANIA
(thousands of acres)
COUNTY ST. FOR. GM. LAND NAT. FOR. FOR. IND.2 FARMS OTHER T.C.F.A,
ALLE
ARMS
3EAV
BUTL
CAMS
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
FAYE
FORE
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
0
0
0
0
0.2
0
74.2
66.1
14.5
2.1
0
0.5
8.7
0
0
26.1
o
0
3.4
1.1
2.0
1.3
2.0
17.3
11.0
24.7
59.6
10.9
7.8
3.4
. 4.6
22.8
1.0
0.8
17-2
15-3
2.1
9.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
113-3
0
110.6
0
0
0 .
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0
0
9.6
17.4-
12.7
45.7
0.7
33.4
0.1
1.3
12.2
0
0.2
8.5
22.7
0.2
0.4
8.0
35.2
20.5
35.6
36.8
45.8
35-1
12.8
42.3
7.1
40.6
57.4
31.6
17.7
53-2
110.0
32.6
44.3
43.1
163.4
172.3
104.5
215.1
214.4
184.1
' 430.5
178.6
248.3
92.3
140.9
217.6
232.1
71-5
105-4
275-3
284.5
173-5
252.6
172.5
210.0
126.3
252.7
278.3
258.3
577.2
476.1
316.7
253-3
185.0
281.4
307.4
90.2
159.6
437.1
355-. 1
220,1
309-0
19 County
Total 195.8
214.4
223.9
165.6
709-7 3756.9 5266.3
St. For. = State Forests; Gm. Land = Game lands; Nat. For. = National
Forest; For. In. = Forest Industry; T.C.F.A. = Total Commercial Forest
Acreage.
1. 1964-1967
2. For. In. = 35$ pulpmills, 37% sawmills and 28% wood-using industry
(exclusive of logging) on a state-wide basis.
3. 1964 Census of Agriculture
SOURCE: Pa. Dept. of Commerce (21)
17
-------
TABLE 2.1 .4.-6.
DEFINITIONS OF FOREST COVER TYPES
. APPEARING IN TABLE 2.1.,4,-7
White pine: Forests in which 50 oercent or more of the stand is
eastern white pine. In Pennsylvania, this includes a small
acreaqe in the hemlock tyoe.
Virginia-pitch pine: Forests in which 50 percent or more of the
stand is Virginia pine, pitch pine or other yellow Dines,
singly or in combination. Includes small areas of the
soruce forest tyoe.
Oak-hickory: Forests in which 50 percenter more of the stand is
upland oaks or hickory, singly or in combination except
where pines comprise 20 to 49 percent, in which case the
stand would be classified oak-pine. It also includes the
yellow poplar - oak forest type.
Other oak types: Primarily oak-pine and oak-gum forests. Those
forests in which 50 percent or more of the stand is hardwood,
usually upland oak, but in which pines make uo 25 to 49 percent
of the stand are categorized as oak-oine. Oak-aum forests
are bottomland types in which 50 nercent or more- of the stand
is blackgum, sweetgum, or oaks, singly or in combination,
except where pines comprise 25-49 percent.
Elm-ash-red maple: Forests in which 50 percent or more of the stand
is American elm, black ash or red manle, singly or in combination,
When all three species are present, this signifies a wet site.
In Pennsylvania predominantly red maple stands on unland sites
make up most of the acreage in this broad type.
Maple-beech-birch: Forest in which 50 percent or more of the stand
is sugar maple, beech or yellow birch, sinaly or in combination.
It includes the black cherry forest tyoe.
Aspen-birch: Forests in which 50 percent .or more of the stand is
aspen, paper birch, gray birch, or Din cherry, sinaly or in
combination.
18 -
-------
TABLE 2.1 .4.-7
ORBES - PENNSYLVANIA COMMERCIAL FOREST
COMPOSITON BY TREE ASSOCIATION1
County
T.C.F.'A.2 %
(thousand White Dine
acres)
Alle
Arms
Beav
But!
Camb
Clar
Clea
Elk
Faye
Fore
Gree
Indi
Jeff
Lawr
Merc
Some
Vena
Wash
West
172.5
210.0
126.3
252.7
278.3
266.7
585.9
471 .6
316.7
251.6
185.0
281.4
315.6
90.2
159.6
437.1
361.5
220.1
309.0
4.4
4.9
4.7
4.8
2.1
8.4
6.8
4.9
2.5
4.9
4.6
4.9
9.9
4.5
4.2
2.3
9.3
4.4
4.9
19 County
TOTAL 5291.2
Pitch-
Virginia
Pine
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.7
1.0
4.5
2.3
___
1.5
0.9
0.8
3.5
0.6
0.9
1.6
2.4
0.6
0.6
Oak-
Hickory
26.7
29.7
27.9
28.7
55.7
52.5
59.4
20.8
55.3
19.1
27.1
29.6
54.1
27.7
24.9
52.2
55.3
24.7
30.1
Other
Oaks
2.4
2.0
1.9
1.9
5.1
1.8
1.3
0.8
5.7
3.0
2.6
2.2
1.5
1.7
2.8
5.6
1.4
1.8
1.9
Elm-Ash
Red Maple
22.2
24.6
23.0
24.1
9.7
6.6
8.8
12.1
9.1
11.4
22.3
24.2
7.8
23.3
20.7
8.3
9.6
20.1
24.1
Maple
Beech'
Birch
16.6
18.1
19.5
19.7
21.8
9.6
12.3
47.7
20.1
50.0
19.7
18.5
9.4
18.7
18.1
24.3
10.2
21.7
18.0
Birch
26.9
20.0
22.5
20.1
4.6
1.6
9.2
13.7
5.7
11.6
22.
19.
,7
,7
13.8
5.3
1.4
40.2
2.5
14.6
21.3
23.5
28,4
5.7
11.8
26.7
20.4
14.9
1. Percentage of county-specific, total commercial forest land (1965)
occupied by the given tree association. Percentages may not add to
one hundred due to rounding of fiqures.
2. T.C.F.A. Total Commercial Forest Acreage for 1965. Substantial increases
in the amount of forested land within the Pennsylvania ORBES
region have occurred during the past decade. For a more recent
estimation of T.C.F.A. see Table 2.1.4.-4 (commercial forest lands
typically comprise over 99% of the estimated forest acreage).
SOURCE: Adapted from Ferguson (25)
19
-------
FIGURE 2.1.4. - 5
MAJOR FOREST TYPES OF THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
- Oak-Hickory
- Aspen-Birch
- Maple - Beech - Birch
- White Pine
- Nonforest
-------
TABLE 2.1.1.-8
ENDANGERED AND THREATENED PLANT SPECIES
IN THE STATE OP PENNSYLVANIA
Status
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered*
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Specific Name
Cerastlum arvense
var. vllloslsslmum
Isotrla rnedeololdes
Potamogeton Porter!
Trollius laxus
Scirpus ancistrochaetus
Echinacea laevlgata
Juncus gymnocarpus
Cyprlpedium candidum
Platanthera peramoena
Calamagrostis Porter!
Muhlenbergla curtisetosa
Poa palud!gena
Asplenlurn ebeno!des
Potamogeton Hill!!
Prunus alleghaniensls
Common Name
Long-hairy field
Chickweed
Small whorled Pogonia
Porter's pondweed
Spreading globe-flower
Bulrush
Smooth purple coneflower
Naked-fruited rush
Small white lady's slipper
Purple fringeless orchid
Porter's reed-bentgrass
Short-bristled Muhly grass
A meadow grass
Walking spleenwort
Hill's pondweed
Sloe; Allegheny plum
Habitat Preference
Serpentine barrens
Acid soil in dry woods
Shallow water
Swamps, wet woods and
wet meadows
Bogs.
Woods and prairies
Sphagnum bogs
Calcareous sails of
marly bogs, open swamps
and wet prairies
Damp or wet soil
Wet rocks and sandy
shores
Moist, shady ground
Bogs and wet woods
Woods banks and rocks
in circumneutral soil
Shallow water
Dry, rocky woods
-------
(TABLE 2,1.1.-8 Cont.)
Status Specific Name Common Name Habitat Preference
Threatened Mlcranthemum micrantnemoIdes Lettuce-leaved saxifrage; Muddy shores between
Mountain lettuce estuary tide-marks
SOURCES: -Species after Smithsonian Institution (36).
-Habitat Preferences after Gleason and Cronquist (37)
*Revisions as of May 21, 1975; see Federal Register (38).
-------
the Smithsonian Institution to prepare a list of endangered and
threatened plant species. Th.e term "endangered" denotes those
species of plants in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of their ranges. Plant taxa from very limited
areas (e.g., type localities] or from restricted fragile habitats
are usually considered endangered. Threatened species are those
species that are likely to become endangered within the foresee-
able future throughout all or a significant portion of their
ranges. This includes species categorized as rare, very rare, or
depleted. Table 2.1.4.-8 presents a list of endangered and threat-
ened plant species for the State of Pennsylvania with notations on
the preferred habitat of these species.
The compilation of an endangered and threatened species list
has gained new impetus in recent years and the potentiality exists
for additions to the list in the near future. Table 2.1.4.-9 lists
species which are rare in western Pennsylvania, have been found in
Pennsylvania ORBES counties, but have not yet received official,
threatened status. Likewise, Table 2.1.4.-10 lists species which
are rare in western Pennsylvania, have been found in counties that
neighbor the ORBES region, but have not yet been designated as
threatened.
It is evident from these tables that the majority of endangered,
threatened, or rare species are small, flowering plants native to
moist or wet areas. Pine, serpentine, and shale barrens also
support a significant number of such species.
I. Beneficial Aspects of Natural Vegetation
The precise monetary value of our botanic communities is
unquantifiable , yet indisputably astronomical. Plants, either
directly or indirectly, serve as the food source for virtually
all heterotrophic organisms. Furthermore, the plants of fragile,
ecosystems may serve as valuable indicator organisms, "sounding
an alarm" to man in the event of environmental perturbations.
Forests, woodlots, and fields serve as living and breeding places
for our wildlife. Pennsylvanians have utilized particular species
for timber and fiber for centuries. Modern man is equally depend-
ent upon natural areas as aesthetically appealing places for
seeking tranquility or pursuing outdoor-based recreation. In
addition, well managed forests are extremely valuable entities
within the framework of the hydrologic cycle. Such forests tend
to control soil erosion and, therefore, promote good water quality.
The multiple benefits associated with our forests can be
best insured by wise management and the preservation of species
diversity within the various community types. The Smithsonian
Institution (36) has rendered the following justification for
this strategy.
23
-------
TABLE 2*1 .4.4:9 '
RARE PLANTS* OF THE PENNSYLVANIA 19
COUNTY ORBES REGION
Specific Name
Aconitum recTinaturn
grey
Aster 11 neariifoil us
L.
Carex fraseri Andr.
(= Cymophyllus)
Clethra acuminata
Michx.
Croton glandulosus
var. septentrional Is
Mvel1. Arg.
Eleocharis rostellata
Torr.
Gentiana flavida
Gray
Gentiana saponaria
L.
Houstom'a purpurea
L.
Common Name
Trailing wolfs-
bane
Linear-leaved
Aster
Fraser's Sedge
Mountain Sweet
pepperbush
Location where found Habitat Preference
Wymp's Gap, Fayette Co. Mountain woods
Ohiopyle, Fayette Co.
Reel's Corners, Somer-
set Co.
Elliotsville, Fayette
Co.
Dry ground & open
woods; esp. sandy soil
Rich mountain woods
Rich mountain woods
Glandular Croton Bidwell, Fayette Co. Dry or sandy soil
Small-beaked
spike-rush
Lawrence Co.
Yellowish Gentian Ribold to Renfrew,
Butler Co.
Soapwort Gentian Markleysburg Bog,
Fayette Co.
Mountain Houstom'a Ohiopyle and
Chalkhill, Fayette Co
Saline or calcareous
swamps and marshes;
esp. along coast
Moist, open woods
Moist woods and
thickets
Dry woods , pine barrW:
and prairies
Iris prismatica
Pursh
Magnolia tripetala
L.
Marshallia grandiflora
Beadle & F.E. Boynt
Slender Blue
Flag
Umbrella Mag-
nolia
Barbara's -
buttons
Ohiopyle floodplain,
Fayette Co.
Ohiopyle and Indian
Creek, Fayette Co.
Ohiopyle, Fayette Co.
Sandy open woods &
pine-lands
Rich woods
River banks and dry
woods
24
-------
(TABLE 2.1 .4.-9 Cont.)
Specific Name
Polygala cruelata
var. aqu.ijpnia
Fern. & Schub.
Prenanthes racemosa
Michx.
Samolus parviflorus
Raf.
Stylosanthes riparia
Kearney
Tri11ium cernuum var.
macranthum Wieg
Xyrls torta
J.E. Smith
Common Name
Cross-leaved
Milkwort var.
Great Lake
Lion's-foot
Water-pimpernel
Location where found
Chalkhill, Fayette Co.
Plaingrove Bog,
Lawrence Co.
Butler Co.
(only 1 specimen
collected)
Pencil-flower Ohiopyle, Fayette Co.
Nodding Trillium Formerly grew @
Thornhill, Allegheny Co.
Ye How-eyed
Grass
Chalkhill Bog,
Fayette Co.
Habitat Preference
Damp or wet soil;
marshes and pine-barren:
Stream banks, moist
meadows
Muddy stream banks &
ditches
Dry woods & barrens
Moist or wet woods
Bogs & wet, esp.
sandv soil
* These plants have been collected from only one Western Pennsylvania county.
Sources: -Species and their locations after Carnegie Museum Herbarium Records (39)
-Habitat preferences after Gleason and Cronauist (37).
25
-------
IN}
cr>
Specific Name
Animoph.11 a breviligulata
Fern
Arctostaphylus glaucophylla
var. latifolia
Rehd.
Arctostaphylus uva-ursi
var. adenotricha
Fern. & Macbr.
Botrychium multlfldum
" .) Rupr.
Butomus umbel latus L.
Cakile edentula var.
lacustris Fern.
Chrysogonum virginianum L.
Conioselinum chinense (I..)
Dlarrhena americana Beauv,
Eriocaulon septangulare
Withering
TABLE 2.1. 4.-10
RARE PLANTS* OF COUNTIES
NEAR THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
Common Name Location where found
Beachgrass
Bog-rosemary
Bearberry
Leathery Grape-
fern
Flowering Rush
Scurvy-weed
Chrysogonum
Hemlock-pars ley
Twin grass
Seven-angled
pipewort
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Sulfur Springs Bog,
Warren Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Wattsburg, Erie Co.
Escaped along Elk Creek
and Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Warfordsburg, Fulton Co.
Laurel Springs & Spruce
Creek, Huntingdon Co.
Bedford Co.
Canadohta Lake, Crawford Co.
Habitat Preference
Dunes and dry sandy shores
along all Great Lakes and
Atlantic
Acid Bogs
Sandy or rocky soil
Open, often moist and sane
places, rarely in woods
Shores and river banks ale
St. Lawrence River Valley
and some stations.along
Great Lakes
Coastal sands
Woodland
Swamns, bogs, wet ledges
and wet meadows
Moist woods
Usually shallow water,
occasionally in deep watei
or on miry shores
Eriophorum spissum Fern.
Hare's-tail
Titus Bog, Erie Co.
Bogs and wet soil
-------
(TABLE 2.1 .1-10 Cont.)
ro
Specific Name
Gerardia auriculata Michx.
Habenaria leucophaea (Nutt.)
Common Name
Auricled Gerardia
Location where found
Tonolowav Creek, Fulton Co.
Hibiscus palustri's L.
Iris verna var. smalliana
Fern.
Juncus alpinus var.
rariflorus Hartm.
Juncus balticus var.
littoralis Engelm.
Ledurn groenlandicum
Oeder
Ligusticum canadense (L.)
Britt
Listera australis Lindl
Lonicera villosa var.
tonsa Fern.
Pachistima Canbyi Gray
Pinus echinata Miller
Potentilla anserina L.
Prairie white-frinqed Harmonsburq, Crawford Co.
orchid
Heteranthera reniformis R.&P. Mud plantain
Rose mallow
Upland violet Iris
Alpine rush
Baltic rush
Labrador tea
Anqelico
Southern Tway-
blade
Mountain fly-honey-
suckle
Canby's mountain-
lover
Short-leaved nine
Silverweed
Lutzville, Bedford Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Biq Tonoloway Creek, Fulton
Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Sulphur Springs Boq,
Warren Co.
Breezewood, Bedford Co.
Sulphur Sorinqs and Toplo-
vich Boqs, Warren Co.
Toplovich Boq, Warren Co.
Lutzville, Bedford Co.
Shale barrens in Fulton Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Habitat Preference
Prairies or open upland
woods
Wet praries, boqs, marshes
Submersed, floatinq or
creepinq in mud
Salt marshes alonq coast
Sandy soil, coastal
barrens, piedmont,
mountains.
Wet meadows and sandy or
gravelly shores
Calcareous or brackish
shores and dunes and also
inland
Bogs and wet shores
Woods, chiefly in the
mountains
Shaded boqs and wet woods
Swamps and wet woods
Rocky woods in the
mountains
Dry, sandy, or rocky soil
Wet, sandy beaches
-------
ro
oo
(TABLE 2.1 .4-10 Cont.)
Specific Name
Prenanthes serpentaria
Pursh
Pseudotaenidia montana
Mackenzie
Salix Candida Flugge
Salix glaucophylloides var.
albovestita (Ball) Fern.
Scheuchzeria palustris var.
americana Fern.
Senecio antennariifolius
Shepherdla canadensis (L.)
Nutt
Sida hermaphrodita (L.)
Rusby
Sparganium minimum Fries
Spi raea corymbosa Raf.
Triglochin palustris L.
Utricularia resupinata B.D.
Greene
Zizania aquatica var.
anqustifolia Hitchc.
Common Name
Lion-foot
False pimpernel
Hoary willow
White-haired willow
Scheuchzeria
Cat's-paw ragwort
Soapberry
Virginia mallow
Least Bur-reed
Flat-topped Spiraea
Marsh arrow-grass
Purple bladderwort
Northern wild rice
Location where found
Bedford Springs, Bedford Co.
Hewitt, Bedford Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Titus Bog, Erie Co.
Harrisonville, Fulton Co.
Elk Creek and shores of Lake
Erie, Erie Co.
Saxton, Bedford Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Clearville, Fulton Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Presque Isle, Erie Co.
Habitat Preference
Woods
Shale-barrens
Cold bogs and glaciated
areas
Sandy shores, calcareous
slopes and sometimes swam;
Cold sphagnum bogs
Shale-barrens
Dry, sandy or stony, cal-
careous soil
Moist alluvial soil
In shallow water
Mountain woods
Brackish marshes along tr
coast and in bogs
Muddy soil or very shallf
water at edge of oonds
Marshes, stream banks an<
shallow water
* These plants have been collected from only one Western Pennsylvania County.
Sources: -Species and their locations after Carnegie Museum Herbarium Records (39)
-Habitat Preferences after Gleason and Cronquist ( 37 ).
-------
A wide variety of plant species is essential to
the maintenance of the environment in a livalbe con-
dition in order to prevent wind and water erosion and
to aid in developing fertile soil, in storing water,
and in maintaining or providing subsurface water. A
wide diversity of plant species and populations, there-
fore, is required to stock the many different habitats
and ecosystems of the earth and is necessary to main-
tain ecological stability. Man's own monocultural
system of agriculture has taught him much about the
problems of ecological stability in the need for pro-
tection from diseases, insect pests, weeds, depletion
of soil nutrients, and similar ecological problems.
... A large untapped potential of enormous value to
man exists if he preserves the diversity of plant
species. It has been estimated that 50,000 new
alkaloids can be discovered in plants, including
possible cancer cures. New plant medicinals and
drugs are presently being discovered.
The mere presence of a dense forest canopy above a land mass
serves to reduce the erosive force of rainfall. Furthermore, the
thick mats of leaf litter and humus, so typical of Pennsylvania's
deciduous forest floors, effectively absorb and retain significant
quantities of precipitation. These processes reduce runoff and
erosion; consequently, they regulate stream flow and limit silta-
tion. Table 2.1.4. - 11 depicts the substantially reduced capacity
of harvested forest lands for erosion control. Field studies have
indicated that roads used to access logging sites are probably
more responsible for this diminished erosion-control capacity
than the actual removal of trees (41). However, managed forests
in western Pennsylvania have been shown to be' substantially less
erodible than their unmanaged counterparts (see Table 2.1.4. -12).
The "Copeland Report" (43) noted that the hydrology and water quality
of most of western Pennsylvania is influenced to a major degree by
the forests of the area
Forested lands enhance water quality in several additional
ways. Canopy cover often shades cold water streams from direct
solar radiation, thereby inhibiting temperature increases and
algae blooms. The autumnal leaf-drop "powers" the bioenergetics
of the aquatic communities inhabitating woodland streams. Further-
more, the biomass of our terrestrial vascular plants acts as a
storage reservoir within the hydrologic cycle that is not easily
polluted by man. Unfortunately, indiscriminate land clearing,
heavy livestock grazing, and poor lumbering practices have left
approximately one-third of western Pennsylvania in poor hydrologic
condition. Essentially all (95%) of Pennsylvania's forested land
has a high to medium potential for hydrologic improvement (44).
29
-------
TABLE 2.1.4 - 11
REPRESENTATIVE EROSION RATES FOR VARIOUS LAND USES
Soil Loss
Cover type Tons/Acre/Year
Forest 0.0375
Grassland 0.375
Abandoned Surface Mines 3.75
Cropland 7.50
Harvested Forest 18.75
Active Surface Mines 75.00
Construction 75.00
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (40)
30
-------
TABLE 2.1.4. - 12
197"I LAND USE AND CALCULATED' EROSION
RATES IN WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
116
117
118
119
120
Pa. DER Sub-baaln
(Upper Allegheny River Basin in Pa.)
(Middle Allegheny River Basin)
(Lower Allegheny River Baaln)
(Honongahela River Basin In Fa.)
(Upper Ohio-Beaver River Basin In Pa.)
Acreage*
(millions of acres)
2.375
1.607
1.317
1.521
1.561
Cropland
16
16
22
20
28
LAND USE
Pasture
6
1
5
10
12
ill
Forest
71
75
61
56
16
Other
1
5
12
11
11
Cropland
3.1
3.9
3.8
6.5
3-8
Poret
Managed
0.1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.1
SHEET
ER03IOM HATES
AND RILL
(tona/acre/year)
it
Uninanaged Pasture I Other Land
7,2
9.2
9.2
10.1
7-8
2.9
1.2
5.2
5.1
5.1
Weighted Averan
1.2
1.8
2.3
3-1
2.9
'Calculated using the universal soil-loss equation (USLE)
1. Acreage of sub-basin after federal land, urban land, built-up areas, and
large water areas are deducted from the total area of the sub-basin.'
SOURCE; Adapted trot Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (12).
-------
2.1.4.2 VERTEBRATE FAUNA
A.) Amphibians and Reptiles £
!
The great diversity of Pennsylvania's "herpetofauna" has
classically been'attributed to the presence of the Appalachian
Mountains and three large river basins; these physiographic
features provide a variety of suitable habitats throughout the
Commonwealth. On a statewide basis,'Netting and Richmond (45)
indicate that seventy-six different species* of.reptiles and
amphibians have been recorded over the years. More than two-
thirds of this total have been observed within the confines of
the Pennsylvania ORBES region (46, 47, 48).
Although the physiographic features of the Commonwealth do
not function as exceptionally strong distributional barriers,
Reinert and Dalby (49) have noted the following generalized
zoogeographic patterns:
I. A southern element of the Nearctic herpetofauna
has penetrated the southeastern portion of the
state, inhabiting the lowland and coastal plain
region.
II. Another southern element has penetrated part,
or all, of the Appalachian mountain system but
has not been successful on the more westerly
Appalachian Plateaus (Pa. ORBES region).
III. A western element of the Nearctic herpetofauna,
consisting of a smaller number of species has
entered the Appalachian Plateaus. (Pa-. ORBES
region) but has had little success in penetrating
the Appalachian Mountains.
However, these distributional patterns are "givens" in any environ-
mental analysis (i.e. they are "part and parcel" of the ecological
framework imposed by nature and evolution). Currently, the most
dramatic influences on reptile and amphibian distribution within
the Pennsylvania ORBES region arise from the activities of man.
The Army Corps.of Engineers (33, 34) summarize the most important
distributional trend as follows, "As might be expected, the number
of species and suitable habitats increases with distance from
Pittsburgh and its associated urbanization, industrialization, and
environmental pollution."
None of Pennsylvania's herpetofauna are currently included on
the "Federal Endangered Species Lis't" (50). The bog turtle (Clemmys
muhlenbergi) was formerly listed but has recently been dropped from
the list.** However, the Pennsylvania Fish Commission issues its
*This total is comprised of 21 salamanders, 15 frogs and toads, 4
lizards, 14 turtles, and 22 snakes.
**New evidence suggests that this turtle may merely be behavioral^
secretive and not actually endangered.
32
-------
own "List of Endangered, Threatened, or Status Indeterminant
Amphibians and Reptiles" (see Table 2.1.4. - 13) which includes
the bog turtle and seventeen other species of herps. Authority
for the protection of Pennsylvania herpetofauna rests primarily
with the Fish Commission. The annually published "Summary of
Fishing Regulations and Laws" (52) outlines the laws regulating
the possession of particular species.
Inasmuch as no extensive inventory of Pennsylvania's
herpetofauna has ever been undertaken, the quantification of
any past impacts is tenous. The herpetological records indicate
that several currently rare species (Blanding's turtle, midland
smooth softshell turtle, and Kirtland s water snake) were proba-
bly never exceedingly common in western Pennsylvania (53).
Nonetheless, impacts on other species have indeed occurred since
the herpetological records once indicated a high diversity in
Allegheny County (48) and such is obviously not the case today.
Conversely, certain species, of herps seem to be quite compatible
with civilization. Species still relatively common in Allegheny
County include: American toad (Bu.fo a. ameri canus) , garter snake
(Thamnophis s. sirtal is ), black rat snake' (E Tap he. o . obsoleta).
milk snake (Lamphropeltis t_. trianguTum) , northern dusky salamander
(Desmognathus f.fuscus )T red-backed salamander (PI ethodon c_.
ci nereus) , a~n~d eastern box turtle (Terrapene c. Carolina) (54).
The following four species of herps merit special consideration
by virtue of their present status within the Pennsylvania ORBES
region.
1. Massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus)
In the Pennsylvania ORBES region the'.massasauga (a
prairie rattlesnake) occurs chiefly in wet meadows,
although it may also inhabit bogs, swamps, and even dry
woodlands (32, 46, 47). The literature (55) suggests
that this snake, at least during the last century, never
was exceedingly common in the Pennsylvania ORBES region.
Nonetheless, natural succession and habitat destruction
by man via the damming and draining of wetlands have
served to make this rare species even more scarce in
recent years (56, 57). Persecution by people who dislike
snakes, especially poisonous ones, has doubtlessly in-
tensified the problem (57). Consequently, the massasauga
is currently labeled an endangered species by the Penn-
sylvania Fish Commission (see Table 2.1.4.-13). Although
records of their occurrence exist for four Pennsylvania
ORBES counties, at the present time known massasauga
populations are essentially confined to areas near Slippery
Rock (see Appendix, Natural Area #35) and Bruin in Butler
County, in addition to Five Points in Venango County (58).
Individuals have also been reported from the Pymatuning
area in Crawford.*
*Crawford County is not a Pennsylvania ORBES County but it is
drained by the Upper Ohio River system.
33
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.--- 13
PENNSYLVANIA FISH COMMISSION
LIST OF ENDANGERED' (1), THREATENED (2)
OR STATUS INDETERMINATE (3) AMPHIBIANS
AND REPTILES
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
+Blanding's turtle
^Eastern mud salamander
^Eastern tiger salamander
*New Jersey chorus frog
*Southern plain leopard frog
*Eastern mud turtle
*Red-bellied turtle
*Broad-headed skink
*Eastern kingsnake
Coal skink
Green salamander
3og turtle
Midland smooth softshell
Kirtland's water snake
Eastern hognose snake
Rough green snake
Timer rattlesnake
Massasauga
Emydoidea blandingii
PseudotrTton m. montanus
Ambystoma t_. tigrinum
Pseudacris triseriata kalmi
Rana sphenocephala
Kinosternon s'. subrubrum
Chrysemys rubriventris
Eumeces laticeps
Lampropeltis g. getulus
Eumeces anthracinus
Aneides aeneus
Clemmys^ muhlenbergi
Trionyx jji. muticus
Clonophis kirtland^
Heterodon platyrhinos
Opheodrys aestivalus
Crotalus horridus
Sistrurus catenatus
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
1
1
3
3
3
3
1
Status categories are defined as follows:
1. Endangered: Actively threatened with extinction in
the state. Continued survival unlikely without
special protective measures.
2. Threatened; Not under immediate threat of extinction
in the state, but occurring in such small numbers
and/or in such restricted habitat that it could
quickly cease to be a part of the state fauna.
3. Indeterminate: Apparently threatned or uncommon to
rare, but insufficient data currently available on
which to base a reliable assessment of status.
-Collected in Crawford County which is not a PA ORBES County but. is drained
by the Ohio River System.
*Based upon the herpetological records of the past (45,48), such species are
not deemed to be-likely inhabitants of the PA ORBES region.
Source: Adapted from PA Fish Commission (51); Netting and Richmond (45);
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (48).
34
-------
2. Timber Rattlesnake CCrotaTus horridus)
The timber rattlesnake inhabits rocky areas with a
southern exposure in the more sparsely settled, mountain-
ous counties of the Pennsylvania ORBES region. Although
upland areas seem to be its preferred habitat, the timber
"rattler" is known to descend into valleys to obtain water
in the late summer (45). In the past, specimens have been
recorded from ten of the nineteen Pennsylvania ORBES
counties (see Fig. 2.1.4.-6); however, at the present time,
significant-populations within this area are probably con-
fined to the northern section (Elk, Forest, Venango,
Clarion, and Jefferson Counties) (58, 59). Consequently,
the timber rattlesnake is currently listed as an indeterminate
species by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission (see Table 2.1.4.-
13).
The greatest threat to the continued survival of the
timber rattlesnake within the Commonwealth is direct persecu-
tion by man. Pursuit of these "rattlers" was at one time
encouraged by a bounty of one dollar per snake and past refer-
ences describe lone snake hunters slaughtering hundreds of
them in the northcentral portion of the state (55). At the
present time, outdoorsmen and farmers may still kill them
because of a fear and/or hatred of snakes, especially poison-
ous ones. Organized snake hunts for sport also occur in
Pennsylvania and although the "rattlers" are usually
released unharmed, a recent committee on reptile conserva-
tion (60) has recommended the prohibition of such hunts.
Timber rattlesnakes are known to congregate in rocky
den areas, which often harbor numerous individuals, especially
during hibernation. For this reason, they are particularly
susceptible to impact from earth-moving activities within
their preferred habitat.
3. Bog Turtle (Clemmys muhTen bergi)
The bog turtle is a small, semi-aquatic turtle which is
currently categorized by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission as
an endangered species (see Table 2.1.4.-13). The ruination
of this turtle's preferred habitat (bogs and marshes) is
thought to be the principle cause for its demise (58, 61).
In addition, the scarcity of this reptile makes it a valuable
"black market" item among exotic pet fanciers and herpeto-
legists.
The bog turtle is believed to be very rare in the
Pennsylvania ORBES region. Moreover, this turtle's secretive
nature complicates efforts to locate and identify populations
for special protection. Specimens have been reported from
Mercer County (48) and Conneaut Marsh in Crawford County* (32),
*Crawford County is not a Pennsylvania ORBES county but it is
drained by the Upper Ohio River system.
35
-------
FIGURE 2.] .4.-6
COUNTY LEVEL HERPETOLOGICAL RECORDS
FOR RARE SNAKES
IN THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
CO
cr>
flLLE
B,C j HEST
HflSH v^ / A,C
LEGEND
A. Timber Rattlesnake
B. Massasauga
C. Kirtland's Water Snake
S.OURCE: U.S^. Army Corps j)f Engineers (48)
-------
4. Kell bender CCryptobrarichus alleganiensis all egani ensi s_)
This large, fully aquatic salamander is more properly
discussed within the realm of aquatic ecology; however, it
will be dealt with herein since amphibians, as a group,
are typically thought of as terrestrial creatures.
At one time hellbenders inhabited swift, cool, and
clear streams with rocky bottoms throughout the Pennsylvania
ORBES region. Excavations of Indian Villages and the
herpetol ogical records of Carnegie Museum indicate that they
were relatively common in and around Allegheny County (58).
At the present time, hellbenders are hardly rare in the
Pennsylvania ORBES region; however, their distribution has
been substantially reduced. The effects of siltation, acid
mine drainage, river impoundment, and thermal pollution have
almost eliminated them from much of southwestern Pennsylvania
(33, 34, 58). The largest remaining populations inhabit
the clean watersheds to the north and east of Pittsburgh,
especially the Upper Allegheny River, French Creek, and
Loyalhanna Creek (58).
At a recent symposium on the status of nongame species within -
the Commonwealth (60), professional and amateur herpetologists dis-
cussed management strategies for the state's herpetofauna. The
following recommendations summarize the essence of the outcome:
a.) Conservation of habitat-this would include, but not
limit itself to, the acquisition of critical habitat
and adjacent lands for endangered and threatened species.
b.) The undertaking of a statewide inventory of the herpetofauna
c.) The prohibition of organized snake hunts.
d.) The establishment of bag and possession limits for all
currently nonprotected species.
e.) Rewrite existing legislation in a more comprehensive
manner in such a way as to give the Fish Commis-
sion more enforcement clout.
B. Avifauna
Trustworthy records of bird abundance and species composition
are nonexistant for western Pennsylvania in pre-colonial and colonial
times. Nonetheless, Todd (62) suspects that birds were more plenti-
ful then and that forest species predominated. Indeed, the extensive
forests of pre-settlement Pennsylvania could not have conceivably
furnished suitable habitat to numerically significant populations
of field species such as the bobolink, meadowlark, prairie horned
lark, bobwhite, vesper sparrow, savannah sparrow, and grasshopper
sparrow. These species undoubtedly entered the Pennsylvania ORBES
37
-------
region frora the Mississippi Valley only after the agriculture and
lumber industries had cleared substantial tracts of the virgin
forest (see Section 2.1. 4.1.. -C).; 1;
Many ornithologists believe that atmospheric temperature is
the primary ecological factor controlling the zoogeographic dis-
tribution of birds. Consequently, the life-zone concept of Allen
(62) and Merriam (64) has often been applied to the Nearctic
avifauna. This system divides North''America into seven transcon-
tinental belts of distribution, each of which is characterized by
an assemblage of species. Figure 2.1.4.-7 maps the three life-
zones that cross the Pennsylvania ORBES region. Table 2.1.4.-14
functions as a legend to this map by listing representative
assemblages for each zone.
The Carolinian avifauna is comprised of typically southern
species. In Pennsylvania, resident species belonging to this assem-
blage are believed to have their northernmost range limited by the
severity of winter temperatures at higher latitudes. Altitudinal"
influence on temperature has impeded the colonization of the
Allegheny Mountains by this group. Nonetheless, Todd (62) believes
that these birds are numerically increasing and extending their
occupied territory northward.
The Canadian avifauna is comprised of northern birds; however,
in Pennsylvania this group contains few strictly boreal species.
Moreover, changing forest conditions have resulted in a recession
of Canadian species with an accompanying intrusion of the Alleganian
avifauna from- the south.
The Alleganian avifauna does not constitute a distinct zoo-
geographic unit in western Pennsylvania, since it lacks a unique
assemblage of species. In the Pennsylvania ORBES region it may be
regarded as a transition belt of varying width, an area of overlap
where northern and southern avifaunal elements abut:and intermingle
(62).
The life-zone concept has been justifiably attacked by many
ecologists over the years. Indeed, the zoogeography of many species
cannot be adequately explained by this method. The concept has been
presented herein merely to illustrate the current distributional
trend of a receeding northern avifauna and an expanding southern
avifauna. Todd (62) notes that although this trend is probably
"characteristic of life flowing north in the backwash of the last
glaciation," i.t has undoubtedly been, accelerated and modified by
man.
The draft material of the Army Corps of Engineers' "Environ-
mental Resource Inventory" (48) indicates that 284 species of birds
occur in western Pennsylvania (35). However, only 186 of these
birds can be legitimately categorized as "relatively abundant."
38
-------
FIGURE 2.1.4. - 7
PROVISIONAL LIFE-ZONE AVIFAUNAL MAP OF THE PA. ORBES REGION
Co
LEGEND
-Canadian Avifauna
-Alleghanian Avifauna
-Carolinian Avifauna
For an explanation of the legend
see Table 2.1.4. - 14.
SOURCE: Adapted from Todd (62)
-------
TABLE 2.1.4. -14
KEY TO LEGEND OF PROVISIONAL LIFE-ZONE AVIFAUNA
MAP (Figure 2.1 .4.-7)
-r*
o
Canadian Avifauna
Eastern Goshawk
Yellow-bellied Flycatcher
Alder Flycather
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Red-breasted Nuthatch
Brown Creeper
Eastern Winter Wren
Eastern Hermit Thrush
Swainson's Thrush
Eastern Golden-crowned Kinglet
Solitary Vireo
Magnolia Warbler
Black-throated Blue Warbler
Blackburnian Warbler
Northern Water Thrush and
Grinnell's Water.Thrush
Mourning Warbler
Canada Warbler
Northern Pine Siskin
Red Crossbill
Slate-colored Junco
White-Throated Sparrow
Alleghanian Avifauna
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker
Least Flycatcher
Tree Swallow
Black-capped Chickadee
Veery
Nashville Warbler
Black-throated Green Warbler
Chestnut-sided Warbler
Bobolink
Rose-breasted Crosbeak
Eastern Purple Finch
Eastern Savannah Sparrow
Swamp Sparrow
Carolinian Avifauna
Turkey Vulture
Barn Owl
Red-bellied Woodpecker
Acadian Flycatcher
Carolina Chickadee
Tufted Titmouse
Bewick's Wren
Carol i na Wren ~,j
Eastern Mockingbird
Blue-gray Gnatcatcher
Prothonotary, Wasrbler.__
Worm-Eating Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Louisiana Water-Thrush
Yellow-breasted Chat
Hooded Warbler
Eastern Cardinal
Bachman's Sparrow
SOURCE: Todd (62)
-------
Furthermore, the relative abundance of many species is a seasonal
phenomenon due to annual migrations. The current status of five
groups in the study area is as follows:
1. Waterfowl
The Pennsylvania ORBES region is located on a major
waterfowl migration route which is part of the Atlantic fly-
way. Consequently, the rivers of the area occasionally serve
as resting places for migrating species such as the ring-
necked duck CAythya colTaris ). greater scaup (A_. mari la ),
goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), bufflehead (B_. al beol a ) .
mallard (Anas p. piatyrhynchos), oldsquaw (C1anqula hyemalis),
and common merganser (Mergus merganser) (33, 34).Ducks
which may remain in the area to breed include the mallard,
wood duck (Aix sppnsa), and black duck (Anas rubripes).
Marsh and wadi ng birds known to inhabit the area TncTude
the great blue heron (Ardea herpdias), killdeer (Charadri us
vocif erus) , belted kingfisher (MegTcferyle alcyon), greater
yel1 owl egs (Tringa melanoTeuca) , and lesser yellowlegs
(J_. fTavipesT
The most significant wetlands for the production of
waterfowl in western Pennsylvania are located in Crawford
and Erie Counties to the north of the Pennsylvania ORBES
region. Sites of particular importance within the Pennsylvania
ORBES region include the Shenango Wildlife Management Area,
State Game Lands #270, and the Great Blue Moron Rookery in
Mercer County; Beaver Run Reservoir in Westmoreland County;
and State Game Lands #95 in Butler County (32, 65, 66).
2. Songbirds
Songbirds comprise the largest group of terrestrial
vertebrates in the Pennsylvania ORBES region. Strictly wood-
land species have generally experienced population decreases
over the years due to the clearing of the virgin forests
(62). Conversely, populations of species preferring second
growth woodland and thickets, suburban backyards and gardens,
and agricultural areas have tended to increase. Species
such as the robin (Turdus migratorius), house wren (Troglodytes
aedon), cardinal (Cardi na"l i s cardi nal i s), starling* (Stunms
vu1gari s ), and house sparrow* (Passer domesticus) are cur-
rently thriving in such areas (33, 34, 67).
Past impacts on Pennsylvania's songbirds are attribu-
table to numerous factors including:
a.) Habitat destruction (primarily deforestation).
b.) Intensified competition from introduced European
species.
*These species were introduced from Europe.
41
-------
c.) Predation by th.e house cat, crow, and red squirrel.
d'. }. Increases in populations of the cowbird.
e. ) II legal shootings.
f.) Miscellaneous deaths indirectly caused by man (i.e.
pesticides, el.ectrical transmission Lines, large
plate glass windows).!
3. Gamefairds
Ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), ruffed grouse
(Bonasa u_. umbel! us ), wild turkey (Meleagris gal lopavo si 1 vestri s ) ,
and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura carol i ne"nsi s ) are the most
sought after gamebirds in the Pennsylvania ORBES region; wood-
cock (Philohela mi nor), bobwhite quail (CoTinus c. virqi nianus) ,
and snipe (Capella gallinago) are also pursued by hunters,
although not as intensely. Riparian bottomlands in the study
area function as habitat for pheasant and doves. The wild
turkey has suffered from encroaching civilization; consequently,
these upland birds attain their maximum population densities
in the sparsely settled, "big woods" counties such as Elk,
Forest, Venango, and Clarion. Ruffed grouse prefer dense cover
as their habitat; this species has benefited from small timber
operations in Somerset, Fayette, Venango, and Clarion Counties
(68, 69). Population data for the three most extensively studied
gamebird species are presented in Tables 2.1.4. - 15, 16, and 17.
4. Predatory Birds
Approximately twenty-one species of'predatory birds are
known from western Pennsylvania (33, 34): Hawks and owls
account for the greatest number of species, although eagles,
falcons, and osprey are also known from the area. Most of
the predatory birds inhabit woodlands, however many species
frequently venture into fields while hunting. Red-tailed
hawk (Buteo jamaicensis ), Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi ) ,
great horned owl (.Bubo v. virqi nianus), and screech owl
(Otus a s i o) are some of the common predatory birds of the
Pennsylvania ORBES region (33, 34, 60).
Although predatory birds have suffered from habitat
destruction, significant impacts have also resulted from
other miscellaneous factors. Adverse effects from the
bioaccumulation of pesticides have received national atten-
tion. Predatory birds, including the bald eagle (61), have
been known to die from electrocution on transmission lines.
Substantial impacts in the Pennsylvania ORBES region have
resulted from formerly existing predator control programs.
The campaign instituted against the goshawk (a predator of
game animals and domestic fowl) in 1929 best exemplifies
such impacts. During the first year of this statewide
42
-------
'i . i . <* . - i a
RING-NECKED PHEASANT POPULATION
DATA* FOR PENNSYLVANIA ORBES COUNTIES
County
ALLE '
ARMS
8EAV
BUTL
CAMS
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
FAYE
FORE
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
Range
Type
1-st Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
1st Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
3rd Class
1st Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
1st Class
2nd Class
3rd Class
Thousands
Acres Habitat1
13.1
331.5
28.2 '
2.6
9.8
339.3
190.5
15.7
359.9
103.3
39.3
98.3
38.9
78.9
10.5
155.3
68.3
64.2
87.3
107.0
13.3
61.6
236.0
9.8
313.8
121.6
215.4
19.4
136.6
256. S
20.3
209.7
18.9
182.1
239.8
254.9
248.4
281.8
3.2
Avg. Annual Avg. Fall . . .
peaL. 2 Av8- Annual
Population Density Peculation Density- Harvest4
533
272
177
302
143
116
197
151
254
186
314
236
399
215**
115
84
75**
646
327
251
Insufficient
148
109
224
160
191
. 352
247
195**
122**
289
206
137**
88**
395
298
586
307
210
355
181
118
201
96
77
131
100
169
125
209
157'
266
144**
77
56
50**
431
218
167
Data for Population
99
73
149
106
128 .
235 '
165
130**
31**
192
137
92**
58**
264
199
391
205
140
142
54
29
80
29
9
39
25
51
31
63
39
30
50**
23
14
18**
172
65
42
Calculations
30
18
45
27
32
71
41
46**
28**
58
34
32**
20**
79
50
156
62
35
Harvest
Value^
3.02
1.15
0.62
1.70
0.62
0.40
0.83
0.53
1.09
0.66
1.34
0.83
1.70
1.06**
0.49
0.30
0.38**
3.66
1.38
0.89
0.64
0.38
0.95
0.57
0.68
1.51
0.87
0.98**
0.60**
1.23
0.72
0.68**
0.43**
1.63
1.06
3.32
1.32
0.75
* 1972 - '73 averages; cocks only unless otherwise noted.
** Cocks and hens.
1. Thousands of acres
2. Pheasants/thousand acres
3. Pheasants/thousand acres (immediately prior co commencement o£ the hunting season).
4. Pheasants harvested/thousand acres (during the hunting season).
5. Dollars/acre (based soley on hunters' expenditures in 1975).
SOURCE: Palmer (70).
43
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-16
RUFFED GROUSE POPULATION
DATA* FOR PENNSYLVANIA
ORBES COUNTIES
Avq. Annual
Amount of
County Habitat
ALLE 86.2
ARMS 218.9
BEAV 134.6
BUTL 261.6
CAMB 284.6
CLAR 272.6
CLEA 608.0
ELK 360.4
FAYE 317.3
FORE 138.1
GREE 147.8
INDI 289.4
JEFF 292.8
LAWR 92.7
MERC 147.6
SOME 443.4
VENA 352.7
WASH 192.7
WEST 312.1
* 1972-73 averages
1 . Thousands of acres
2. Grouse/thousand acres
3. Grouse/thousand acres
Peak Pop.
2
Density
253
564
421
399
280
233
185
107
121
171
534
434
288
185
356
264
240
335
279
Avg. Fall
Population
Density 3
169
376
281
266
187
155
123
72
80
114
356
289
192
124
237
176
160
223
186
(immediately prior to
4. Grouse harvested/thousand acres
(durinq the
Avg. Annual
. a
Harvest
25
56
42
40
28
23
18
11
12
17
53
26
29
19
36
26 '
24
33
28
commencement of the
hunting season) .
Harvest
Value5
0.23
0.51
0.39
0.37
0.26
0.21
0.17
0.10
0.11
0.16
0.49
0.24
0.27
0.17
0.33
0.24
0.22
0.30
0.26
hunting s
5. Dollars/acre (based soley on hunters' expenditures in 1975).
SOURCE: Palmer (70)
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-17
WILD TURKEY POPULATION DATA*
FOR SOME PENNSYLVANIA ORBES COUNTIES**
County
CAMB
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
FORE
JEFF'
SOME
VENA
Amount of
Habitat1
102.4
144.0
601.6
505.6.
262.4
233.6
160.0
192.0
Avg. Annual
Peak Pop.
2
Density
34.5
9.9
15.0
22.2
24.2
28.5
32.2
18.4
Avg. Fall
Population
Density
24.6
7.0
10.7
15.9
17.3
20.4
23.0
13.1
Avg. Annual
4
Harvest
4.9
1.4
2.1
3.2
3.5
4.1
4.6
2.6
Harvest
Value5
0.49
0.14
0.21
0.32
0.35
0.41
0.46
0.26
**
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
1972-73 averages
Remaining Pa. ORBES Counties have insufficient data for population
calculations.
Thousands of acres
Turkeys/thousand acres
Turkeys/thousand acres (immediately prior to commencement of the hunting season)
Turkeys harvested/thousand acres (during the hunting season).
Dollars/acre (based soley on hunters' expenditures in 1975).
SOURCE: Palmer (70)
45
-------
program, seventy-five 'percent of the birds presented as
goshawk for bounty were other species of predators including:
sparrow haw.k, screech; owl ,r go! den eagle, turkey vulture, red-
tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper's hawk, osprey, and
even peregrine falcon: (71,{72).': More importantly, the predator
control programs of the past convinced a significant number
of Pennsylvania nimrods that predatory birds threaten game
populations. Consequently, many predatory birds are still
"shot on sight" in violation of both state and federal laws.
5. Endangered Birds
The peregrine falcon (Falco peregri nus), Kirtland's
warbler (Dendroica kirtjandii) , and southern bald eagle
(Haliaeetus 1. 1eucgcephalus) are endangered birds which may
occur in the Pennsylvania ORBES region. The falcon and war-
bler are occasional migrants through the area; the eagle nests
in Crawford County which borders the ORBES region.
The peregrine falcon prefers rough, wooded country as its
habitat. Todd (62) notes that peregrines have a tendency to
avoid flat cultivated areas. In Pennsylvania the breeding
areas of this falcon were typically located on cliffs in the
vicinity of water. Although this falcon has not been known
to breed in Pennsylvania since 1952 (56), thirty-four rock
ledges once served as nesting sites in the state (72).
The abundance of peregrines in pre-colonial times has been
estimated at a mere five thousand birds for the entire continent
(73). The species was therefore prone to impact from man and
his activities since the time of Europeancolonization. The
exact reasons for the demise of the peregrine are not definitely
known;. however, pesticides are suspected of killing birds direct
ly and rendering eggs infertile (61, 73).
The Kirtland's warbler is a small songbird that nests in
the jack-pine forests of Michigan and winters in the Bahama
Islands. While migrating in the spring and fall, this bird
has been known to pass through the Pennsylvania ORBES region
(33, 34, 62). Mayfield (74) has ascribed their demise to the
northward recession of the jack-pine plant association and
increased pressure from the brown-headed cowbird.
The southern bald eagle currently inhabits a few areas in
Crawford County, Pennsylvania. Three nests located in the ,
Black Jack and Sanctuary areas of Pymatuning State Park and
in Conneaut Marsh near Geneva usually yield two eggs/nest/
year; however, only one of these six eggs typically hatches
(75). Pesticides are suspected of being a possible cause of
this poor reproductive success.
At a recent symposium on the status of nongame species in
Pennsylvania the following recommendations were made for the
management of the Commonwealth's avifauna:
46
-------
a.) Adoption of guidelines (76] concerning the minimum
breeding area requirements of warblers and vireos.
Such guidelines should be incorporated into strategems
for the management of state parks and forests.
b.) Elimination of pesticide use in the control of the
gypsy moth.
c. ) Consolidation and extension of existing knowledge of
Pennsylvania birdlife.
C. Mammals
Prior to European colonization, the vast forests of Pennsylvania
supported a diverse mammalian fauna. Wolf (Cani s lupus) , cougar
(F e1i s concolor) , beaver (Castor canadensis )~ f1sher (Martes p e n n a t i) ,
marten (.M. ameFi cana) , Canadian lynx (.Lynx canadensis), elk (Cervus
canadensis) . and even an occasional wolverine (Gulo luscus) were
known to inhabit pre-settlement Pennsylvania (14, 77, 78). Some
authors contend that moose (Alces alces) and bison (Bison bison)
were also present, but such claims have never been substantiated
(79, 80, 81). By the end of the nineteenth century, all of the
aforementioned species had become extinct from the state (77). More-
over, market hunting had made white-tailed deer (Qdocoileus virginiana)
so rare, that occasional sitings merited front page coverage in cer-
tain area newspapers (81). Later efforts by the Pennsylvania Game
Commission resulted in the re-introduction of the beaver and elk.
Management techniques likewise helped to greatly increase the deer
herd. Nonetheless, the majority of the original.boreal species
have remained extinct from the state.
The draft material of the Corps of Engineers', "Environmental
Resource Inventory," (48) lists sixty-two species of mammals as
currently occurring in western Pennsylvania. About half of these
species can be legitimately categorized as common. During the last
century, populations of the white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virgini-
anus) , eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanusTT eastern
chipmunk (Tamias striatus), gray squirrel (Sciurus caroli nensis) ,
woodchuck (Marmota monaxT> red fox (Vulpes vulpes), meadow vole
(Microtus pennsyTvanicus) , and raccoon (Procyon lotor) have faired
welland in many instances have shown evidence of increasing.
Conversely, bobcat (Lynx rufus) and river otter (Lontra canadensis)
populations have suffered extensive damage in the Pennsylvania
ORBES region.
Current patterns of mammalian distribution within the study
area vary from species to species. Many mammals such as the chip-
munk, gray squirrel, and raccoon are abundant throughout the Penn-
sylvania ORBES region. Nonetheless, several general trends are
evident:
47
-------
a.) Deer and black, bear QJrsus 'anter 1 c a n u s.) population
densities are greatest in ;the northeastern counties
of the study are:a. 5
b.) Porcupine C E r e t hi z o n ' d o r s^ a'turn} and beaver populations
are essentially confined to the northern counties.
c.) FO.X squirrel CSciurus niger rufiventer) populations
are essentially confined to the counties around
Pittsburgh.
d.) Cottontail rabbit, woodchuck, and vole, population
densities are greatest in the semi-agricultural counties
around Allegheny County.
e.) The Norway rat (R'attus norivegicus) , an introduced
pest, reaches peak densities on riparian land
around urban areas.
The Pennsylvania Game Commission classifies deer, elk*, black
bear, wild rabbits, woodchuck, raccoon, squirrels, bobcat*, and
snowshoe hare as game mammals. Population data on the three most
extensively studied species is presented in Tables 2.1.4.-18, 19,
and 20. Mink, muskrat, foxes, river otter*, beaver, skunk, and
opossum are classified as furbearers. Hunting and trapping consti-
tute big business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; license sales
alone typically exceed 14 million dollars annually. Millions more
are spent each year on ammunition, firearms, and supplies. In the
1976-77 marketing year, the statewide fur harvest (673,747 pelts,
comprised chiefly of muskrat) was worth 6.12 million dollars.
Past impacts on Pennsylvania's mammalian fauna are partially
attributable to deforestation via excessive logging, market hunting,
intensive fur trapping, and predator control programs. These act-
ivities no longer represent ecological threats to the Pennsylvania
ORBES region; they have long since been either discontinued or
placed under strict regulations. Urbanization and industrialization
are currently the greatest source of detrimental impacts on wildlife
Increased noise levels, habitat destruction from construction act-
ivities, predation by free-roaming pets, gross pollution, and high-
way traffic accidents are among the.more obvious causative agents.
Indeed, millions of mammals are killed every year on Pennsyl-
vania's roads. Rabbit, raccoon, woodchuck, opossum, skunk, and
deer are the most susceptible species. Quantifications of current
annual small game road kills are not available; however, it is
widely believed that such mortalities exceed the annual hunting
harvest by a considerable amount. Big game road kills are less
than hunting mortalities; however, they do account for a signifi-
cant fraction of the total annual attrition in deer. Those road-
killed deer which are located by Game Commission personnel are
recorded. Doubtlessly, many crippled individuals amble off the
highway and die without being reported or located. Thusly, the
*Hunting or trapping of these species is currently prohibited.
' 48
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-18
GRAY SQUIRREL POPULATION
DATA FOR PENNSYLVANIA ORBES COUNTIES
Avg. Annual
Peak Avg. Fall
Amount of Population Population Avg. Annual
1-2 3 4
County Habitat Density Density - Harvest
ALLE 86.2
ARMS 218.9
BEAV 134.6
3UTL 261.6
CAMB 284.6
CLAR 272.6
CLEA 608.0
ELK ' 360.4
FAYE 317-3
FORE 138.1
GREE 147.8
INDI 289.4
JEFF 292.8
LAWR 92.7
MERC 147.6
SOME 443.4
VENA 352.7
WASH 192.7
WEST 312 . 1
4.4
1.8
2.2
2.2
1.4
1.4
1.0
0.5
1.2
2.3
3.3
2.1
1.7
2.0
2.3
1.6
1.1
2.9
2.6
2.9
1.2
1.5
1.4
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.3
0.8
1.5
2.2
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.1
0.7
1.9
1.7
0.29
0.12
0.15
0.14
0.09
0.09
0.07
0.03
0.08
0.15
0.22
0.14
0.12
0.13
0.15
0.11
0.08
0.20
0.17
Harvest
Value5
2.13
0.88
1.09
1.05
0.68
0.68
0.48
0.23
0.60
1.09
1.60
1.01
0.84
0.97
1.12
0.79
0.54
1.42
1.26
1. Thousands of acres
2. Squirrels/acre
3- Squirrels/acre (immediately prior to commencement of the
hunting season) .
4. Squirrels harvested/acre (during the hunting season).
5. Dollars/acre (based solely on hunters' expenditures).
SOURCE: Palmer (70).
49
-------
TABLE 2.1.4£-19
COTTONTAIL RABBIT POPULATION
DATA FOR PENNSYLVANIA ORBES COUNTIES
Amount of
County Habitat
ALLE
ARMS
BEAV
BUTL
CAMB
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
PAYE
PORE
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
194.8
277-2
169-1
333.2
226.6
164.7
184.1
135.0
266.9
76.0
289-2
323.1
184.0
177.5
330.1
371.4
122.9
428.8
426.8
Avg. Annual '
Peak
Population
Density2
6.8
5.8
6.8
6.7
4.9
6.1
6.8
4.0
5.1
1.6
4.5
5.6
6.8
5.4
5.2
5.3
5.5
5.4
6.0
Avg. Fall
Population
Density^
1.6
1.3
1.5
1.5
i.i
' 1.4
1.5 -
0.9
1.1
0.4
1.0
1.3
1.5
,1.2
1.2
1.2
1-3
;1.2
1.4
Avg . Annual
Harvest
0.47
0.20
0.31
0.30
0.23
0.28
0.31
0.14
0.23
0.06
0.10
0.19
0.31
0.24
0.18
0.18
0.31
0.25'
0.34
Thousands of acres.
Rabbits/acre.
Rabbits/acre (immediately prior to commencement of the
season) .
Rabbits harvested/acre (during the hunting season).
Dollars/acre (based solely on hunters' expenditures in
Harvest
Value 5
11.52
4.91
7.62
7.48
5.55
6.81
7.62
3.33
5.67
1.36
2.52
4.69
7.62
5.99
4.42
4.44
7.75
6.07
8.36
hunting
1975)
SOURCE: Palmer (70).
50
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-20
WHITE-TAILED DEER POPULATION
DATA* FOR PENNSYLVANIA ORBES COUNTIES
Avg . Annual
Peak
Amount of Population
1 2
County Habitat Density
ALLE
ARMS
BEAV
B.UTL
CAMB
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
PAYE
FORE
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
210.3
391.0
232.4
466.6
408.7
358.2
688.7
387.3
463.7
147.8
348.3
482.2
389-0
213-6
380.3
655.1
412.1
496.2
576.6
*Based on 1972-75
1.
2.
3-
4.
5.
14
30
7
19
23
46
39
103
8
193
27
30
46
7
10
15
56
9
20
.7
.5
.8
.2
.8
.4
.3
.3
.7
.4
.9
.5
.0
.8
.0
.0
.1
.1
.3
Avg. Fall
Population Avg. Annual
3 4
Density Harvest
11
24
6
15
19
37
31
82
7
154
22
24
36
6
8
12
44
7
16
.8
.4
.2
.4
.0
.1
.4
.6
.0
.7
.3
.4
.8
.2
.0
.0
.9
.3
.3
I
4
1
3
4
7
6
8
1
23
3
6
7
0
2
4
8
1
4
.8
.9
.9
.8
.8
.4
.3
.3
.7
.2
.4
.1
.4
.9
.0
.2
.8
.8
.1
Harvest
Value5
1
4
1
3
4
7
6
8
1
23
3
6
7
0
1
4
8
1
4
.75
.85
.86
.83
.74
.37
.25
.22
.74
.10
34
.07
.32
.93
.98
.18
.93
.81
.04
averages
Thousands of acres.
Deer/thousand acres.
Deer/thousand acres (immediately prior
hunting season) .
Deer harvested/thousand acres (during
Dollars/acre (based solely on hunters'
to commencement of the
the hunting season) .
expenditures in 1975).
SOURCE: Palmer (70) .
-------
data presented in Table 2.1.4..-21 represents a conservative estimate
of annual white-tailed mortalities due to traffic mishaps. Westmore-
land, Butler and Venarigo Counties h.av|e among the highest mortalities
in the Commonwealth. Fergus (83] not*es that many deer and bear are
killed along the portion of Interstate 80 that cuts through the
heavily wooded Allegheny Plateau region (Clearfield, Jefferson,
Clarion, and Venango Counties).
Approximately ten species of mammals are considered to be rare
in the Pennsylvania ORBES region. By virtue of their present status,
the following four species merit additional consideration.
1. River Otter (Lontra canadensis)
Prior to the twentieth century, this aquatic mustelid
was a relatively common inhabitant of many Pennsylvania water-
ways. At the present time this species is very rare in the
state and is probably extinct from the study area. The last
individuals known to occur in the Pennsylvania ORBES region
.are as follows: the Ohio River in 1898, the Allegheny and
Monongahela Rivers in 1899, Jacob's Creek in 1905., and
Dunkard Creek in 1947 (79, 84). Otters were occasionally
reported along wild sections of the Clarion River in the
late 1940's, but Richmond and Rosland (85) were unable to
verify any of these sitings.
The extirpation of otters from western Pennsylvania
has been, ascribed to excessive deforestation, water pollu-
tion, and intensive trapping (86). The current statewide
population has been estimated to be between a range of 285-
465 animals, ninety percent of which are confined to the
northeastern counties of Pike, Monroe, and Wayne (87).
Wildlife biologists with the Game Commission describe the
otter as "barely holding its own" despite complete protection
in 1952 (88). Nonetheless, Eveland and Ryman note that half
of Pennsylvania's sixty-six counties contain suitable otter
habitat. Moreover, a limited live-trapping and transferral
program is now underway in an effort to repopulate the
Commonwealth. The preservation of relatively large, clean
streams with wild riparian land is necessary if this pro-
gram is to be successful.
2. Elk (Cervus canadensis)
In pre-colonial and colonial times the Pennsylvania elk
herds are believed to have attained their peak densities in
the mountainous central portion- of the state and in the
Pocono region of the northeast; however, elk did indeed
occur throughout much of the Pennsylvania ORBES region (79).
The native Pennsylvania elk became extinct between 1860 and
1870. Stocking efforts commenced in 1913 with individuals
procured from Yellowstone National Park; these animals were
-------
TABLE 2.1.4. -21
AVERAGE ANNUAL1 REPORTED
WHITE-TAILED DEER MORTALITIES
DUE TO TRAFFIC MISHAPS
IN THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
County
ALLE
ARMS
BEAV
BUTL
CAMS
CLAR
CLEA
ELK
FAYS
FORE
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
TOT*
STTO**
280
267
186
637
267
504
614
198
118
401
173
502
497
80
304
325
652
209
907
7,456
23,845
Range
493
- 666
342
- 1,133
- 345
- 745
970
391
300
592
392
- 695
- 831
119
417
456
- 1,041
493
- 1,260
-10,167
-29,914
Mean
367
505
275
807
312
593
832
303
206
469
259
596
690
102
342
392
845
312
1,089
9,307
26,177
One Standard Deviation
± 75
± 132
± 56
± 176
± 26
± 86
± 129
± 79
± 59
± 85
± 74
± 81
± 144
± 16
± 40
± 49
± 140
± 89
± 136
± 936
±2,007
1. 1971-1977 data
* Total for the Pennsylvania ORBES region
** Total for the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
SOURCE: Adapted from Pa. Game Commission (82).
53
-------
released chiefly in tiie counties of central Pennsylvania.
In the 1920's it became obvious that the elk population
could not withstand hunting pressure, so the species was
given complete protection in 1931,
Elk are currently very rare in Pennsylvania. The
herd size has typically averaged about fifty or sixty
individuals during the past decade (89). These animals
are essentially confined to the Cameron-Elk-Forest County
area. The majority of the population occurs between St.
Mary's and Benezette in Elk County and on State Game
Lands No. 14 in Cameron County (90, 91, 92). Preferred
elk habitat consists of grassy openings and fringe areas
where early post-disturbance successional communities
merge with mature forest, providing both food and cover.
The gradually maturing forests of State Game Lands No. 14
has eliminated many of these savanna-like areas, thereby
pushing the elk to nearby agricultrual areas (93). The
Game Commission has, therefore, undertaken a program of
selected land clearing on SGL No. 14 in order to encourage
the elk to remain on this tract.
The current estimated annual mortality rate for the
herd is about fifteen percent. The deaths are due to brain
worm infestation, natural attrition, shootings by careless
deer hunters, shootings by farmers due to crop damage, and
an occasional road kill (89). Moreover, it is believed that
elk are "high strung" animals and that a lack of solitude
may result in lower reproductive rates (79). This fact
is especially alarming when one considers that elk aren't
exceptionally prolific animals even under natural condi-
tions.
3. Bobcat (Lynx rufus)
This .nocturnal carnivore was relatively common through-
out most of the state prior to the early 1930's. Because
this cat preys upon game animals and livestock, the
Commonwealth paid bounties on it from 1810 until the mid-
1900's. During the twentieth century claims averaged about
200-300 cats per year with a range of 97-862 per year (79,
94). This predator control program is believed to have had
a significant impact on the state's population (71, 95).
The present statewide population of bobcats is estimated
from one hundred to si* hundred individuals (96). The Game
Commission believes that the population is currently on the
upswing and although it is still very rare, it is not likely
to become extinct (97). Prime bobcat habitat consists of
extensive tracts of second growth woodland with brushy areas.
In Pennsylvania they avoid areas with extensive farmland
(92). Rocky recesses are typically chosen as den areas,
therefore ledges, caves, and boulder piles may be considered
54
-------
valuable habitat assets. Tfie bobcat is susceptible to impact
from man due to its wide-ranging nature; it is known that
males may travel up to twenty miles in a single night in
search of a mate. If any individuals currently occur within
the Pennsylvania ORBES region, they are doubtlessly confined
to sparsely populated areas in the northern and eastern
counties (e.g. Elk, Forest, Clearfield, Cambria, and
Somerset].
4. Indiana Bat (MyOtis' soda! is)
This is the only Pennsylvania mammal that is currently
on the federal "Endangered Species List." Very little
knowledge exists as to the bionomy and habits of this bat,
for it was not described as a species until 1928 at which
time it was already rare. In the Pennsylvania ORBES region,
small wintering colonies have been reported from caves in
Fayette and Westmoreland Counties. Future encounters with
man could be severely detrimental to this species since
hibernating cave populations are concentrated and, therefore,
vulnerable to impact. (79).
At a recent symposium on the status of nongame species in
Pennsylvania (60), the mammalogical committee made the following
recommendations for the preservation of the Commonwealth's mammal-
ian fauna:
a.) Undertake a state mammal field survey.
b.) Construct a detailed vegetation habitat map of the
state.
c.) Make detailed studies of the transformations induced
by major developments (highways, strip mines, etc.)
d.) Develop guidelines for minimizing destructive changes.
e.) Identify vulnerable species and habitats.
f.) Purchase remaining outstanding natural areas.
2.1 .4.-3 SPECIFIC HABITATS
The Pennsylvania ORBES region contains a substantial number of
wild, scenic, natural and/or recreational areas. The Allegheny
National Forest comprises the largest single tract; the portion
within the study area occupies over 224 thousand acres of Forest
and Elk Counties. Throughout the study area, seventy-seven State
Game Lands account for approximately 277 thousand acres (see Fig.
2.1.4.-8). Twenty-two existing State Parks and five State Parks
currently under design, development, or acquisition contribute
119 thousand additional acres to the study area (see Fig. 2.1.4.-9)
55
-------
FIGURE 2.1.4. - 8
STATF GAME LANDS OF THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
en
cr>
Approx. Area of State Game Lands
in the Study Region
(thousands of acres)
ALLE
ARMS
BEAV
BUTL
CAMB
CIJVR
CLEA
ELK
FAYE
FORE
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
1.2
4.8
2.7
8.6
17.3
11.0
24.7
59 . 6 , . . , .
19.7
7.8
9.2
8.1
41.0
2.1..^.,
4.4
17.2
21.0
7.4
9.5
TOT
277.3
Boundary of the Pa.
ORBES Region
SOURCE: Adapted from Pa. Game Commission (98).
-------
en
FIGURE 2.1.4. - 9
STATE AND NATIONAL FORESTS/PARKS
OF THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
SlJitt ftWCtl LAND
ALCCGHtim HATlOtlM. fOMCST STA1C PAAnS O ST*rt Hi&TOAlC P*HHS Q SIA|C nlSIOHlC PROPCflTiCS AM) MuSCUMS (^HAIIOKAi. HiSIOftlC PARKS (J) UMOCRM VtLOPCD
SOURCE: Adapted from the Pa. Dept. of Commerce (99).
-------
and Table 2.1.4.-22). Various picnic areas, historical sites and
county parks, account for several thousand more acres. For a more
detailed mapping, of these'-areas} tft.e| reader is referred to Plates
IV-21 and IV-19 of Pennsylvania's, "Comprehensive Water Quality
Management Plan." (COWAMP') for.study areas 8 and 9 respectively
C100, 101). . i
The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy has identified 159
"Natural Areas" in the Pennsylvania ORBES region (see Appendix A).
These areas are by definition: a.) sites for basic scientific
research, b.) environmental quality baseline study areas, c.)
places providing guidance in land use, d.) habitats for reserves
of breeding stock biota, e.) outdoor classrooms for ecology, and
f.) protected areas of natural beauty (102). Many of these
natural areas are located on State Game Lands, State Forests, or
the Allegheny National Forest; others are located on privately
owned land which may or may not be protected from degradation.
Irregardless of ownership, these sites merit prime consideration
in the assessment of any potentially adverse environmental impacts.
The most significant of these natural areas are mapped on two -
plates (IV-22 and IV-17) of the Pennsylvania, "Comprehensive
Water Quality Management Plan" for study areas 8 and 9 respectively
(103, 104).
58
-------
TABLE 2.1.4.-22
STATE AND NATIONAL 'PARK LAND
OF THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
County
ALLE
ARMS
BEAV
BUTL
CAMS
CAMB-FAYE-
SOME-WEST
CLAR-FORE-
JEFF
CLEA
ELK
FAYE '
FAYE-SOME
GREE
INDI
JEFF
LAWR
MERC
SOME
VENA
WASH
WEST
Name of Park
Allegheny Islands*
Point State Park
Crooked Creek
Raccoon Creek
Moraine
Prince Gallitzin
Laurel Ridge
Cook Forest
Curwensville
Parker Dam
S.B. Elliott
Bendigo
Elk
Fort Necessity
Ohiopyle
Ryerson Station
Yellow Creek
Clear- Creek
McConnell's Mills
Maurice K. Goddard
Babcock
Kooser
Laurel Hill
Mount Davis
Mount Davis
Allegheny River*
Oil Creek*
Hillman*
Keystone
Laurel Mountain
Laurel Summit
Linn Run
Mountain Streams**
Acreage
Park Type"
TOTAL
139
36
2,440
6,909
15,838
6,249
15,426
6,418
2,118
895
330
100
3,192
912
18,443
1,104
2,822
1,209
2, '512
4, '883
54
170
3,935
581
10
3,165
7,001
3,780
1,187
493
15
560
8,000
120,930
S
H
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
U
S
S
S
S
S
S
P
S
S
N
p
S
S
S
S
S
p
S
S
*Under design or development
**Under acquisition
1. Key: S-State; P-State Forest Picnic Area: N-Natural Area;
U-National; H-Kistorical
SOURCE: Pa. Bureau of Statistics, Research, and Planning (99).
59
-------
REFERENCES,
1. V.C. Schepps. Pennsylvania .and the Ice.Age. Harrisburg: Pa. Geol. Survey,
1962, Geological Survey Educational Series No. 6.
2. C.E.P. Brooks. Climate through the Ages. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
Inc., 1949.
3. P.B. Sears. "Postglacial Migration of Five Forest Genera." American Journal
of Botany 29 (1942): 684-91.
4. L.D. Potter. "Post-glacial forest sequence of north-central Ohio." Ecology
28 (1947): 396-417.
5. P.B. Sears. "Forest sequence and climatic change in northeastern North
America since early Wisconsin time." Ecology 29 (1948): 326-333.
6. I.E. Braun. Deciduous Forests of Eastern North America (reprint of original).
New York: Hafner Press, 1974.
7. E.N. Transeau. "The Prairie Peninsula." Ecology 16 (1935): 423-37.
8. J.F. Lovell. Guide to Plants of the Jennings Blazing Star Nature Reserve -
Butler County, Pocket Guide No. 4, Pittsburgh:Western Pennsylvania Conser-
vancy, 1965.
9. O.E. Jennings and A. Avinoff. Wild Flowers of Western Pennsylvania and
the Upper Ohio Basin. Pittsburgh!University of Pittsburgh Press, 1953.
10. F.W. Preston. "Introduction to Glacial Lake Arthur: Lake deposits and
physiographic features." Guidebook for the Sixteenth Annual Field Conference
of Pennsylvania Geologists (mimeographed), Dept. of Geology, University of
Pittsburgh, 1950.
11. P.B. Sears. "Xerothermic Theory." The Botanical Review 8 (1942): 708-36.
12. A.M. Kuchler. Potential Natural Vegetation of the Coterminous United States.
Special Publication 36, American Geographical Society, 1964.
13. G.M. Day. "The Indian as an Ecological Factor in the Northeastern Forest."
Ecology 34 (1953): 327-46.
14. O.A. Marquis. The Allegheny Hardwood Forests of Pennsylvania. USDA Forest
Service General Technical Report NE - 15, Upper Darby, Pa., 1975.
15. J.S. Illick. The Forest Situation in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Dept. of
Forestry Bulletin 30, Harrisburg, 1923:
16. A.F. Hough and R.D. Forbes. "The Ecology and Silvics of Forests in the High
Plateau of Pennsylvania." Ecol. Monogr. 13 (1943): 299-320.
60
-------
17. S.J. Buck and E. Buck. The Planting of Civilization in Western. Pennsylvania.
Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1939.
18. W.C. Grimm. The Trees of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg: Stackpole and Heck,
Inc. 1950.
19. S.A.Wilhelm. "History of the Lumber Industry of the Upper Allegheny River
Basin during the Nineteenth Century." Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1953.
20. Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters. "Biennial Report 1948-50."
Harrisburg, Pa., 1950.
21. Pennsylvania Department of Commerce. Pennsylvania Forest Industry Statistics.
Harrisburg, Pa., 1967.
22. R.V. Reynolds and A.H. Pierson. Lumber Cuts of the United States. U.S.D.A.
Bulletin No. 1119, Washington, D.C., 1923.
23. U.S. Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experimental Station, Upper Darby,
Pa. Private Communication, April 27, 1978.
24. J.T. Bones and O.K. Sherwood. Primary Wood-Product Industries of Pennsylvania.
U.S.D.A. Forest Service Resource Bulletin NEr-27, Upper Darby, Pa., 1972.
25. R.H. Ferguson. The Timber Resources of Pennsylvania. U.S.D.A. Forest Service
Resource Bulletin NE-8, Upper Darby, Pa., 1968.
26. E.L. Little. "A Check List of Native and Naturalized Trees of the United
States (including Alaska)." U.S. Dept. Agr., Agr. Handbook No. 41, 1953.
27. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office of Appalachian Studies. Development of
Water Resources in Appalachia. Main Report II - Sub-Regional Plans, Chap. 11,
46: 25. Cincinnati, 1969.
28. J.S. Illick. A Guide to Forestry, Book I. Pennsylvania Department of Forestry
Bulletin No. 26, Harrisburg, Pa., 1922.
29. Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters. Departmental records for 1934
and 1947. In: The Pennsylvania Manual. B. Focht (ed.), Harrisburg, Pa.,
1934 and 1947.
30. U.S. Forest Service. Forest Survey Statistics for Pennsylvania. Upper Darby,
Pa., 1951.
31. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. Departmental records for 1958, 1968, and
1974. In: Pennsylvania Statistical Abstracts. Pennsylvania Dept. of
Commerce, Bureau of Statistics Research and Planning, Harrisburg, Pa., 1977.
32. K.S. Erdman and P.G. Wiegman. Preliminary List of Natural Areas in Pennsylvania.
Pittsburgh: Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, 1974.
33. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District. Allegheny River, Pennsylvania
(mile 0 to mile 72), Final Environmental Statement on the Operation and
Maintenance of the Navigation System. Pittsburgh, 1975.
61
-------
34. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh'District. Monongahela River,
Pennsylvania and West Virginia, Draft Environmental Statement on the Operation
and Maintenance of the Navigation System.. Pittsburgh, 1975.
4 r ~'
35. U.S. Forest Service, Northeastern Forest-Experiment Station. Map of the
Major Forest Types in Pennsylvania; Upper Darby, Pa., 1955.
36. Smithsonian Institution. "Report on Endangered and Threatened Plant Species
of the U.S." House Document.94-51. Serial No. 94A. Washington, D.C., 1975.
37. H.A. Gleason and A. Cronquist. Vascular Plants of the Northeastern United
States and Adjacent Canada. New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1963.
38. The Federal Register. "Fauna and Flora" Vol. 40, No. 127, July 1975, pp. 2783-
2792.
39. Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Department of Botany. Unpublished herb-
arium records. Pittsburgh, Pa., 1978.
40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Methods for Identifying and Evaluating
the Nature and Extent of Nonpoint Sources of Pollutants. Washington, D.C.,
1973.
41. Green International, Inc. Existing Population, Economy and Land Use of Study
Area 9 (prelim, draft). Prepared for the Pa. Dept. of Environ. Resources by
Green Int. of Sewickley, Pa., 1976.
42. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. Sub-basin 17 - State Water
Plan (draft copy). Harrisburg, Pa., 1977.
43. The Copeland Report - A National Plan for American Forestry, Vol. 1, Senate
Resolution 175, 72nd Congress, pp. 378-395, 1933.
44. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office of Appalachian Studies. Development of
Water Resources in Appalachia. Main Report II - Sub-Regional Plans, Chap. 11,
46: 25.. Cincinnati, 1969.
45. Pennsylvania Fish Commission. Pennsylvania Reptiles and Amphibians, 3rd ed.,
M.G. Netting and N.D. Richmond (eds.), Harrisburg, Pa., 1950.
46. R. Conant. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians. Boston: Houghton
MiffTin Co., 1958.
47. W.F. Blair et_ ajL Vertebrates of the United States. 2nd ed., New York:
McGraw-Hill Co., 1968.
48. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District. Environmental Resource
Inventory (draft material). Pittsburgh', 1977.
49. H.K. Reinert and P.L. Dalby. "Distributional Patterns of Pennsylvania
Herpetofauna," Manuscript under preparation at the Biology Department of
Clarion State College, Clarion, Pa., 1978.
62
-------
50. Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Division of Herpetology and Endangered Species,
Bellefonte, Pa. Private Communication July 25, 1978.
51. Pennsylvania Fish Commission. "New List of Endangered, Threatened, or
Status Indeterminate Fishes, Amphibians, and Reptiles." Bellefonte, Pa.,
1977.
52. Pennsylvania Fish Commission. Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws - 1978.
Harrisburg, 1978.
53. Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Department of Herpetology. Pittsburgh,
Pa., Private Communication June 25, 1978.
54. Based upon the collecting experience of the author between 1964 and 1978.
55. Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, Division of Zoology. The Serpents of
Pennsylvania. IV (4, 5), Harrisburg, 1906.
56. Green International, Inc. Environmental Characteristics of Study Area 8
(preliminary draft)r Chap. IV, Comprehensive Water Management Plan (COWAMP)
prepared for the Pa. Dept. of Environ. Resources by Green International,
Sewickley, Pa. 19
57. J.K. Bowler. "Venomous Snakes of Pennsylvania." Pennsylvania Game News
45(7), 1974.
58. Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Department of Environmental Science.
Pittsburgh, Pa., Private Communication January 24, 1978.
59. Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Division of Herpetology and Endangered Species,
Bellefonte, Pa., Private Communication July 28, 1978.
60. Pennsylvania Game Commission and the National Audubon Society. Proceedings
of the Symposium on Nongame Species October 1, 1977. T. Williams (ed.),
Harrisburg, Pa., 1978.
61. G. Laycock. America's Endangered Wildlife. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.,
Inc., 1969.
62. W.E.C. Todd. Birds of Western Pennsylvania. Pittsburgh: University of
Pittsburgh Press, 1940.
63. J.A. Allen. Bulletin Museum Comparative Zoo!. 2: 375-425, 1871.
64. C.H. Merriam. Nat. Geogr. Mag. 6: 229-238, 1894.
65. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. Sub-basin 16-State Water
Plan (draft copy). Harrisburg, Pa., 1977.
66. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. Sub-basin 20 - State
Water Plan (draft copy). Harrisburg, Pa., 1977.
63
-------
67. L.A. Luttringer. Pennsylvania Birdlife.^ 7th ed., Harrisburg,.Pa.:
Pennsylvania Game Commission, 1973.
68V PennsylvaniaGame Commission. Departmentf of Information and-..Education.
"Hunting in Southwestern Pennsylvania." * Harrisburg, Pa., 19761 ," .
69. Pennsylvania Game Commission, Department-of Information and-Education.
"Hunting in Northwestern Pennsylvania." . Harrisburg, Pa., 1976.
70. H. Palmer. Environmental Impact Review Manual. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania
Game Commission, 1977.
71. R. Gerstell. The Pennsylvania Bounty System. Research Bulletin No. 1.
Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission, 1937.
72. S.P. Baldwin, S.C. Kendeigh, and R.W. Franks. "The protection of hawks
...and. owls in Ohio." Ohio Jour. Sci. 32(5): 403-424, 1932.
73. M.E. Rutzmoser and O.S. Heintzelman. "Peregrines and pesticides -.the
extinction of a species." Pa. Game .News 41(6), 1970.
74. H. Mayfield. The Kirtland's Warbler. Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Cranbrook
Inst. of Science, 1960.
75. Pennsylvania Game Commission, Waterfowl Mgmt. Station, Pymatuning Reservoir. .
Private Communication July 20, 1978.
76. American Birds 31: 3-23.
77. W.C. Grimm and R. Whitebread. Mammal Survey of Northeastern Pennsylvania.
Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission, 1952.
78. R.M. Gilmore. "Mammals in archaeological collections from southwestern
Pennsylvania.". Journ. Mamm. 27(3): 227-334.
79. O.K. Doutt, C.A, Heppenstall, and J.E. Guilday. Mammals of Pennsylvania.
R.M. Latham (ed.). Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission, 1966.
80. R.B. Simpson. "Mammals of Warren County, Pennsylvania." Unpublished field
notes; a copy is on file at the Allegheny National Forest Station, Warren,
Pa., 1890-1944. :
81. H.E. Clepper. The Deer Problem in the Forests of Pennsylvania. Pa. Dept.
of Forests and Waters Bulletin No. 50, Harrisburg, 1931'.'
82. Compiled from various issues of Pennsylvania Game News from 1971 to 1977.
-83. C. Fergus. "A Wasted Harvest.-" . Pennsylvania-.Game News, Vol. 45(10), .,
Harrisburg, 1974. -
84. W.C. Grimm and H.A. Roberts. Mammal Survey of Southwestern Pennsylvania.
Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission, 1950.
64
-------
85. N.D. Richmond and H.R. Rosland. Mammal Survey of Northwestern Pennsylvania.
Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission, 1949.
86. L.A. Luttringer, Jr. An Introduction to the Mammals of Pennsylvania.
Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission, 1931.
87. T. Eveland and I. Rymon. "Pennsylvania Otter Study." In: Proceedings of
the Symposium on Nongame Species Oct. 1, 1977. T. Williams (ed.). Harrisburg:
Pa. Game Commission, January 1978.
88. Pennsylvania Game Commission, Department of Information and Education.
"Mammals Conservation Fact Sheet." Harrisburg, Pa.
89. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Forestry.
Private Communication. Harrisburg, Pa. June 21, 1978.
90. Pennsylvania Game Commission. A Digest of Pennsylvania Hunting and Trapping
Regulations. Harrisburg, Pa., 1977.
91. Pennsylvania Bureau, of Maps. Pennsylvania County Maps and Recreational
Guide. Kaukauna, Wisconsin: Thomas Publications - Hartjes Center, 1978.
92. Pennsylvania Game Commission. Twenty-five Well-Known Pennsylvania Mammals.
Harrisburg, Pa., 1954.
93. T. Godshall. "A New Approach to Elk Management." Pennsylvania Game News,
Harrisburg, Pa., 1976.
94. Pennsylvania Game Commission. "Annual Report of the Board of the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania for the Year 1921." Harrisburg, Pa., 1922.
95. R.M. Latham. The Ecology and Economics of Predator Management. Report No. 2
of the Pittman - Robertson Project 36-R. Harrisburg: Pa. Game Commission,
1951.
96. Pennsylvania Game Commission. "Bobcat" Game Conservation Wildlife Note 175-3.
Harrisburg, 1975.
97. Pennsylvania Game Commission. Pennsylvania Game News. 48(7), Harrisburg, 1977.
98. Pennsylvania Game Commission, Department of Information and Education.
Harrisburg, Pa.
99. Pennsylvania Department of Commerce, Bureau of Statistics, Research, and
Planning. Pennsylvania Statistical Abstracts. 19th ed., Harrisburg, Pa., 1977.
100. Green International, Inc. "State/Federal Recreation Areas" Plate IV-21,
COWAMP Study Area 8. Prepared for Pa. Dept, of Environ. Resources by Green
Intern, of Sewickley, Pa., 1975.
101. Green International, Inc. "State/Federal Recreation Areas." Plate IV-19,
COWAMP Study Area 9. Prepared for Pa. Dept. of Environ. Resources by Green
Int. of Sewickley, Pa. 1975.
102. Illinois Nature Preserves Commission. Comprehensive Plan for the Illinois
Nature Preserves System, Part I - Guidelines. Rockford, 111., 1972.
65
-------
103. Green International, Inc. "Conservation Map" Plate'lV-22, COWAMP Study Area
8. Prepared for Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources by Green Intern, of Sewickley,
Pa., 1975.
104. Green International, Inc. "Conservation" Map" Plate IV-17, COWAMP Study Area
9. Prepared for Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources by Green Intern, of Sewickley,
Pa., 1975.
66
-------
APPENDIX
-------
APPENDIX
KEY TO ALPHA - NUMERIC DESCRIPTORS
OF NATURAL AREAS
IN THE PENNSYLVANIA ORBES REGION
FORMAT: Name of Site - County; 7.s'uSGS Quad.; distance and direction from the
nearest city; size in acres; owner; protection status.
Key type Other types K types
See Table 2.1.4.-1
SAF * Forest types
OVT « Herbs, Scenic 4 Research types
Z = Zoologic types
G = Geologic types
A * Aquatic types
FOREST TYPES
SAF 16 Aspen SAF 44 Chestnut Oak
SAF 18 Paper Birch SAF 45 Pitch Pine
SAF 19 Gray Birch - Red Maple SAF 46 Eastern Red Cedar
SAF 21 White Pine SAF 50 Black Locust
SAF 22 White Pine - Hemlock SAF 51 White Pine - Chestnut Oak
SAF 23 Hemlock f SAF 52 White Oak - Red Oak - Hickory
SAF 24 Hemlock - Yellow Birch SAF 53 White Oak
SAF 25.Sugar Maple - Beech - Yellow Birch SAF 54 Northern Red Oak - Basswood -
White Ash
SAF 26 Sugar Maple r Basswood
SAF 58 Yellow Poplar - Hemlock
SAF 27 Sugar Maple
SAF 59 Yellow Poplar - White Oak -
SAF 28 Black Cherry - Sugar Maple Northern Red Oak
SAF 29 Black Cherry SAF 60 Beech - Sugar Maple
SAF 39 Black Ash - American Elm - Red Maple SAF 61 River Birch - Sycamore
SAF 41 Scarlet Oak SAF 63 Cottonwood
SAF 43 Bear Oak
HERB. RESEARCH. AND SCENIC TYPES
OVT 3 Sand Barren OVT 9 Rare and Endangered Species .
Locality
OVT 4 Prevernal Herbaceous Flora
OVT 10 Type locality
OVT 5 Vernal Herbaceous Flora
OVT.11 Talus Community
OVT 6 Meadowlands
OVT 12 Cliff Community
OVT 7 Scenic Areas/Natural Vistas
OVT 13 Bryophytes and Ferns
OVT 8 School Study Site/Research Site/
Nature Trail OVT 15 Serotinal Herbaceous Flora
A-l
OVT 17 Heath Barren
OVT 19 Thickets
-------
ZOOLOGIC TYPES '
Z 9 Arthropoda
Z 13 True Fish .
Z 15 Reptiles '
Z 16 Birds
Z 17 Mammals
GEOLOGIC TYPES
G 1 Plains, Plateaus, and Mesas
G 6 Folded Mountains
G 9 Caves
G 10 Works of Erosion
G 11 Works of Glaciers
G 13 Volcanoes and Assorted Works
G 16 Igneous (granite, felsite, basalt)
G 17 Sedimentary (clay, sandstone, limestone)
G 23 Carbonates (calcite, aragonite)
G 28 Silicates (quartz, opal, talc, mica)
G 30 Non-human Zoo logic
G 31 Botanic
AQUATIC TYPES
A 12 Rapidly Flowing Rivers and Streams
A 13 Slow Meandering Rivers and Streams
A 15 Springs
A 19 Large Shallow Lakes
A 22 Kettle Lakes and Potholes
A 23 Oxbow Lakes
A 25 Sphagnum Bog
A 29 Swamps and Marshy Areas
A 34 Lake Shorelines
A-2
-------
APPENDIX
INVENTORY OP
WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY
NATURAL AREAS IN THE PENNSYLVANIA
ORBES REGION
ALLEGHENY COUNTY
1. A.W. ROBERTSON ARBORETUM-Allegheny; Bridgeville; Pleasant Hills;
16 Ac; A.W. Robertson Corporation; complete protection.
SAF52 (K104)
2. BOYCE PARK-Allegheny; Braddock; 2 miles N of Monroeville; 50 Ac;
Allegheny County Parks; partial protection.
SAF60 OVT9 (K102)
3. BURKE GLENN FOSSIL SITE-Allegheny; Murrysville; 2 miles W of
Murrysville; PennDot; partial protection.
G30 G17, Gl
4. GROUSE RUN-Allegheny; Glenshaw: N of Allison Park; 55 Ac: private;
no protection.
SAF23 SAF61, OVT4, OVT9, OVT7 (K106)
5. DARK HOLLOW WjDO_DS_-Allegheny; New Kensington West; just N of
Oakmont; 80 Ac; Oakmont Borough; complete protection.
SAF52 G10 (K104)
6. DEER CRJIEK-Allegheny; New Kensington West;' 2 miles E of Dorsey-
ville; 70 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF52 SAF23, SAF61, G10 (K104)
7. FALL RUN PARK-Allegheny; Glenshaw; 4 miles N of Etna; 109 Ac;
Shaler Township; partial protection.
OVT10 G10, OVT4, OVT73 SAF59 (K103)
8. 14 MILE ISLAND-Allegheny; New Kensington West; at Harmarville;
Fo" Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete protection.
SAF61 SAF62, SAF63, G10, OVT8
9. HARMARVILLE ROAD CUT_-Allegheny; New Kensington West; Harmarville;
PennDot; no protection.
G17 G303 G31
10. LAWRENCE ESTATE-Allegheny; Glenshaw; N of Etna; 200 Ac; Allegheny
County Parks; partial protection.
SAF52 (K104)
11. McCORMICK OAKS-Allegheny; Glenshaw; just NE of North Park Dam;
100 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF52 (K104)
A-3
-------
12. PENN HILLS PARK-Allegheny; New Kensington West; just N of Oakmont;
100 Ac; municipal park; no protection.
SAF27 G10, Gl, OVT7 (K102)
13. RED CEDAR STAND-Al'legheny; Glenshaw; S of Dorseyville; 10 Ac;
private; no protection.
SAP'16
14. TRILLIUM TRAIL-Allegheny; Glenshaw; NE of Sharpsburg; 100 Ac;
Pox Chapel Borough; complete- protection.
OVT4 SAF52, SAF59, A12 (K103, K104)
15. TURTLE CREEK-Allegheny & Westmoreland; Murrysville; N of Pitcairn;
300 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF61 G10
16. WHITE OAK PARK-Allegheny; McKeesport; just NE of White Oak;
50 Ac; Allegheny County Parks; partial protection.
SAF60 OVT4 (K102)
ARMSTRONG COUNTY .
17. BRADY'S BEND OVERLOOK-Armstrong; East Brady; 2 miles N of East
Brady; 2 Ac; PennDot; partial protection.
G10 OVT7
18. BUFFALO CREEK VALLEY-Armstrong & Butler; Freeport and Worthington;
between Freeport and Worthington; private; no protection.
A12 SAF52, SAF23, SAF24, Z13, OVT7, OVT4 , G10 (1-104, KL06)
19. CROOKED CREEK STATE PARK-Armstrong; Leechburg & Whitesburg;
2,480 Ac; State Park; partial protection.
SAF52 SAF59, Gl (K103, K104)
20. NICHOLSON ISLAND-Armstrong; Leechburg; just N of lock #6; 40 Ac;
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete protection.
SAF62 G10, A29
21. WORTHINGTON FOSSIL SITE-Armstrong; Worthington; 2.7 miles NW of
Worthington; private; no protection.
G30 G17
BEAVER COUNTY
22. ALIQUIPPA FOSSIL SITE-Beaver; Aliquippa; 3 miles S of Aliquippa;
private; no protection.
G30 G173 Gl
23. BLAZING STAR MEADOW-Beaver; Beaver Falls; 1 mile NE of Beaver
Falls; 7 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT9 OVT6, OVT15
A-4
-------
24. LITTLE BEAVER RIVER-Beaver; East Palestine; N of Ohioville;
private; no protection.
Gil OVT7
25. RACCOON CREEK STATE PARK-Beaver; Hookstown & Aliquippa &
Burgettstown; 6,909 Ac; State Park: partial protection.
SAF52 SAF59, SAF16, SAF50, Gl, A12 OVT6, OVT19 (K104, K103)
26. WILDFLOWER RESERVE-Beaver; Aliquippa & Clinton; NE of Raccoon
Creek State Park; 300 Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy;
complete protection.
OVT4 SAF52, SAF62, SAF61, SAF39, SAF24, Gl, A12, OVT19, OVT6
OVTB" (K104)
BUTLER COUNTY
27. ALLISON WOODS-Butler; Prospect; just N of Moraine State Park;
100 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT9 OVT5, OVT4, SAF25, SAF44, SAF52, SAF60 (K104, K102)
28. BEAR CREEK VALLEY-Butler; Foxburg; between Bruin and Parker;
500 Ac; State Game Lands; no protection.
SAF24 A12, G30, G17, G10, OVT5, OVT7, SAF52 (K104)
29. BURNS WOODS-Butler; Parker & Billiards; 1 mile SW of Bruin;.
10 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF32
BUFFALO CREEK VALLEY-Armstrong & Butler; Freeport & Worthington;
private; no protection, (see Nat. area #18)
A12 SAF52, SAF23, SAF24, Z13, OVT7, OVT4, G10 (K104, K106)
30. DESHON WOODS-Butler; Butler; 3 miles NW of Lyndora; 16 Ac;
Butler Township; partial protection.
SAF52 (K104)
31. EPWORTH WOODS-Butler; Mars; 4 miles W of Mars; 30 Ac; private;
no protection.
SAF52 (K104)
32. HEINER FOREST-Butler; Parker; just N of Bruin; 18 Ac; Western
Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete protection.
OVT4 SAF52
33. HOGG WOODS-Butler; Slippery Rock; 2 miles NE of Slippery Rock;
30 Ac; private: no protection
SAF60 SAF53, Gl, Gil (K104, K102)
34. JACKSON TOWNSHIP PARK-Butler; Zelienople; just N of Zelienople;
150 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT4 OVT9
35. JENNINGS NATURE RESERVE-Butler; Slippery Rock: 5 miles S of
Slippery Rock; 300 Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete
protection
OVT9 SAF16, SAF52, A29, A13, OVT6, OVT15, OVT19, OVT8, Z15 (K104)
A-5
-------
36. LOWERY RUN-Butler; Emlenton;' 1 mile SE of Emlenton; 90 Ac;
. private; no protection.
SAF23 A12, G10, OVT4 (-K106); *
'-'*'(% .
f f
37. McCORMICK GORGE-Butler; Slippery 'Rock; E of Moores Corners;
400 Ac; private; no pro.tectibn. :'
G10 A12, Gil, Gl; SAF23, OVT4, At5, A23, SAF25, SAF59
TK103, K106)
\
38. MERIDIAN LABORATORIES-Butler; Butier; just NE of Meridian;
100 Ac; private; complete protection.
OVT8 Z16, SAF52, OVT6 (K104)
39. MILLER WOODS-Butler, Slippery Rock; 2 miles NW of Slippery Rock;
42 Ac; Slippery Rock State College; partial protection.
SAF27 SAF61, A23, Gl, Gil, A12 (K102)
40. MORAINE STATE PARK-Butler; Prospect and Chestnut and Slippery
Rock; 15,921 Ac; State Park; partial protection.
Gil Z16, A19, A34, SAF16, SAP53,1 SAF52, SAF60, Gl, OVT6, OVT19,
TIT04, K103)
41. ONEIDA DAM-Butler; East Butler; 4 miles NE of.Butler; 200 Ac;
water authority; partial protection.
Z16 OVT5
42. PARKER FOSSIL SITS-Butler, Parker; 1 mile SW of Parker; private;
no protection.
G_3p_ G17
43- RENFREW WOQDS-Butler; Butler; W of Renfrew; 200 Ac; private;
no protection.
OVT4 SAF59, SAF62, SAF52 (K103, K104)
44. ROUTE 488 OVERLOOK-Butler; Prospect; 2.2 miles N of the inter-
section of Rt. 488 and Rt. 422; 5 Ac; private; no protection.
Gil
45. SCHOLAR'S RUN-Butler; Zelienople; 4 miles N of Zelienople; 80 Ac;
private; no protection. .:
OVT9
46. SQUAW VALLEY RUN-Butler; Emlenton; SW of Emlenton; private; no
protection.
SAF60 (K102)
47. TODD SANCTUARY-Butler, Freeport; 3-5 miles N of Freeport; 130 Ac;
Audubon Society of Western Pennsylvania: complete protection.
SAP24 Z16, OVT7, OVT8, 'SAF52, SAF16, Ai2, Gl, G10, OVT4
(K106, K104)
48. WEST LIBERTY ESKER-Butler; Slippery Rock; between West Liberty
and Jackville; private; no protection.
Gil
' A-6
-------
49. WOLF CREEK NARROWS-Butler; Slippery Rock; 2 miles NW of
Slippery Rock; 100 Ac; private; no protection.
G10 SAF28, SAF59, SAF58, SAF60, Gl, Gil, A12, A29
TK106, K103)
CAMBRIA COUNTY
50. DUNLO FLATS-Cambria; Beaverdale; 2 miles SE of Dunlo;
200 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF19 SAF23, SAF16, Gl, A25, A29 (K106)
51. ELMHURST BOG_-Cambria; Ebensburg; 2 miles NE of Ebensburg;
10 Ac; private, no protection.
A25
52. LAUREL RIDGE STATE PARK-Cambria & Westmoreland & Somerset &
Fayette; Johnstown & Rachelwood & Boswell & Ligonier &
Bakersville, and Seven Springs & Kingwood & Mill Run &
Ohiopyle; 15,436 Ac, State Park, 3,752 Ac. of which are in
Cambria County; partial protection.
G6. OVT7, G10, A12, SAF44, SAF52, OVT19, OVT12 (K104)
53. PRINCE GALLITZIN STATE PARK-Cambria; Coalport; 6,600 Ac;
State Park; partial protection.
SAF52 SAF25, SAF16, Gl, A29 (K104, K106)
CLARION COUNTY
54. COOKS FOREST STATE PARK-Clarion & Jefferson & Forest;
Cooksburg & Lucinda & Tylersburg & Marienville West;
7,822 Ac; partial protection. (Complete protection to 3
virgin tracts)
SAF21 SAF16, SAF22, SAF23, SAF24, SAF25, SAF52, Gl, A12,
A29 (K104, K106)
55. RIMER5BURG FOSSIL SITE-Clarion; Rimbersburg; 1.2 miles N of
Rimbersburg; private; no protection.
G30 G17
CLEARFIELD COUNTY
56. BILGER ROCKS-Clearfield; Curwensville; 3-5 miles WNW of
Curwensville; 30 Ac; private; no protection.
G10 G17, OVT7, SAF24, OVT12, OVT13 (K106)
57. CLEARFIELD FOSSIL REEF-Clearfield; Glenn Richey; 2 miles S of
Clearfield; private; no protection.
G31 G17, OVTS, Gl
58. NEW LONDON FOSSIL SITS-Clearfield; Ramey; 6 miles N of
Beccaria; private; no protection.
G31 G17
A-7
-------
59- QUEHANNA WILD AREA-Clearfi[eId & Elk & Cameron; Driftwood &
Sinnemahoning & Devils Elbow & ^ottersdale; 50,000 Ac; Elk
& Moshannon State Forests; partial protection.
SAF25. SAF16, SAF19 > ;.:SAF44;5 SAE52, A29, Gl, OVT6 (K104, K106)
ELK COUNTY . ': \ \:
60. BIG HILL CREEK BOG_-Elk; James city; Jones Township along Big
Mill Creek S of a pipeline'; 1 Ac; Allegheny National Forest;
no protection.
A25 OVT9
61. BLACK CHERRY STAND-Elk; James City; 100 Ac; Kane Experimental
Forest-Allegheny National Forest; partial protection.
SAF29 (K106)
62. 3ROCKPORT FOSSIL SITE-Elk; Brandy Camp; just N of Brockport;
private; no protection.
G30 G17
63. DENTS FARM NATURAL AREA-(Proposed) Elk; West Creek.; 2 miles
N of Dents Run; 12+ Ac; Elk State Forest; complete protection.
SAF21 Gl (K104)
64. HIGHLAND BOG_-Elk; James City; 1 mile N of Highland; 1 Ac;
private; no protection.
A25
65- PAIGE RUN NATURAL AREA-(Proposed) Elk; Dents Run & Driftwo'od;
10 miles SW of Sinnamahoning; 917 Ac; Moshannon State Forest;
complete protection.
SAF18 SAF16, SAF19, SAF52, Gl, A29, OVT6 (K104)
QUEHANNA WILD AREA-See Natural.Area #59 /
66. SPRING CREEK FOSSIL TRACKS-Elk; Hallton; NW of Hallton; 2 Ac;
private; no protection.
G_3_0 G17
FAYETTE COUNTY
67. ASKON HOLLOW-Fayette; Brownfield; SE of Fairchance; 300 Ac;
private; no protection.
G£ OVT7, G103 G6, G17
68. BEAR RUN NATURE PRESERVE-Payette; Mill Run; 2 miles S of Mill
Run; 23000 Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete
protection. . ' :
OVT8 A12 , GfO, SAF52, SAF23, ;Zl6 (K104)
69. CASPARIS CAVE-Fayette; South Connellsville; SE of Connellsville;
private; no protection.
G9 G10, G6, G17
A-8
-------
70. CONFLUENCE BOG-Fayette; Confluence; 3 miles W of Confluence;
10 Ac; private; no protection.
A25 Gl
71. DEER LAKE MARSH-Fayette; Fort Necessity; 1.7 miles E of
Chalkhill; 100 Ac; private; no protection.
A29 Z17
72. FALLINGWATER-Fayette; Mill Run; 3 miles N of Ohiopyle; 500 Ac;
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete protection.
SAF52 A12, G10, G6, G17, OVT7 (K104)
73. FOSSIL QUARRY: FAYETTE COUNTY-Fayette; Brownfield; 8 miles
E of Uniontown; private; no protection.
G30 G17, G6
74. IGNEOUS INTRUSION-Fayette; Carmichaels; E of Adah on Middle
Run; 3 Ac; State Game Lands #238; no protection.
G16 G13
75- INDIAN CREEK GORGE-Fayette; Mill-Run; 4 miles 'NE of Mill Run;
700 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT7 A12, G10
LAUREL RIDGE STATE PARK-See Natural Area #52 for descrip.;
2,841 Ac. of the 1571^ Ac. total are in Fayette County.
76. LICK RUN (LICK HOLLOW)-Fayette; Brownsfield; 7 miles E of
Uniontown; State Forest; 1,000+ Ac; no protection.
SAF52 SAF59, G10, G6, A12, OVT7 (K104)
77. LINN RUN STATE PARK-Fayette; Ligonier; 5.60 Ac; State Park;
partial protection.
SAF52 SAF25, SAF44, Gl, G6, A12 (K104, -K106)
78. MARKLEYSBURG BOG_-Fayette; Ohiopyle; 6.1 miles E of Farmington;
10 Ac; private; no protection.
A25 OVT10, Gl, SAF52
79. OHIOPYLE STATE PARK-Fayette & Somerset; Fort Necessity &
Ohiopyle & Mill Run & South Connellsville; 18,483 Ac; State
Park; partial protection (complete protection for the
Ferncliff area).
SAF52 SAF59, Gl, G10, G6, A12, OVT4, OVT6, OVT7> OVT19,
OVT12, OVT13 (K103, K104)
80. QUEBEC WILD AREA (proposed)-Fayette; Smithfield & Brownfield;
SE of Uniontown; 5,200 Ac; State Forest; partial protection.
SAF59 SAF52, SAF25, G10, G17, G9, A12 (K103, K104)
81. WHITE ROCKS_-Fay ette; Brownfield; 3.2 miles E of Fairchance;
100 Ac; private; no protection.
G10 G6, G17
A-9
-------
FOREST COUNTY
82. BEAVER MEADOWS-Forest; Lynch; L-,000 Ac; Allegheny National
Forest; no '< protection. 'i ^
A29 Gl -: " t
-- COOKS STATE FOREST-See Natural JArea #54.
83. HICKORY CREEK WILDERNESS- CPropo.'sed) Forest; Cobham; NE of
Queen; 12 ,800 Ac; Allegheny National Forest; no protection.
SAF25 OVT7, A29, Z17 , Gl, G10,: A12, SAF23, SAF24 (K106)
84. TIONESTA FOSSIL SITE-Forest ; Tionesta; W of Tionesta;
private; no protection.
G_3_0 G17
GREENE COUNTY
85. CARMICHAELS FOSSIL SITE-Greene; Carmichaels ; 4 miles N of
Carmichaels; private; no protection.
G31 G17
86. ENLQW FORK OF WHEELING CREEK-Washington & Greene; Wind Ridge
& Claysville; 4. miles S of Claysville; private; no protection,
OVT4 OVT9, SAF26, SAF61, SAF52, SAF53, OVT19 , OVT6, SAF59
K103)
87- RYERSON STATION STATE PARK-Greene; Wind Ridge & New Freeport ;
800 Ac; partial protection.
G28 Gl, SAF52, SAF59 (K103,.K104)
INDIANA COUNTY
88. CLARK RUN NATURAL AREA- (Proposed) Indiana; Vintondale; N side
of Conemaugh River; 3 miles W of. Johnstown; 384 Ac; Forbes
State Forest; complete protection.
SAF59 G65 G10, OVT12, OVT8, A12 (K103)
89. PINK LADIES SLIPPER WQODS_- Indiana; Burnside; 3 miles N of
Glenn Campbell; 3 Ac; private; -no protection.
OVT5 SAF21
90. SUN CLIFF- Indiana; Brush Valley; 12 miles SE of Indiana;
private; no protection.
SAF24
91. WURTZITE LOCALITY -Indiana; Elderton; .just W of Shelocta;
PennDot ; partial protection.
G23 G17, G30, OVT10
A-10
-------
JEFFERSON COUNTY
92. CLEAR CREEK STATE PARK-Jeffarson; Sigel; 1,123 Ac; partial
protection.
SAF52 SAF51, Gl, A12 (K104)
COOKS FOREST STATE PARK-See Natural Area #54.
93- SUGAR HILL SCHOOL FOSSIL SITE-Jefferson; Carman; 3 miles W of
Brockway; private; no protection.
G30 G17-
LAWRENCE COUNTY
94. BLUE IRIS AREA-Lawrence; Harlansburg; 1.9 miles N of
Harlansburg; 10 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT9 A29
95. BUCHANAN RUN-Lawrence; Edinburg; N of Pulaski; 110 Ac;
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete protection.
SAF24 G10, A12, OVT7, Gil, SAF62, SAF52 (K106)
96. FRINGED GENTIAN BOG-Lawrence; New Castle S; 3 miles E of
New Castle; 1 Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete
protection.
A25 Gil, OVT9
97. GARDNER SWAMP-Lawrence; New Castle South; 2 miles SE of
New Castle; 15 Ac; private; no protection.
A29
98. KENNEDY MILLS-Lawrence; Portersville & Harlansburg; N of
McConnells Mill State Park; 500 Ac; private; no protection.
G10 Gil, A12, SAF23, SAF24, SAF25, Gl, 'OVT7, (K103, K106)
99. LOCKE WOODS-Lawrence; Harlansburg; 2 miles NW of Harlansburg;
30 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF52 SAF53, A29, Gl, Gil, OVT19 (K104)
100. McCONNELLS MILL STATE PARK-Lawrence; Portersville; 2,000 Ac;
complete protection (gorge portion).
G10 A12, SAF23, SAF24, SAF25, SAF44, SAF52, SAF59, Gil, OVT7,
OVT13, OVT4, OVT5, OVT12, OVT8, OVT9 (K103, K104, K106)
101. MUDDY CREEK RALLjS-Lawrence; Portersville; N of Rose Point;
20 Ac; private; no protection.
G10 Gil, OVT7, Gl, A12
102. NORTH LIBERTY-BRENT SWAMP-Lawrence; Harlansburg; between N.
Liberty 4 Brent; 100 Ac; State Game Lands 151; no protection.
A-11
-------
103- PLAINGROVE BOG-Lawrence ; Harlarisburg; just W of Plaingrove;
20 Ac; private; no protection. ,-
A25. A29,
104. PLAINGROVE POTHOLE - L awr enc e ; Harlansburg; N of Plaingrove; 300
Ac; private; no protection.
Gil OVT9
105- QUAKERTQWN FALLS-Lawrence; Campbell; 1.2 miles E of the
Ohio-Pennsylvania Line; 70 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT7 SAF54, SAF58, SAF50, G10 , G17 , A12, OVT13 (K103)
106. ROCK POINT-Lawrence; Beaver Falls; W of Ellwood City; 100 Ac;
private; no protection.
OVT9 G10, OVT7, A12, Gil, SAF59 (K103)
107. WAMPUM FOSSIL SITE-Lawrence; New Castle S; 0.7 miles S of
Wampum; private; no protection.'
G30 G17
MERCER COUNTY
108. BLACKTOWN 'SWAMP-Mercer ; Mercer; 1.9 miles WNW of Grove City;
135 Ac; private; no protection.
A29
109- CRANBERRY SWAMP -Mercer ; Hadley; S of Sunol; 150 Ac; private;
no protection.
A29 Gil, Gl
110. FRENCH GREEK HEMLOCKS-Venango & Mercer; Utica; N of Utica;
200 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF24 SAF23, SAF25, SAF52, Gil (K104, K106)
111. FOWLER BOG-Mercer ; New Lebanon; N of Carlton; 10 Ac; private;
no protection.
A25 A29, Gil, Gl, OVT9 .
112. GREAT BLUE HERON ROOKERY -Mercer; Mercer & Grove City; 5-6
miles NW of Slippery Rock; 25 Ac; private; no protection.
Z16 A29
113. GROVE CITY FOSSIL SITE-Mercer; Grove City; 2.5 miles N of
Grove City; private; no protection.
G30 G17
114. HALFMOON SWAMP-Mercer; Jackson. Center; 4 miles N of Fairview;
50 Ac; private; no protection."
A29 :
115. MAURICE K. GODDARD STATE PARK-Mercer; Sandy Lake & Lebanon;
NW of Hadley; 6,972 Ac; partial protection.
OVT8 (K104, K106)
' A-12
-------
116. McCLURE TRACT-Mercer; Hadley; 1 mile NE of Clark's Mill;
100 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF29 SAF28, Gil (K102)
117. MERCER BCX}-Mercer; Greenfield; 2 miles SW of Mercer; 30 Ac;
private; no protection.
A25 A22, A29, Gl, Gil, OVT9 (K94)
118. OTTER CREEK SWAMP-Mercer; Jackson Center; 5 miles W of
Jackson Center: private; no protection.
A29 Gil
119. PINE SWAMP-Mercer; Sandy Lake; 5 miles S of Sandy Lake;
200 Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy; complete protection.
A29 SAF25, SAF39, SAF52, SAF53, Gl, Gil, A25, OVT9, OVT19
TKI04, K106)
120. SCHOLLARDS RUN-Mercer; Mercer & Harlansburg; 1 mile E of
Leesburg; State Game Lands; 1,000 Ac; partial protection.
A29
121. SHENANGO RESERVOIR-Mercer; Sharpsville & Freedonia; N of
Sharon; 13,000 Ac; Corps of Engineers; no protection.
Z16 A29, A34, Gl
122. SPRINGFIELD FALLS-Mercer; Mercer; 2 miles NE of Leesburg;
50 Ac; State Game Lands; partial protection.
SAF25 Gl, GH, G10, A12, OVT7 (K106)
123. SWAMP ROOT-Mercer; Grove City; just SE of Swamproot; 100 Ac;
private; no protection.
A29 Gil
SOMERSET COUNTY
124. BEECHDALE HOLLOW-Somerset; Murdock & Meyersdale; 5 miles N of
Meyersdale; 120 Ac; private; no protection.
SAF22 SAF24, SAF59, Gl, A12 (K103, K104)
125. BIG SPRING-Somerset; Markleton; 5-7 miles NE of Listonburg;
5 Ac; private; no protection.
415
126. KINGS BRIDGE PARK-Somerset; Kingwood; 1.6 miles W of
New Lexington; 300+ Ac; private; no protection.
A29 OVT19, A13
127. LAUREL HILL STATE PARK-Somerset; Seven Springs & Rockwood
& Kingwood & Bakersville; 4,169 Ac; State Park; partial
protection.
SAF24 SAF25, SAF52, SAF44, SAF59, Gl, A12 (K104, K103, K106)
A-13
-------
LAUREL RIDGE STATE PARK-See Natural Area #52 for description;
5,354 Ac. of the 15,^-36 Ac; total are in Somerset County.
128. MOUNT DAVIS NATURAL AREA-Spmersjet; Markleton; 8.miles W of
Meyersdale; 585 Ac; Forbes! Statfe Forest; complete protection.
G£ G10, SAF41, SAF44,, SAF45, SAF43, SAF52, OVT11, OVT7,
OVT17 (K104) ; ; !
129. MOUNT DAVIS QUARRY-Somerset; Markleton; 3/4 mile W of Mount
Davis; private; no protection. :.
130. PACK SADDLE-Somerset; New Baltimore & Fairhope; 2.4 miles NW
of Fairhope; 400 Ac; private; no protection.
OVT7 OVT3, SAF22, G10, G6, A12;:
131. ROARING RUN SWAMP-Somerset; Somerset; 2 miles NE of Jennerstown;
100 Ac; private; no protection.
A29 GI ;
132. ROCKWOOD RESERVOIR-Somerset; Rockwood; NW of Rockwood; 30 Ac;
water company; no protection. .
SAF23 (K104)
VENANGO COUNTY
133. ALLEGHENY RIVER STATE PARK-Venango; Kennerdale & Polk-; 3,140 Ac;
State Park; partial protection.
SAF25 SAF52, A12, Gl, G10 (K104, K106)
FRENCH CREEK HEMLOCKS-See Natural Area #110.
134. HEMLOCK WOODS KENNERDALE-Venango; Kennerdale; junction of
- Scrubgrass and Bullion Creeks; private; -no protection.
SAF23 Gil (K106)
135- OIL CREEK STATE PARK-Venango; Titusville South & Oil City &
Pleasantville; 7,197 Ac; partial protection.
SAF52 SAF24, SAF25, A123 Gl, G10 (K104, K106)
136. WESLEY FOSSIL SITE-Venango; Wesley; 1 mile N of Wesley;
private; no protection.
G30 G17
137. WHANN RUN/LOCKARD RUN-Venango; Eau Claire; 2 miles N of Lisbon;
110 Ac; private; no protection.
A12 G17, G10, OVT7, SAF23, SAF25 (K106)
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ENLOW FORK OF WHEELING CREEK-See Natural Area #86.
138. HILLMAN STATE PARK-Washington; Burgettstown & Clinton; 3,654
Ac; partial protection.
OVT8
A-14
-------
139. LABORATORY FOSSIL SITE-Washington; Washington East; 1.7 miles
S of Washington; private; no protection.
G30 G17
WESTMORELAND COUNTY
140. BEAR CAVE-Westmoreland; Boliver & Wilpen; NE of Derry; private;
no protection.
G£ G10, Z17, G17, G6
141. BEAR CREEK-Westmoreland; Ligonier; 6 miles SE of Rector;
76 Ac; Rolling Rock Farms; partial protection.
SAF24 SAF25, A12, Gl, OVT11 (K106)
142. BEAVER RUN RESERVOIR-Westmoreland; Slickville; 3 miles W of
Slickville; 400 Ac; water company; partial protection.
Z16
143. BIG OAK WOODS-Westmoreland; Ligonier; 2 miles E of Rector;
300 Ac; Rolling Rock Farms; partial protection.
SAF59 (K103)
144. BUFFALO NUT SANCTUARY-Westmoreland; Stahlstown; 3 miles W of
Stahlstown; 53 Ac; Carnegie Museum of Natural History; complete
protection.
OVT9 SAF52, SAF59, Gl, G6, A12 (K103, K104)
145. CON_ CAVE-Westmoreland; Boliver; NE of Derry; private; no
protection.
G£ G10, G6, G17, Z17
146. CONEMAUGH GORGE-Westmoreland; Boliver; NE of Derry; 3,000 Ac;
State Game Commission; partial protection.
G10 G6, G17, SAF52, OVT19 (K104)
147. COON CAVE-Westmoreland; Boliver; NE of Derry; private; no
protection.
G_9 G10, G6, G17, 217, Z9
148. COPPERHEAD CAVE-Westmoreland; Boliver; NE of Derry; private;
no protection.
G_9_ G10, G6, G17, 217, 29
149. DELMQNT FOSSIL SITE-Westmoreland; Slickville, just S of
Delmont; PennDot; partial protection.
G30 G17
150. DUFF PARK-Westmoreland; Murrysville; just S of Murreysville;
148 Ac; Franklin Township; partial protection.
SAF52 OVT4, OVT8, SAF27, SAF61 (K104)
151. FURNACE WOODS NATURE RESERVE-Westmoreland; Ligonier; 1 mile
N of Laughlintown; 133 Ac; Carnegie Museum of Natural History;
complete protection.
SAF59 SAF52, Gl, A12, A29, OVT4, OVT8, OVT11 (K103, K104)
A-15
-------
152. GUFFY HOLLOW-Westmoreland; McKeesport; 4 miles SE of-McKeesport;
100 Ac; private; no protection."
OVT4 G10, OVT9, SAF59 (K103)
153- HIGH ROCKS VALLEY-Westmoreland| Derry; ME of Derry; 200+ Ac;
private; no protection.
OVT7 G17
LAUREL RIDGE STATE PARK-See Natural Area' #52; 3,488 Ac.of the
15,436 Ac. total are in Westmoreland County.
154. LEMON HILL-Westmoreland; Wilpen; 3-6 miles SW of New Florence;
70 Ac; Girl Scouts of Western Pennsylvania; partial protection.
SAF59 SAF52, OVT4, OVT8 (K103, K104)
155. LEMON HOLE CAVE-Westmoreland; Boliver; NE of Derry; Torrance
State Hospital; no protection.
G£ G10, G6, G17, Z17, Z9, G30
156. LINN RUN BOG-Westmoreland; Ligonier; 7 miles SE of Rector;
30 Ac; Forbes State Forest; partial protection.
A25 Z16
157- MOUNTAIN STREAMS-ROARING RUN VALLEY-Westmoreland; Seven Springs;
E of Champion; 3,000 Ac; Western Pennsylvania Conservancy;
complete protection.
OVT7 SAF27, SAF25, SAF52, G6, G10 (K101)
158. POWDERMILL NATURE RESERVE-Westmoreland: Ligonier; 3 miles
S of Rector; 1,800 Ac; Carnegie Museum of Natural History;
complete protection.
OVT8 SAF44, SAF52, SAF59, SAF27, Gl, G65 A12, Zl6, OVT19,
OVT 6 (K103, K104)
159. SILVERMINE RUN-Westmoreland; Ligonier; 2 miles E of Rector;
300 Ac; Rolling Rock Farms; partial protection.-
SAF60 A12, SAF24, G10 (K103, K102)
TURTLE CREEK-See Natural Area #15-
A-16'
------- |