30 639 BIOLOGICAL INVENTORY CAPE LA CROIX CREEK WATERSHED CAPE 1/3GIRARDEAU COUNTY MISSOURI(U) MIDWEST AQUATICENTERPRISES MAHOMET IL JAN 77 LMSSD-76-25-26

UNCLASSIFIED F/G 6/6 NL

mmmmmmmmmsmIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIommlllIIIIIIIIIIIommImIIEIII~hIIEIIEEI

IIIIIIIEEEIII

, ~ I'.

125 1111'.IIII1 . III1"___ Iliu

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

NATIONAL I.CAU 0f STAWOAtS- 1963- A

S

' I ___________ __

.'~ I

A~~~~~~ -pa -Aiti -O tUV A

St.TJI 14.1 Dlsttt

lhd~ CitatN@ 1 7b5y

Man3S UJAICW1

4-13 i "-S ':

.4" t--.'Z:

0_0 621 ItCATION OF THIS PAGE (When Date Bator** _________________

REPORT DOCUENTATIO" PAGEI. REPORT NUMBER 90 ~VT ACCESSION No EIIU' AAO UB

4. TITLE (Aid 6*011W 5. x OF ?RPR4P~~Vq~BIOLOGICAL IWNEOHY CAMILA CROIX (JBRECWATERSHEND, CAPE GIRARDEAU COUJNTY, limi Report,

wMISSOURI S. V"FORMIN4 ORG. A~gOmT' NUmBea

1AUTHOnfaJ S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMUER(e)

IIMSSD 76-25-26

SPERFedMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASKMidwest Aquatic Enterprises AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBWERS

Rural Route IMahomet, Illinois 61853

11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATEU.S. Army Engineer District, St. Louis Jan 1977210 Tucker Boulevard, North 12. NUMBER OF PAGESSt. Louis, Missouri 63101 203_

VAL MONITORING AGENCY NAME & AOORESSfff different fivom CatrohME Office) 1S. SECURITY CLASS. (of 1hi m~rpart)

Unclassified

S. DECL AS IPCATION/DOWNGRADING

III. DISTR1UTION STATEMENT (of this Report) SHEULZ

Approved for release; distribution unlimited.

117. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of Ah. abstract enterd in Block it. If iffamt from Report)

I&. SUIPPLEMENITARY NOTES

JUL 2 5 1983 *

'a t

AS.KEY WORDS (Continue an reverse aide If neesay A", identily by block aninber)

Biological InventoryCape La Croix CreekCape Girardeau, Missouri

This report vas the end product of an eight-week survey of the biologicale lements of the Cape La Croix Creek watershed near Cape Girardeau, Missouri.Th purpose of this study was to identify and quantify the biological elementsad to gather sufficiently detailed information to permit analysis anduderstanding of short and long-term local and regional impacts which may

W3 ima GHF EIIO 9 NOV SSIS ORSOETE, U~nclassified

SECUftTy CLASINIPCATION OF TIt PAGE (WARn 0W bee'e

ONE _. No

MCUMTV CLMWICATWU Of TMuSROM P ~ F-

result from feasible water, resource developments. 'In addition'to obtaininquantitative data rega rlAng the fama-and flora at designated aquatic andterrestrial sites, one oC the prime pdrpos.**.f this inventory was thequalitative evaluation of wildlife habitats found in the project apea. Ybfi.-,inventory served as part of a planning document for'the 'Oape'La MV6i Creek,watershed,* providing environmental information-.to be codinfdiied in theidentification of alternative solutions to water resource problems in thle area.'

3UCOJWY CLAIPICA~TON OF THIS PAGWWf m ftNebs

I. ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ......................................................... 1

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ........................................ 2

METHODSTerrestrial vegetation ............................................ 10Aquatic vpgetation ................................................ 10Inventory tables .................................................. 11Maps .............................................................. 11Phytoplankton ..................................................... 13Zooplankton ....................................................... 14senthos ........................................................... 14Fishes ........ ................................................. 15Species diversity .............................................. 15sOther vertebrates ................................................. 15

TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIESUrban areas ....................................................... 17Non-urban areas ................................................... 74Species in habitats ............................................... 109

AQUATIC COMUNITIESPhytoplankton ..................................................... 118ooplankton ....................................................... 122Benthos ........................................................... 122Fishes ............................................................ 127

PESTIFEROUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ........................................ 148

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED FLORA AND FAUNA ............................ 150

PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIESProblems .......................................................... 156Opportunities .................... .................................. 156

LITERATURE CITED ................ ... I .. ............................. 158

APPENDIX I - PHYTOPLANKTON ........................................... 161

APPENDIX 2 - ZOOPLANKTON ............................................. 171

APPENDIX 3 - ENTOS ................................... 178

APPENDIX 4 - FISHES .................................................. 190

'J -,-

I,iii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Locations of sampling sites ......................................

2. Approximate gradient of Cape La Croix and Walker Creeks, CapeGirardeau County, Missouri, showing locations of the six bio-logical sampling stations (based upon U. S. G. S. topographicmaps, 7.5 minute series, Cape Girardeau and Cape Girardeau NEquadrangles, 1967 ed.) ........................................... 4

3. Wildlife habitat types ...........................................

4. Aquatic macrophytes observed along transect F-F' (as number ofstems per m2) .................................................... 99S

S. Aquatic macrophytes observed along transect G-G' (as number ofstems per m2 ) .................................................... 101

tJ

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. Locations of aquatic sampling stations ........................... 6

2. Locations of vegetation transects ................................ 7

3. Relationships among mean concentrations of physical and chemicalparameters observed at three stations in Cape La Croix CreekFebruary through May, 1975 ....................................... 8

4. Predominant plants observed during spring in the Cape La CroixCreek watershed .................................................. 19

S. Birds known or likely to occur in the Cape La Croix Creekwatershed ........................................................ 38

6. Mammals known or likely to occur in the Cape La Croix Creek

watershed ........................................................ 67

7. Amphibians known or likely to occur in the Cape La Croix Creekwatershed ........................................................ 74

8. Reptiles known or likely to occur in the Cape La Croix Creekwatershed ........................................................ 78

9. Summary of the upland forest vegetation sampled on transect A-A'during May, 1976 ................................................. 89

10. Summary of the upland forest vegetation sampled on transect C-C'during May, 1976 ................................................. 90

11. Summary of the upland forest vegetation sampled on transect D-D'during May, 1976 ................................................. 91

12. Summary of floodplain forest vegetation sampled on transect B-B'during May, 1976 ................................................. 94

13. Summary of wooded swamp vegetation sampled on transect E-E'during May, 1976 ................................................. 95

14. Morphology of the Cape La Croix Creek drainage net ............... 104

15. Summary of the extent of various wildlife habitat types in theCape La Croix Creek watershed .................................... 108

* 16. Waterfowl observed along the Mississippi River from Grand Towerto Cairo, Illinois, by aerial censuses from 13 December 1972through 17 December 1975 ......................................... 112

17. Migratory waterfowl ranked by abundance from aerial censuses,

I- .-.

Table Page

numbers taken by waterfowl hunters, and the electivity indexof the hunter-prey relationship .................................. 115

18. General aquatic habitat descriptions representative of the sevenaquatic sampling sites in the Cape La Croix Creek watershedduring May and June, 1976 ........................................ 119

19. Phytoplankton collected at stations in the Cape La Croix Creekwatershed, May, 1976 ............................................. 120

20. Zooplankton observed at stations in the Cape La Croix Creekwatershed, May, 1976 ............................................. 123

21. Benthic macroinvertebrates observed at stations in the Cape LaCroix Creek watershed, May and June, 1976 ........................ 124

22. Checklist of fishes known or likely to occur in the Cape La CroixCreek watershed .................................................. 128

23. Population density (number of individuals ha-1 ) and standing crop(kg ha-1 , in parentheses) of fishes at stations in the Cape LaCroix Creek watershed, June, 1976 ................................ 142

24. Composition (% of total number), species diversity, and speciesrichness of fishes observed in stream and marsh habitats in theCape La Croix Creek watershed, June, 1976 ........................ 143

25. Rare and endangered plants and animals known or likely to occurin the Cape La Croix Creek watershed ............................. 151

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to acknowledge the assistance and cooperation ofthe following individuals during the course of this study. Mr. DanRagland and Mr. James Zerega toured the project area with us, discussedproposed resource developments in the watershed, and indicated areas ofpossible environmental concern. We would especially like to thank theWildlife Research Section, Illinois Natural History Survey, for theirassistance in obtaining unpublished data regarding waterfowl censusesof the project area. In addition we would like to acknowledge the as-sistance of Mr. Paul L. Heye, Associate Professor of Biology, SoutheastMissouri State University, in reviewing and supplementing the bird listsfound in this inventory.

+I

I!

t t _ _ _

b >

9

BIOLOGICAL INVENTORYCAPE LA CROIX CREEK WATERSHED

CAPE GIRARDEAU COUNTY, MISSOURI

INTRODUCTION

This report is the end product of an eight-week survey of thebiological elements of the Cape La Croix Creek watershed near CapeGirardeau, Missouri. The purpose of this study was to identify andquantify the biological elements and to gather sufficiently detailedinformation to permit analysis and understanding of short- and long-term local and regional impacts which may result from feasible waterresource developments. In addition to obtaining quantitative dataregarding the fauna and flora at designated aquatic and terrestrialsites, one of the prime purposes of this inventory was the qualitativeevaluation of wildlife habitats found in the project area. This in-ventory will serve as part of a planning document for the Cape LaCroix Creek watershed, providing environmental information to be con-sidered in the identification of alternative solutions to water re-source problems in the area.

Field work was conducted during May and June, 1976. This restric-tion in time affected the results in many ways. Virtually all migratorywaterfowl were absent at the time of the inventory. Aspection of theplant community, a natural annual sequence of species replacementthroughout the growing season, limited the inventory of herbaceousplants to late-spring species.

In addition to field data collection, this inventory relied uponcompilation of pertinent data from published sources and consultationwith acknowledged specialists. In this way it was possible to fill anumber of gaps in the data caused by the eight-week late-spring timerestriction.

Ii

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY PREA

The Cape La Croix Creek watershed encompasses approximately 2square miles (14,100 acres) of urban, rural, and developing lands, alllying within Cape Girardeau County in southeast Missouri (Fig. 1). Thestream flows from the wooded hills and undeveloped areas north of CapeGirardeau, through major residential and commercial districts in thecity, and empties into the Mississippi River at approximately river mile50 above the mouth of the Ohio River south of Cape Girardeau. The water-shed includes about 70% of the city of Cape Girardeau, a community ofapproximately 35,000 persons. Extensive development in the upland por-tions of the watershed has been projected by both the City of CapeGirardeau and the Southeast Missouri Regional Planning Commission.

The physical geology of the study area is discussed in depth byBratton (1974). His discussion, plus zoogeographic notes by Pflieger(1971) provide the basis for the following summary.

Four distinct physiographic regions occur in Missouri. Of these,two occur in the project area. Cape La Croix Creek and its tributarystreams originate in the Ozark Uplands region and flow, for most oftheir length, through this region. Just south of Cape Girardeau, thestream flows onto the alluvial plain of the Mississippi Embayment of theSoutheastern Lowlands physiographic region. The southern rim of theOzark Uplands region is highly dissected by stream channels, The allu-vial plain of the Southeastern Lowlands extends upstreem along many ofthese streams,creating a broad transition zone between the two physio-graphic regions. Cape La Croix Creek is one such stream.

Figure 2 depicts the gradient of Cape La Croix Creek and WalkerCreek from their sources to the junction of Cape La Croix Creek and theMississippi River. Station locations are also shown. Based upon thesedata and the bioJogical data gathered in this investigation, station 1clearly represents Ozark Uplands and the wetland at station 6 and thestream at station 3 are typical of the Southeastern Lowlands. Station 2probably is classified best as representing a transition zone. Stations4 and 5 have been highly modified by man, and meaningful classificationbased upon biological criteria is often impossible. However, topographiccriteria permit tentative designation of station 5 as Ozark Uplands andstation 4 as transitory.

South of Cape Girardeau, the Ozark Uplands region is set off fromthe Southeastern Lowlands by a steep rocky bluff extending southwestwardin a curved line. This bluff line constitutes a sharp rise of 20 to 80 mfrom the level of the Lowlands to the level of the adjacent uplands.

The present topography of the Ozark Uplands is largely erosional,with the greatest relief along the major streams where dissection has pro-ceeded most rapidly. An important stream flow characteristic of Cape LaCroix Creek in this region is that it is a losing stream, or one whichloses water to the groundwater system (Bratton 1974).

The topography of the Southeastern Lowlands region as a whole is abroad plain with a gentle slope to the south. For the most part. the

3

Figure 2. Approximate gradient of Cape La Croix and Walker Creeks,Cape Girardeau County, Missouri, showing locations of thesix biological sampling stations (based upon U. S. G. S.topographic maps, 7.5 minute series, Cape Girardeau andCape Girardeau NE quadrangles, 1967 ed.).

W

%V 4

0

E

Cu 0

(W) OA&I002 DVUJWOJJU014A01

dim

surface relief is less than 3 m. Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments arerarely exposed. These older deposits are overlain by alluvium rangingin thickness from one to more than 60 m, and in the uplands they are over-lain by a thick mantle of loess. The alluvium and loess were depositedduring Pleistocene and Recent times.

Before settlement, much of the Southeastern Lowlands consisted ofswamp, and during times of flood, the area was inundated by the MississippiRiver. Modification began in 1913 and 1914 with the diversion of a numberof streams eastward along the northern border of the lowlands to the Missis-sippi River south of Cape Girardeau. Construction of a network of smallerdrainage ditches eliminated the extensive swamps that formerly occupiedthe Southeastern Lowlands.

The climate of the project area may be inferred from weather servicerecords from Cape Girardeau. Data for 1975 show a temperature range from110 F to 95' F with an annual mean temperature of 57.40 F. Annual meanprecipitation is 44.83 inches. Fifteen years of records exist.

Seven aquatic and seven terrestrial sampling sites were locatedwithin the Cape La Croix Creek watershed (Fig. 1). Specific locations ofsampling sites are found in Tables 1 (aquatic sites) and 2 (terrestrialand wetland transects).

As a portion of the larger surface water quality investigation ofthe Cape Girardeau-Jackson, Missouri, Metropolitan Study Area conductedby Southeast Missouri State University, three stations in Cape La CroixCreek were sampled for 20 parameters from February through May, 1975, atapproximately biweekly intervals. In all, seven collections were made.The monitoring stations were located in the watershed as follows: stationCLC-11 corresponded closely to station 1 of the present study; station CLC-5 to station 4; and station CLC-1 to station 3. These data have been sum-marized in Table 3.

They concluded, based upon the water quality standards establishedby the Missouri Clean Water Commission, that water quality in the studyarea was acceptable for existing water use. Furthermore, they observedthat during periods of "sufficient" flow, urbanization did not appear todegrade water quality. As this was a short-term investigation, theycautioned that this might not be true during the low-flow periods oflate summer and early autumn (Southeast Missouri State University 1975).

These data also characterize the existing water quality of the OzarkUplands (station CLC-11), through the urban areas of Cape Girardeau (sta-tion CLC-5), to the Southeastern Lowlands (station CLC-1).

Although Cape La Croix Creek flows through these distinct areas, theoverall effect upon the baseline water quality appears to be minimal: of20 parameters measured, 15 did not demonstrate any significant differences(0.05 level) among stations (Table 3). In general, concentrations appearedto increase from upstream to downstream.

The five parameters demonstrating significant differences (0.05 level)among stations included dissolved oxygen, total solids, hardness, total

-.4 On - - 4 10 -4

00

V) En z3 W33

0 -)

'tn Ze 0 0 )U

o~~, a a a

.4

C-44

k- -t -00 0 0n 0n t d

44-$-4

4-1 04

41.

bb y). V; ..

0 T.L) 0 0o

4J L ffuu u .4 tO1$4>CO -~U ) 4 t r)-4 c.4 to.

co .. -N 4 'm .,.I k 0' 0 -0 0 U 3 31:- U) 9:

.4 -4- u

cd cd *CU

00S.

1 CU co4)-4

q) .- . C .. C

0 ~ ~ ~ -00 3oa 0 U 0 $43~ )

o) 04U

N7

-4-

00

c'Jo

0 W~ C .- 4 -4 04

fr4-400

z 0

tn4J

0h

I."

01 00 A 0 0 0 4

co4i

0 c0

-. 0 0i 'WI

>0 0 L 0 3t "6 LL. r'. LL V

I. U 00. 0=60 9% .

Cu

= a

0 0n 00 42

4-4 -4 '

CuY

8

Table 3. Relationships among mean concentrations i of physical andchemical parameters observed at three stations in Cape La CroixCreek February through May, 19752.

STATIONSPARAMETERS3 CLC-1 CLC-5 CLC-11

Flow (cfs) 9.56 6.00

Hydrogen Ion Concentration as pH 7.24 7.40 7.14

Air Temperature (C) 14.04 17.00 15.07

Water Temperature (C) 13.26 13.34 11.57

Dissolved Oxygen 7.25 10.76 9.60

Biochemical Oxygen Demand 2.77 1.93 1.24

Ammonia Nitrogen 0.070 0.148 0.027

Organic Nitrogen 0.526 0.359 0.259

Nitrate Nitrogen 0.570 0.420 0.539

Nitrite Nitrogen 0.019 0.018 0.012

Total Phosphate 0.320 0.277 0.145

Soluble Orthophosphate 0.080 0.082 0.059

Suspended Solids 130.3 206.9 21.0

Total Solids 365.6 401.0 129.0

Hardness as CaCO 3 143.0 122.6 56.8

Total Alkalinity as CaCO 3 126.3 106.3 43.9

Turbidity (FTU) 26.0 20.4 18.2

Specific Conductance (vmho cm=1) 242.0 229.7 117.1

Fecal Coliforms (# per 100 ml) 2917.1 2020.6 333.7

Fezal Streptococci (# per 100 ml) 8672.0 7012.0 2244.0

'Any two means underscored by the same lino are not significantly differ-ent (0.05 level) by the Modified New Duncan Multiple-Range Test (Kramer1956). This test was performed following a model I analysis of variance.

2Raw data used for analyses appeared in Southeast Missouri State Univer-sity (1975).

3As mg liter-1 unless other units are indicated.

USL

9

alkalinity, and specific conductance.

Dissolved oxygen concentrations were significantly lower (0.05 level)at station CLC-I. As the farthest downstream sampling point, station CLC-lreceives the cumulative organic load from the entire Cape La Croix Creekwatershed upstream. This was reflected in biochemical oxygen demand beinghighest at this station (Table 3). It is therefore not unusual for dissolvedoxygen concentrations to be lowest there.

The remaining four parameters showing significant differences areinterrelated to the extent that each reflects the natural increase in bothdissolved and particulate solids which occurs in a stream system from sourceto mouth. These parameters have, however, been influenced and increased byurbanization, primarily as storm water runoff.

Amoni total solids, hardness, total alkalinity, and specific conduct-ance, station CLC-11 was significantly lower (0.05 level) than either sta-tions CLC-5 or CLC-1 (Table 3). With the exception of total solids, thestations exhibited a continued downstream increase in concentration. Totalsolids, which includes a particulate fraction in addition to the dissolvedfractions included in hardness (chiefly Ca 2 expressed as CaCOs), totalalkalinity (chiefly HC03 expressed as CaCO3), and specific conductance(which includes all electrolytes dissolved in water), might be expected tobe greater in the urban areas. The decrease observed downstream at stationCLC-l could merely be the result of particle settling.

6r

10

METHODS

Terrestrial vegetation. The dominant plant species occurring in theCape La Croix Creek watershed were recorded during field reconaissanceand sampling. Since field work was performed in May, the species list,presented later as an inventory table, was necessarily limited to trees,shrubs, spring wildflowers, and other early species. The species listwas not intended to be exhaustive (primarily because of aspection andthe sampling time restrictions), but the species recorded represent thepredominant species which characterize the various habitats.

Nomenclature follows Mohlenbrock's Guide to the Vascular Flora ofIllinois (1975), the single most recent and complete area document availa-ble.

Intensive sampling in floodplain forest, wooded swamp, and uplandforest habitats was accomplished by transect sampling. Five transectswere established in the vicinities ot aquatic sampling stations 1, 2, 3,5, and 6 (Fig. 1). Transects were originally proposed to include onlybottomland forest/wooded swamp habitats. During field reconaissance, how-ever, it became evident that bottomland or floodplain forest was either(1) reduced to a small band along the stream's edge because of encroachingagriculture or urban development or (2) reduced when the elevation rosesharply along the stream. Consequently, representative stands near sta-tions 1, 3, and S were more appropriately termed upland forest (Table 2).

Each transect was 10 m wide and 100 m long (only 75 m availablenear station 5), in all instances extending virtually from forest edge toforest edge. In each transect all vegetation was classified and recordedaccording to the first applicable category in the following hierarchy:(1) woody stems equal to or greater than 18 inches dbh; (2) woody stemsgreater than 6 ft tall or 4 inches dbh; (3) woody stems less than 6 fttall or 4 inches dbh; and (4) herbaceous stems of ground cover species.

Results of each transect were summarized in tabular form. Speciescomposition and abundance were expressed as: (1) the number of treesgreater than or equal to 18 inches dbh; and (2) the number of individuals,dominance (%), and ground covered (%) for each species in the categoriesoverstory, understory, and ground cover, respectively (defined above).Dominance was the percent composition based upon basal area: [(totalbasal area of given species) (total basal arep of all species)] x 100.The percent ground covered by each species was determined from the esti-mated crown areas as a percent of the total area sampled in each transect.

Aquatic vegetation. Four wetland types were present in the Cape La CroixCreek watershed: type 3, inland shallow fresh marsh; type 4, inland deepfresh marsh; type 5, inland open fresh water or lakes and ponds; and type7, wooded swamp. While type 5 wetlands were scattered throughout thewatershed, types 3, 4, and 7 were concentrated in the southern one-sixthof the watershed. These latter wetlands contained the greatest diversityof aquatic macrophytes.

Only wetland types 4 and 7 were sampled for aquatic macrophytes.

11

Type 3 wetlands occupied only a few acres. Analyses in the wooded swamp(type 7) were accomplished as discussed above.

Aquatic macrophyte quantitative sampling was done in two type 4wetlands, each containing a distinct open water plant community. Astransect sampling best described the vegetation changes along the environ-mental gradient from open water to dry land, a quantitative sample consistedof a transect 1 m wide (1) from the "center" deep-water area of the wetlandto beyond the shoreline in F-F' and (2) from shore to shore in wetland G-G'.Thus, representatives of the hydrosere succession (attached floaters,amphibious state, wet meadow stage) were included. The transect continueduntil the encroaching agricultural or urban land was reached. All individ-uals were identified and counted.

A 100 m2 area was sampled in type 4 wetlands. While this exceededthe 81 m2 proposed for two transects, it was considered important to in-clude the complete succession of species present.

Locations of the aquatic macrophyte transects are presented in Table£2. The first transect F-F' was in a wetland dominated by arrow arum (Pcl-

tandr virginica), lizard's-tail (Saururus cernuus), and smartweed (Poly-gonum spp.). The second quantitative sample was in an area dominated byyellow pond lily (Nuphar Zutewn ssp. macrophyllnum) and lizard's-tail. Sincethis second wetland was not extensive, the transect ran from shore to shore.

Inventory tables. Inventory tables were prepared for terrestrial andaquatic species known or likely to occur in the project area. These tablesinclude general information concerning the spatial distribution and relativeabundance of each species in the total environment. As a convenience to layusers, families within each major group (i. e., amphibians, reptiles, birds,and mammals) are arranged alphabetically rather than phylogenetically. Like-wise, species within each family are arranged alphabetically.

Twelve categories were established for the inventory tables including:city, suburban, exurban, agriculture, old field, upland forest, woodedswamp, open fresh marsh, Cape La Croix Creek and tributaries. MississippiRiver, shallow and deep fresh marshes, and other (parks, estates, and ceme-teries). These generally correspond to the habitat types of Figure 3.

Fishes were not included in the 12-category tables discussed above.Similar general information for these organisms was included in 7-categorytables subdividing the aquatic habitats as follows: Mississippi River,backwaters and oxbows, open fresh marsh, wooded swamp and deep and shallowfresh marshes, and Cape La Croix Creek (Southeastern Lowlands, Transitional,and Ozark Uplands). Presentation is alphabetical.

Ma . Two maps of the Cape La Croix Creek watershed were prepared duringth inventory (Figs. I and 3). Figure 1 serves as a base map and to locatesampling sites. The base map was drawn from U. S. G. S. topographic maps,7.5-minute series, Cape Girardeau and Cape Girardeau NE quadrangles (1967editions).

I'12

Figure 1, sampling sites, locates areas of point and transect sam-pling as identified in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. It should be notedthat the transect "arrows" illustrated on the map are not intended torepresent the actual length of the transect. In most cases, transectlengths were too short to permit accurate representation of length on thefigure. Rather, the "arrows" on Figure 1 are intended to portray the loca-tion and general orientation of the transects.

Figure 3 depicts the distribution of wildlife habitat types in theCape La Croix Creek watershed. In general, habitats shown are those usedin the inventory tables discussed above. These habitats were mapped withreference to an uncontrolled aerial photomosaic (black-and-white) and afalse-color infrared aerial photograph. Individual habitat subunits ofless than 2 acres were, in general, not plotted.

The category old field probably does not apply in the project area.Because of the intensive agriculture practiced in the area, all suitablecleared land is under cultivation. Because of their ephemeral nature, itwas felt that plotting the old field category would only increase the rate

£of out-dating of the habitat map. Hence, old field and agriculture habitatsare plotted together.

Sand bars and mudflats existed in the project area only as smallareas along the immediate course of Cape La Croix Creek and its tributarystreams and the Mississippi River. Sand bar and mudflat habitat was notplotted separately from the two flowing water habitat types (Capt. L7Croix Creek and tributaries and Mississippi River) on the habitat map.

Backwaters and oxbows are aquatic habitats in close associationwith the Mississippi River. Because of their proximity to the river andbecause their physical and biological elements vary with the stage ofthe river, backwater and oxbow habitats were not plotted separately fromMississippi River on the habitat map.

Four wetland types, as defined by Shaw and Fredine (1956). werepresent in the project area. These are plotted conveniently on Figure 3,wildlife habitat types, as they are synonymous in most cases: (1) takesand ponds corresponding to wetland type 5, inland open fresh marsh; (2)floodplain forest corresponding to wetland type 7, wooded swamp; andmarshes and wetlands corresponding to wetland types 3 and 4, inland shallowfresh marsh and inland deep fresh marsh, respectively.

It should be pointed out that designation of "floodplain forest"habitat type was not based upon topographic association with a river flood-plain. Much of the bottomland forest within the project area was virtuallyindistinguishable biologically from forest on adjacent uplands. Only oneforest in the project area had a biological community which showed evidencethat periodic and prolonged inundation were a normal part of its ecology.This will be discussed below, but it was necessary to mention that onlythis stand is indicated on Figure 3 as floodplain forest.

The remaining wildlife habitat types are plotted without change.

.. O.

13

Phytoplankton. Two replicate net plankton samples of 30 to 60 liters eachwere collected at aquatic sampling stations 1 through 6 using a #25 plank-ton net. Sample volumes were determined by water turbidity. Samples werepreserved with acidified Lugol's solution and later volume-adjusted to 100ml.

Phytoplankters were counted using both a Sedgwick-Rafter countingcell under 160X magnification and a nannoplankton counting cell under400X magnification. Two to five Whipple grids were counted at 160X oneach of 12 replicate Sedgwick-Rafter cells prepared for each of the rep-licate plankton samples. In addition, five Whipple grids were counted at400X on each of 12 identically prepared nannoplankton counting cells.This modification of standard counting methodologies (Weber 1973) has beenshown to increase overall counting efficiency and to reduce the coefficientof variation of the counts obtained (Woelkerling, Kowal, and Gough 1976).

Filamentous species were recorded in 100 p units. Diatoms wererecorded during initial counting as Centrales, Pennales, or the lowest

*certain taxonomic level for the readily identifiable forms such as Fragil-aria spp., Melosira spp., NavicuZa spp., and Nitzschia spp. All plantswere identified to the lowest reasonable taxa. Densities were calculatedby the formula:

C * 1000 mm3/mlNumber per liter = C* D0 S* F

A - D - S ° F

where C - the number of each organism tallied; A = area covered by theWhipple grid (mm2); D = depth of the counting cell (mm); S = the numberof grids counted; F = the concentration factor of the sample being counted(liters/ml).

Diatoms were counted and identified from slides prepared by apotassium dichromate-hydrogen peroxide digestion of 5 ml of sample concen-trate. The samples were then repeatedly rinsed with distilled water andcentrifuged until the supernatant was clear. The diatoms were then con-centrated to approximately 1 ml. Permanent slides were prepared in dupli-cate by adding an appropriate volume to 18 mm No. 1 glass coverslips.These were dried and affixed to glass slides with Hyrax high refractiveindex mounting medium.

Diatoms were grouped as described earlier and percent compositionfor each species was determined. This value was applied to the appropriategroup total and reported as number per liter. In groups where only emptydiatom frustules were recorded, the taxa enumerated from the preparedslides were recorded as present (+). Also, species present in concentra-tions of less than I per liter were recorded as plus.

Those species recorded as present were included in the total numberof species for each sample. However, since no numerical values were ap-plied, they were not included in the total number of organisms per sample.

14

Zooplankton. Two replicate net plankton samples of 30 to 60 liters werecollected at aquatic sampling stations 1 through 6 using a #25 planktonnet. Sample volumes were dependent upon water turbidity. Four ml ofneosynephrine nosedrops were added to each sample to prevent contractionof non-loricate rotifers when samples were preserved after 1S to 30 minuteswith sufficient forinalin to achieve a 5% final concentration.

A species list for each zooplankton sample was prepared by scanningeach sample with a stereo-zoom microscope at lOX to 80X. After the scan,the sample was thoroughly mixed and subsamples were withdrawn using anautomatic pipette. Organisms were identified and counted using the stereo-zoom microscope in a modified Sedgwick-Rafter counting cell holding 2.5 mlof sample. Two entire cells were counted for each sample. Identificationslides were made of the copopods, cladocerans, and some rotifers and ex-amined with an interference contrast microscope at lO00OX magnification forspecies determinations.

Results were reported as number per liter for each species. Con-version of the recorded counts was based upon the following formula:S

Number Species A per liter = (A B). CD

where A = total number of species A counted; B = total volume samplecounted (ml); C = volume of concentrated sample (ml); and D = volume ofsample filtered (liters).

Those species observed only during scanning and not in the subsam-ples counted or whose densities following counting and calculating wereless than 1 per liter were recorded as present ( ). These were includedin the total number of species for each sample.

Benthos. Five quantitative benthic samples were collected from each ofsix aquatic sampling stations. Sampling was done with a 6-inch squareEkman grab at stations 3, 4, and 6 and with a Surber swift-water samplerat stations 1, 2, and 5. Substrate composition determined which samplingdevice was most appropriate: the Ekman sampler for softer clay-silt-detrital sediments and the Surbcr sampler for gravel, rubble, and bedrocksubstrates.

Samples were taken at equidistant points along a line perpendicularto the longitudinal axis of the stream. Sample 3 was the midstream sampleand sample I was nearest the right bank (facing downstream) at each sta-tion. In the wetland the five samples were spaced at approximattly equi-distant points from the center of the wetland to the shore, samples 1through 5, respectively.

Benthic samples were s;ieved in the field to reduce the volume ofsample and all material ret:aintd by a standard 30-mesh sieve was preservedwith formalin and returned to the laboratory for further processing. Inthe laboratory samples contaiijing ;ubstantial amounts of inorganic sub-strate were floated with a satir. r'd magnesium sulfate solution to separate

p15

the organisms from the substrate. After flotation, the residue was examinedunder a stereoscopic Microscope to retrieve snails, fingernail clams, andother organisms which did not float.

All samples were then sorted under stereoscopic microscopes at amagnification of lOX. Residue was scanned at 40X prior to disposal toinsure that all organisms had been removed. Identification to genericor species level was performed by taxonomists specializing in each of themajor groups of aquatic organisms.

To convert numbers of benthic macroinvertebrates per sample to num-bers per a2, each count from the Ekman grab samples was multiplied by 43since it sampled 1/43 m2 of bottom area while each count from the Surberswift-water sampler was multiplied by 11 as it sampled 1/11 m2 of bottomarea.

Quantitative sampling was supplemented with qualitative hand-pickedcollections at each station. In addition, blacklight trap samples werecollected from stations 1, 3, and 6. These stations were considered to berepresentative of the three major aquatic areas investigated: upland head-water stream, lowland stream near mouth, and a wetland, respectively.

The occurrence of a species in qualitative samples is indicated onthe species tables with a plus (+). These data are not included in thespecies totals.

Fishes. Fishes were collected from stations 1 through 6' by seining.Seining employed a S by 25 foot bag seine with 3/16-inch stretch mesh anda block seine of the same mesh size. Sampling continued until no furtherspecies were found and adequate series of each species had been collected.

The inventory table of fishes presented later in this report wascompiled from results of field studies and various published sources ini-cluding Smith, Lopinot, and Pflieger (1971) and Pfliegcr (1971, 1975).Nomenclature follows Bailey et at. (1970).

Species diversity. Species diversity (D) was calculated for phytoplankton,zooplankton, benthos, and fishes using the following equation:

nD - - p logPi

i=l 2

(Shannon and Weaver 1949) where pi = fraction of total individuals (N)belonging to the ith species.

Species richness was calculated from the difference between thecalculated diversity and equitability (D 4 1og2 N).

Other vertebrates. No specific attempts were made to collect samples ofnon-fish vertebrates. Rather, notes of species observed were made by all

9 16

personnel on trips to the project area. Results of these observationswere combined with published and unpublished records to produce the in-ventory tables presented later in this report. Principal sources are asfollows:

Amphibians: Smith (1961)Reptiles: Smith (1961)

Anderson (1965)Birds: Hanselmann (1966)

Anonyiious (1967)Bellrose (1968, 1976)Carney, Sorensen, and Martin (1975)National Audubon Society (1975)

Mammals: Schwartz and Schwartz (1959)Porath and Torgerson (1975)Sampson (1975a, 1975b)

Supplemental additions to the bird inventory were obtained fromunpublished aerial censuses of waterfowl conducted from 1972 through1975 by Drs. Frank C. Bellrose, Glen Sanderson, and Mr. Robert Crompton,Illinois Natural History Survey. Mr. Paul L. Heye kindly reviewed andsuggested additions to the bird list presented in the draft of this in-ventory. His 21 years of experience with the avifauna of southeastMissouri added 66 species to the final checklist of birds.

S

17

TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES

Three urban and nine non-urban wildlife habitat types, defined asfollows, were recommended for discussion in this biological inventory:

Urban habitat types1. City - associated with biological communities located within

an urban setting and having at least 80% of the area devoidof vegetative cover.

2. Suburban - associated with biological communities located withinan urban setting and having from 20% to 79% of the area devoidof vegetative cover.

3. Exurban - associated with biological communities located withinan urban setting and having from 0% to 19% of the area devoidof vegetative cover.

Non-urban habitat types1. Agricultural - associated with communities of substitute vegeta-

tion devoted to agricultural use.2. Old field - associated with communities of early succession vege-

tation resulting from abandoned farming operations.g 3. Upland forest - associated with communities of forest or brush-

land located in upland areas.4. Floodplain forest - associated with biological communities of

forest or brushland located in floodplain areas.5. Lakes and ponds - lentic habitats with open water greater than

50% of the surface acreage.6. Rivers and streams - lotic communities with their associated

biological communities.7. ;'and bars and mudfZats - largely barren habitats which undergo

periodic inundation.8. Marshes and wetlands - lentic habitats with open water less than

50% of the surface area; largely associated with communitiesof floating or emergent vegetation.

9. Other - habitats which do not conform readily to the above cri-teria, e. g., park areas, estates, and wildlife refuges.

For consistency in this report it was necessary to modify severalnon-urban habitat types. Floodplain forest was present both as floodedswamp and as riparian forest. The flooded habitat is here designatedwooded swamp (wetland type 7). Although located in the floodplain of CapeLa Croix Creek, riparian forest was essentially upland forest in terms ofthe majority of the biota. Organisms utilizing this habitat primarily be-cause of its riparian characteristics are included under the habitatLa Croix Creek and tributaries. Other habitat re-designations are as fol-lows: (1) lakes and ponds become open fresh marsh; (2) rivers and streamsare subdivided into Cape La Croix Creek and tributaries and YVsais,? ;:.River; and (3) marshes and wetlands become shallow and deil ,'i'cah rroh ..A new category, backwaters and oxbows, was added to the aquatic habitats.

The Cape La Croix Creek watershed is approximately 21.21. urban habi-tat (2,998.4 acres) and 78.8% non-urban habitat (11,]01.6 acres). Only asmall portion of the watershed is classified as wetlands, approximately0.6% of the project area (84.5 acres).

Urban areas. The urban areas were notable for the extreme variability in

18

plant material, variable in both diversity and abundance. Tracts rangedfrom the complete absence of all vegetation to wooded tracts where onlythe understory vegetation appeared to be controlled by mowing. In theexurban areas, limited irregular clusters of dwellings occurred, encroach-ing upon predominantly agricultural areas. Encroachment would be expectedto continue as urban expansion continues.

As the dominant vegetative features in the urban landscape, treesexhibited great species diversity, primarily through the establishmentof exotics. While silver raales (Acer saocharinum), sugar maples (Acersaccharwa), numerous oaks ('., :*.w spp.), sweet gum (Liquidnba o styraci-flua), and tulip trees ( Icn dcudro), tulipifera) were frequent and abun-dant, numerous exotic spccui.; and cultivars were also present. Understorytrees in early spring were dominated by redbud (Cercis canadensis), flow-ering do,,wood ( 'crna '!riz), and numerous varieties of crabapples(A/alus ,pp.) and magnolias . .: uo[ia spp.) (Table 4).

* ci ty

City habit:it, 2.3' of The study area (328.3 acres), is locatedentirely within Cape Girardcau. Two principal habitat concentrationsexist: along U. S. highway 01 in the western portion of the city andalong Missouri highway 34 in thv eastern portion of the city. Thie largestblock of city habitat, 2,16. acres, is located along U. S. highway 61south of its junction with Missmri highway 34. Construction of numerousshopping centers in this area insures expansion of city habitat, mostlyin a corridor along highwa) 61.

Of the 381 non-fish Vrtebrates listed in this inventory as knownor likely to occur in the project area, only 14 are recorded as likelyto occur in city habitat. These include six species of birds (Table 5)and eight of mammals (Table 0). Among the birds, nighthawks, rock doves(pigeons), and house sparrows are best adapted to city habitat and areconsidered common. Nightha ,ss feed upon night-flying insects attractedto the city lights and find flat, bare rooftops ideal nesting areas.Rock doves and house sparro%,ws feed upon a great variety of natural foodsand especially upon the edible fraction of man's litter and refuse.Nesting of the;o specie-, occt...'s in the heart of even the largest ofcities.

Among the mammals, oniy house mice and Norway rats can be consideredas abundant in city habitat. Although normally associated with dilapidatedsections of cities and warehouse districts, these ubiquitous maimals willbe abundant wherever sufficient cover and food permit. Surprising asmembers of the city fauna are three species of bats. These mamvials alsofeed upon night-flying ins..ctiattracted to the city limits. Roostingoccurs commonly in chimney., ind undtr window ledges.

City habitat is unsuit i,, for nearly all of the terrestrialvertebrates occurring in the proiect area. Principal factors in creatingthis dearth of species include the lack of natural cover, a food supplywhich may be abundant, but which is not diverse, and constant intrusionof living space by human!.. 7t ! auild be noted, however, that lack of

(U t

$40 L)

0 4)

44r_ 4 * r. l 0 -

t3 - .

* ~~~ 0 a C.

C-4 04

kb 0 *cz > 00 x k 0)"Ci- 4t.Z

uj .. 4 .,40 rq u a c -

c 1r.e Z4 n a0 e C '

e0( 0r ' U w -,.I-LU 4 qc Ng '~~0 -

&LJ ~ 4 CO~ 0. 3 ~ E . C."e

20

=jI

N

41.

2l 444 fi L)t .

N-r Iz ts 4

.- J Q) ..J 0) -l Q. 4

!~ O~ *0-j *-) P,4tA Go

o ~ 17'I A

~~4-4 ~ ~ c cc ' V ~ ~ ~ .

U 21

u M -It

(D C 4

00

14 -

td 2:

u N4

M ) ej (0 N .

4j %Nr L 4) e N$ Lcz -!c uf v) 13 50

91. to4. .0 .ca -4 ;1. k - 23

to d' '4 Z) 0. C) m

CI 0. A

ca coC L Al .

22

c04

41

0 44 44V

.- 3 to >.. LLU

0 *2 -:

V)C~~ 7A -T ~0 '3 f~ 1 4

23

3co Q

(zoo 4Oa1

w-2 4)

Vj *~ 0 (n~ F-. .

- ;. . -1~C(i

24

Aii

I-M

Nd

eq..

to 4

4

Nj -b (3

-, N -9 H 0 4 j0 w ..- % Q 4 - 9 .

'A V) ; ) n ) o OM -

-l LIU IilQ:. U. a 14

2S

oili

F7- z.7

N. N b

LI i L I .14 C 14 LI

.19 4) z t1

41 tO C 0 10 .4 4 jO . 4

A. C0 t 0 -IS

.4 0. .0 41. rLU *dm :

- 41J x 0 u (0

+A r 1 .141 L.0 3 kto .,, -- t.U -) 0 ~ (D) SL c

IL

26

4.1 0

4j-

rU

to . S9

S cd :

4) Cz _',110 X=

LN (Nr4t4

4)~1 3c ~ >. N.) 31 o 0

wj j t

22

00

( L.

co tnC- 41 a

zO

00 z bd co

coS.Li Li i Li 1

zi

."4 NC

0 u2

UU

to p

.5, to .1 0 VDo $C u. < o0 o.

ai t-j~ 4) *s to r -o u ) 0 Z ,

a' 4)' (4 ( 0 V)-u es

U4 Q O k* o C7tcis o ~ -

,-4- ;~&28

CA 41

-4t

EE

a)) >

;: Q) 0 -

0 tI~ *~0 * t C

4- 0) 5* 0 CA 0C~J j 4N .1 0 A5

0j I u

C) :3 IL::4-~~~~ Cd) 0,7l 2

ul ..L3

9 ~ ~ f;290

ins

to C

CL0.0 .

C3. : En 0 4) ;4,

U).0

-4.VL

30

3i

LA. L U

tA cU

1zw nL

CD MU

-1 UL :"

ca -I4 19 %

t3C14 UA G 00 OU'4 *..

oU -I~c r4 -m w LL (I tA C A44) .3 C WI. 4 ,0u LU k A r 4

L m > - -4 o/C~ C4 -U * ~ 1 I . ~ ~ S~l ~ tZ

S -L,4 I L .~ ' Lo q O : . !; 5f, > -L p .U

- -0 -6

31

~ t it

3- 0

3w o

'0~ 0

LA 0 2,O

0.

4-. g: U

UU u z =

ii o U

04 Lku 12 Qc

.3 0

32

m M-

coj

It

u La k

=O'l

0~~I 11 . m 1

UU U4-C a c .1 "1 "1 = A4

3t 0~ 43Ln to T. V)

cq53~4

O4m O. UE U4. k

I--

Jz Li

'Ca

'Ch~h~ Li

rdh Lco w C

0a C: 4- 0 74 s + Q

4) ;3 17-. 40 $ Q M 4V

ci 0.- th LU t 0 a) co

*L Z, E -tU < 41h .0

4) ~C Mi' , ~-

ha C to

p 34

II

Q0

w -4

Cl -4

) ti) V)) 17 SO-

35

ot

o, to, C4 0

E t) .

0 Lu .I tA

-It N" u - to 0 to,

EN CL ca~

36

-. 0

<

u. rL. %, t

Q)N

c- 12-

tl 410 LU 4 b 14 0 * A -.Nj 3 -V - A c at

-co

-~ ~~~ NW,&& j4J

'IN I

0-oz

Li II

'VJi *2'Vaw 1 A~

* 38

u L)

u ou

o -4

() co E7j~4. 8 = -'9-0 te4

, 0 01.- 0 = * S. Vt VLn F- . -, 0 tn 4. Q. E4 a

ejI.0 *9c Al A hi

to0

14 -4 C

.44- . z.

q. ) w n -) 4 (U n.4 Q

UO0~ Z... >~( ~00 0

to cd tU

a 4.5 V

0 -41 to 044 ~ .- 0 is 0) 0 to. o2 C

.0 U ~4j t to(~ E- c z~ii.LL F-." 2 l1

-- -40

to 0__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i5o z 0 4 U 0

0 V)

r. W f Z4 U

04) -4 9 a

' '5 -., . - - - r,,, c: i -i

Z -r .14 - 0 *4-.43(dC*~ 4 3 cd 04) 4.1 a

to to qD 4 4) z ..>

~~& 44~ 4) C;14 u

- ~C ~--4) .41,S*.4 ii

l f.l ' J1!l l. j

9 - 41

W cc 0:Eew

0 )

r_ 4

__ W) 4) 011

4z w) cz 1

40 01 0 u2~ U)-'-l Id a4 -N

44. 0- '-' 4 0 b

t) 0

O~U 4)0 to~LQ4),

42

IMI

o -0

ca ) W- .

- a) r) 4) -

$. to 4j -

4j : j 4 - j

-4; t44- V )4 J

o ~.cr~o~ 0cCA

43

m 0

0 0 E 0

0~ $4 CU

to -4s (U 'A

41 >WU

to z 0

4,.4 vs-a41.

.0 r1- 0 x o t

A UI

u 44

-_ ___ ___ ___ ___ __ _ _._____

Z~

U

5 3

u u

_-r-

U W

,-, . .s ,' -~ -4

z 0 .ti - .,, 0 . o

Li,,

45

u wOu

iU M

U

t 0

r_ - 0 1)0 LO 3L

:3 - F-

~Z 0

0 -u -t0 z~.' C

r- Q) t. tQ -L 0 v

- 1- ..4 ri C4 uCO UO . 0 CL CU .

>) ~ LC) C).. *u

U ~ L. ~ i> ~ .o~*

CC w

U U U 46

4j Ma

m --

-C 'A

j 00

to0

-A Z,; 0

- o 0 cc~ L ,- j

ad . ~ -' y

M AIL>.C-

C

'0 w

-, 04

Mo .

.4--

0 S) 0 . C)) 0 r

0 0 0 ~ ) 4 ~ C

CL' ci 4 % Co tj V . V z

0 '0- 00' CA) o ) Ln' ~ 4.

Co' a wC~t Z')C C

to)U M~ CA) >- t5 %0. 4-t 0 Z 0. to Cd 0 to ~ a o z 0

C)Lf) 4Ln -a '-1 t toC n to ~ ~ - w> LL C l

- Ci) i) 0 0 0 LI0

9 48

u uI

r- _ LOX

*.4 4 C- ,

.-- L~4) C I. -

- V)-' - ~

- ~ ~ V 0 0 3

SZI -o u CI t C-C)

.0 IL V4 -' -

oL ale.I~ $. ~ i~) C0~

u we

4- 0

4- ( -1

0 J

to r

>* V) .-dU

0 0 .0

En ej Ut, ..- U -4 r t3 -

Li~- 3t 4) "0 ~ '-30, Ci 0 41 0 1.4

41. 4 1 -4 to V,: c~ .*"0 -- 4O (d 0j co - *TA

u 0 t- 0

to 41 l * - to

V.~ - fv,

004 zJ. w) *z ca T'~ -Wu26c )e w5A- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C a C 3 C) - 1"

> tz~ 1~

L0

so

Ccc

0 1.

U Z: 4:

u . z) Q i T-i Z

.,.) u) -~

'0 0- tA0 -. C 0

co -4 0 ~ -LO~

r4 -- C ~ ~ , C~C 4 I

.6r

tot414

, . ., .-i _ ,

o- to c

t4 0 0 10 o-

) V 0 - <- " 0

4- 4,3 0..

52

C13

cz U

4-1'

to F- ' C- u.4 - .

N9 4-) ,.ga

go 0j 4 0

4)~f Ak~ .CC ..4Y-~S CU ~ ~* Mal

MU

:3 (d 0 *

00 to - -

t0 0 C

-4 .,4 ., -D-

4 .- 0 0 - St4v ~ -14.) .2 -g

0 to C -1 to . 0 m'. -0 nU0 0j W 3c S-4(1 - -S.

I Cd

.0 0 k- 04 4A 00 S 4) V C 0

Cd 41-d0 4 a I

00~~ u Vu

S4

c r- - -

a t.- c-:* w

3r .0 0, Ir C: -i.

41 'o a:C (.0 0 C 0 '-.

7. ̂ - 4a ) oj

LO 0J o ) o - l0 r-

0 1k 0 C ~ .

.0~~ oi's -

4J 0

acc

-d $i .. 2 . Z 31:4-' "a V1 0l 4IV V3

4, *.- -c C 0 .0o, 4 ~ C .J ',

41 li 4Z C$. 4 ~ ~ .. i 4) .1

~~~r t-j m ~ - 5

o~ of. o. : -10.~~

2 r-Z Z~ So lk

43) tJo,~z

1o

- ) r_ - 1 :p j L

- U7

-------- --

U 57

u M : 9%

u u u

u u u M

4- 4) r to a)q'

to3 "0 e3 to S. c)Q a0 to0 ( 0 '

r_4 " .' go

4) v ~ X W4) 0 c

r-' .4z. V -- 4.3 '0 "- '- 4.4) 7

04) '-4)- to t 0 '-4) )C4-' (n tj LL ) 0 0 0op, 3r 0'0 '-C t) 00.4 r

-~~c .- .0 t4 0) C ,CL tn ;3 4.-L q 4-O

0 .44) 0 0 '4 ~4) -

z Ix U3 rG 0to

In ~ ~ .0 U4 ~ "" ~ ~-CL

oC..-,-.

II

C3 0 C)r- -d 0- C

r- -u '-

C-I4 0)CZ .*0 . C A .) ~ ) '

41,*~- ~ - ~ : 0

C -:'>-~s-a C~1 *~C ~ eCC)~G 4-'~, C V C0

~z,.. Vs -~ ~ )0 -a- U - A d

o~a C)V - )~

U .0 0. *'C.L-_

~.59

o al Wtor

- 4 0 3 o# zu 0

r.-31- i-. o .

.1 >~ 91 . -a 1 .1I> ~ U L:

4.r3 - ~-C ftV> ) i

mat.~ L-i~.

,60

C)7 L r - 11

c'.b t,7

o -. ~ (1'f

- ~ A-~ Cr.

___ 61

c c

'Am

-~~7 C: C__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

m~ 46)

71A 0 - (

C) ~ UU 41 "14 U

0

.1C) X o0T 7

U~ 'I Ul (A u Z V):o

cp. 4,N 4. Q04C

tiCoC) '(A~ 0- 2~ (A.

Q _____ ______62

II

C3 ~

rd C)- -t of I

4~ C); C) " 0

V~ 1) La C,

9 63

ro u

- u

to 4) 4-' 4 -3 toS - C

0 u- exk -V

:3 - Q m - -OsC0~c ei re to c) 0 0 o-1 ,o 4 $.1 4.1 0 " -.

r- to ) Q3c :- a 4) to tn O~

0 .to. to 0) eo 4t- ~i~. r.a 04Z 4 0

0 OF-, 0-

64

a) W

tn. m 0 -H

44-

41 C~ 0 t_

C- C0C 0~0- *4.S) -, >, Z., U .

Zn H Z =0 Q-. 000 -L

co 3 L.0U .L.

W)C .-~- H < -1 0-e +)4- C)LU l -. 70H 4o CO) U. LM (AcO ~

.0 0 ci LQ .2 wt-jLI

C)Hcd U

rl -C E*~) O) & .

65

Ud 0

au) U) 4) r

-4)1r. o

(1) to 441 co 0

41 IA i'.' ) 0 Z r- 4- 1 2 u0~ 7~1 C4 -r C-4 0n A

) .. 4) co 0 : z -

CJ~4 0 .4) ~ OtW.) 0) 0441.C C) 0 4) C) 4) 0 cu LW 1

m >et #j S j 4j g u-1o ~4) tn tn C)) II.. Q .4

z tID - c D ic Z 4

F- >-. .

u- u

z. 0

"I to f I_

-i' ~ ~ rc-iC 1

04 o c ILLL) 'a4 ( ~ 0a'

-~~~4 W,. a, ~ ~ -

Aro m

Co.1

0 toN

4A) V. .0 ~C) $I-

W 0

fA) N

SL C )ro 4.- C): 0 F

0- ' 0 '- 4jO

r ) (4-4 -) 1; 'p,2o'

to >, f) 0t C Q '-'4.

DC0 0. S. CL- ) zT 30

lm L 0 L to cc "u

~~~~ K 4 u > ~~~ *- 3 4 ~ ~ *.)

0- ->- to Q ~ u ~- .).4

68

-6 -U-

"1 ~ ~ ~ t __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

u t..

CU - V U to-

ot Q~

__ _ __ _ __ _ __E__ _ _ __ _ __ _VI___ _ _

Q =c Zl Uo

ri C,, 47

5 69

MIX

Cd C-

00 co I-

04 -4 1-.1 )

C,) 3 .'4 CO ) -4J to 52) . = AvI

0 ) m 4) 4 4w ra U -

q-: k U tf

C.) 0) 41t + 4100 w :O 'd > 14$

U ~ .) (0J - .1 0 itCl) to 4-3- 44) go tu -41

Uz LCC ~~~4.C 4

70

-v

! ,-

tt

C)) to

to C) V) 23

-, 0

lasso AL ..

*, . ~ - o *-

9 K ____71

u u u

U ~ UU

,, 4

'~ 9 __ _ _ ____ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___

V) C1

ri CZ

"i -j U1 VU

,Z 0Z ZrC-

U

41~. 4- 4'-

C- A 4-' 2q

-~~~ t *"0

LU~~~~~-- 0 )r L - 0 E

0)0

Oman_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __w~C

V(

-I-':"~s72

.r

o C 0.Z

!>

U U

= a r

U- u-) to C)

m 1 Q,

73

competition and predators have allowed the more tolerant city speciesto maintain large populations.

City habitat presently is being expanded rapidly west and south-west of Cape Girardeau, mainly along U. S. highway 61. It is interestingto note that habitat succession in the Cape Girardeau area from agricul-tural to exurban to suburban apparently does not climax in city habitat.Rather, a second series of stages (agricultural to old field to city)produces city habitat. It should be stated that the old field stage atbest lasts two or three years.

Suburban

Suburban habitat, 14.6% of the project area (2,063.6 acres), existsprincipally as one more-or-less contiguous block of 1,788.7 acres in thecity of Cape Girardeau. Additional major habitat concentrations are westand south of the city proper.

Suburban habitat is suitable for a greater number of vertebratesthan is city habitat. This inventory records 73 species as known orlikely to occur in suburban habitat, including one amphibian, two reptiles,52 birds, and 18 mammals.

Aiong the amphibians (Table 7), only toads are adapted to the gen-erally dry conditions of suburban habitat. Their activities are noticedespecially on warm, rainy spring evenings.

Garter snakes are the only reptiles common in suburban habitat (Table8). They are especially abundant in vacant lots and in accimulations of

rubble in waste areas.

Birds are abundant in suburban habitat (Table S). In fact, somespecies, such as the robin and starling, utilize this as their primehabitat and can be very abundant. Most other species, however, are associ-ated with backyard areas where open areas of lawn alternate with shrubs andtrees, producing a forest-edge effect.

This forest-edge effect also is attractive to most of the mammalsoccurring in suburban areas (Table 6), especially the squirrels and cotton-tail. Only the house mouse and the rats move into man's dwellings.

Bratton (1974) states that the land west and northwest from CapeGirardeau is most suitable for expansion of this urban habitat. It wasnoted by us that urban development is, .in fact, spreading to these lands.Suburban habitat is the end product of habitat succession from agriculturalto exurban to suburban. This succession apparently reduces habitat diver-sity as fewer numbers of species of all groups of terrestrial vertebratesexist here than in agricultural habitat. Numbers of species alone, however,do not clearly reflect the extent of habitat change. Suburban habitat isessentially forest edge habitat. As such, many of the species includedhere are different from those occupying agricultural habitat. The change,then, is qualitative as well as quantitative.

U u cc : :

Iw

C)Q

4-, 0

-~ .0 V =

o~t -05. 5

C) = I.4 4J

11 c*I r= 'IC)

$-4 el t -'1 ) f C, c-~ ~ 7 5- QQ

*-. S., I-

C) I ~ u'r

75

o 0o

u a) t) ,

oj (C) c$0. CL) LL (0 C)

CiC) LLC) {Lt0 f

l 00 -..'j

II

,f~, z

- On.Zr

0 C)45' QJ

-"

v 1Y 0

0) J 0)S0

'.4 CD

C4.C- 0

p if 77

41,

1

[4C4)

to .00 0s

0i

ui *, ) 0'~ U ~l

+)Lf I. -

U \,--.~.r78

C U

C) ' 0 )

0 (U C (i m to 44'

0 aUf

0- a) U

4~ 1s S:, 4-. f3 I- 4) 0- 1

C) S U ) .

... t th 4-1 '- e :

t-Az

CC)~~~t (1)- 0 ACV C A

(D "'A . - ',I .A. 0

6w t 4j) 1 L -.

-C I .Qz' WO w A V) '.I C..

- C

go a)

tn ., 3c u0 tt) C)3 4) m 0) z

-3 cq 0 o '4 m Z d 0 - C-4 C) j ". § L" ;, S.

41 -l E) Ujr- 4 C.1) U.-n fi) CC4-

to) U to '-)4 V.-4C~-il =C 10 *'10 Z 0 '--

45 m. Q) 41tco cl co C 4- . C 1C) 4 k) :: . Z

c C '-4 03 cCC C )

CC4 1 C6C toC W~~CC. '0

e 80

* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t CC __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _w

-3 44: : W :a u c 1'3 ~ t __a_ cc__ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

t3 h .C -2

161

0 0

CO4- >- 4 -N cc cc

81

L)

C).. C.0 C 0

-1 I ) 4-) cu

tv Cc m r4-) >0 i V C

Q V) 0U 4- M () tAr

C0 t O ,-0 4) 0I 0v ( 0 0 -.-

4- r 4) to0 -

1-C 4 n $- C4) C+ .IUI 0 0 0 0 Co4)C

ca) - L4- ) 4)

p 82

11

V)

- -2 U#jC

t4l 4j4

14 t) v)

-~~;; 0~-~4

V 0

4R -4 4)j I: 4

C .- ~) t( ~U 0t4,S4)C to I -. 0a )

0Loll ~

U 83

t L=

41)

C)

:3 -4

0( to toU cz L

CC ) Iz 0v "S

to t t :$ ( n p C 4- u

CCC) C) .CS- 0(10~.

____ 84

~ -- '>m

LA U ~

0 -toQ0

:3 4V) $- 0

0:

:1 0( . 1) 4

41 4~U -1 0

E ) 0 0C)sC-, C C) 0Q,

co0 45.1r, ' .

0. D '0) -4 41 4

C') t ,) (n 0 M) 0l )~

0 u . q) V) fj) 0C 42 clto*4*- C. U ' -C~

C) <C .0 ) CC-' C -Q4LL)i ' * f

Exurban habitat, 2.4% of tile Cape La Croix Creek watershed (336.5acres), exists principally as new housing developments north, south, andwest of Cape Girardeau. The largest block of exurban habitat, 54.9 acres,is in the vicinity of Arena Park.

Lxurban habitat is transitional, a step in the conversion of nativehabitat to tile forest-edge conditions of suburbia. In the Cape La CroixCreek watershed, this transition generally is agricultural to exurban tosuburban. As a result, the fauna of the exurban areas contains elementsof both agricultziral and suburban habitats. This inventory lists one am-phibian (Table 7), 11 reptiles, mostly snakes (Table 8), 69 birds (Table 5),and 23 mammals (Table 6) as known or likely to occur in exurban habitat.

In spite of the transitional nature of exurban habitat, continuedexpansion of suburban areas virtually assures the existence of a belt ofexurban habitat separating agricultural from suburban habitat. Becauseof its limited extent, however, it is unlikely that exurban habitat con-tributes substantially to the ecological diversity of the project area.

I

Within Cape Girardeau a number of parks, estates, cemeteries, andhigh school and university campuses represent a distinct "urban" habitat.In this report, the non-urban category c';. ' j moved to the urban classi-fication to represent these areas. Essentiall 'y%, the1y represent most ofthe tree stratum of upland forest, thinned, and ,ithlout or with a highlymodified undrstory. Cape (;irardeau contains 270.0 acres of this habitat,1.9% of the watershed. This habitat appears mostly as a "patchwork" withinsuburban habitat, the largest block including Fairmont, Lorimer, and St.Marys cemeteries and Notre Dame High School (139.9 contiguous acres).

As would be expected, this wildlife habitat type contains a faunalelement having many similarities with the upland forest. This inventor'lists 56 vertebrates from parks, estates, cemeteries, and campuses, in-cluding one amphibian (Table 7), four reptiles (Table 8), 27 birds (Table5), and 24 mammals (Table 6). The number for bird species is certainlylow and probably could be increased with more intensive year-long study.

Non-urban areas. The following discussion considers the remaining wild-life habitat types observed in the project areq. Although six of thesehabitats are aquatic or are associated with aquatic communities, theyare discussed below as they relate to the adjacent terrestrial community.Only the non-fish vertebrate fauna will be considered at this time.

Agricultural and O'd Field

The intensive agriculture of the project area precludes old field

habitat in the watershed. Old field in a classic sense includes a longperiod of succession through well-documented vegetative stages. Abandoned

2;

86

fields do not exist, in this sense, in the project area All available

land is either under cultivation, pastured, or lying fallow as mowedfields. Vegetation associated with old field areas, or early successionalstages, was observed primarily in roadside ditches, along abandoned rail-road right-of-ways, and ditch banks. In the city and suburban areas, oldfield vegetation was characteristic of lots or tracts awaiting construc-tion. These areas were only temporarily old fields.

Old field habitat, though included in the inventory tables, isprobably too ephemeral to contribute much to the ecology of the area andis not plotted separately on the habitat map (Fig. 3). Rather, it is in-cluded with a,7rcuZtu'aa1 habitat. Together they represent 56.71 of theCape l~a Croix Creek watershed (7,992.1 acres) in a more-or-less contiguousbelt around Cape Girardeau. Most of this habitat is northwest of the city.

In the early spring the dominant herbaceous vegetation in these areasconsisted of milkweeds (Ascepias spp.), ragweeds (Ambrosia spp.), asters(Astcr spp.), fleabanes (Erigeron spp.), graminoids, and, in the moisterareas, golden ragwort (Senecio aureus) was, by far, the predominant herb.Poison ivy (i.'iL2odeK :''r2on r1d1accns) was ubiquitous in waste areas. Mostroadsides, however, were maintained by mowing.

As field work was accomplished early in the growing season, many ofthe noxious weeds associated with agricultural areas (obvious later in thegrowing season) were not apparent. In fact, spring planting was continuingor had recently been completed throughout much of the project area.

As would be expected for such an extensive habitat, many vertebratespecies are listed as known or likely to occur here. This report includes153 such species, nearly one-half (40',) of the total non-fish vertebratesreported for the entire watershed.

Five species of amphibians are associated with these habitats (Table7). Especially abundant are toads and, in moist meadows, leopard frogs.Twenty-one species of reptiles are known or likely to occur in agricul-tural and old field habitats (Table 8). Most inuerous among these are thesnakes, especially the small constrictors, which undoubtedly take a heavTtoll from the large rodent populations. Also present are a few lizardsand box turtles, but these are most commonly restricted to fencerows andadvanced old field succession.

Birds are numerically the most abundant vertebrates in agriculturaland old field habitats (Table 5). This inventory lists 84 species asknown or likely to occur in such areas. Again, because of the large num-ber of rodents present and also because of the lack of tree cover, preda-tory species are abundant. Fifteen species of hawks and owls are likelyto occur here, many in quite large numbers considering the solitary natureof most species. Also abundant are sparrows (20 species), and blackbirdsand their relatives (7 species), prob;ily due to the seeds and insects,respectively, provided by man's agricultural activities.

Mammal species are especially abundant in agricultural and old fieldhabitats (Table 6). This inventory lists 43 species as known or iikely tooccur, 86% of the total number of mammal species present in the watershed.

87

Especially abundant among these are the rodents and bats. Numerically,house mice, Norway rats, and several species of field mice (Cricetidie)predominate the mammalian fauna of these habitats. Many of the largermammals which occur in agricultural and old field habitat, such as fox,deer, raccoons, and opossum, probably forage nocturnally in cultivatedor open areas and retreat to brushy fencerows or small woodlots duringthe day.

Agricultural land represents the most important wildlife habitatin the project area. This determination is based upon the extent of ag-ricultural habitat, the large number of species which inhabit it, andthe amount of sportsman-hunter/wi Idlife interact ion which occur. s th re.Because of the intensity of agriculture, virtually all suitable land isunder cultivation or maintained as pasture. Hence, expansion of agri-cultural habitat is unlikely. In fact, expansion of urban habitats pres-ently is reducing the amount of agricultural habitat.

Food and cover may be limiting to wildlife in agricultural habitat.Monoculture of row crops produces large amounts of food which may besuitable to only a few wildlife species. In addition, intensive culti-vation reduces the amount of idle land. Hence, the food which existsmay be largely unavailable to species which are reluctant to venture farfrom cover.

Upland forest exists in extensive tracts aiorth of I he (':Ipc I: CroixCreek watershed. One such tract extends into the northernmost portionof the study area and covers 1,42-1.0 acres of the watershed. In l I I21.5% of the project area (3,025.0 acres) is covered by upl and forest habi-tat. This forest is essentially an oak-hickory-Llm association with tuliptrees and sweet gum becoming important in ravines in the highlv dissectedsouthern margin of the Ozark Uplands region. Several forest areas on thelowlands south of Cape Girardeau are clearly upland in species compositionin spite of their location on the floodplain. These are considered uplandforest in this biological inventory. Floodplain forest typically is abiological community which shows evidence of periodic and/or prolonged in-undation. Classification of this ty-pe of forest in the p roject area w]asdescribed above.

As described above, the Ozark Uplands is a highly di 'sected plateanwhich is separated from the Southeastern Lowlands by a narrow and distinctbluff line. The alluvial plain of the lowlands extends upstream alongmany of the area streams creating a broad transition zone between th,- twophysiographic regions.

Because of the thin, somewhat unproductive soils and r, lgged terrain,the Ozark Uplands is, in general, the least intensively cultivated sectionof Missouri. Extensive areas have never been under cultivation or havebeen allowed to revert to natural states. Consequently, deciduous forestcovers most of the dissected part of the Ozark Uplands and much of the un-dissected part (Pflieger 1971).

This is es pcc ia I I apparent t Ire:, ii ,ie tLp iIorest corpri scd21.%of the Cape La Croix Creek watvrs hed icreagc. Mi x,_1 oaik .imd Li kory

tore st s predomi inated with sugar maple (I ze.c') hc brr.J:2'urz z i7) tuI i 1) t ree I .W o .e'~ nd sweeittli .H!-

cr~z turzn : beingi common, iltca~l :Inres (IIineelii -ntion adjacent to streams.

In the vegetation transects san!:pltd, I. c A AA C, -C ,rId Pi-lWt VPi fied Such stan1ds . LocaItionls of thee ti nis are i s t ia ted in ii I ii

I and described in Fable 2. Results aire sumnmarjzed bY rinsect in 1e9, 10, and 11 for tran-sects A-A' , C-C' and 1)-W) respectiveel y

The1se upland forest tracts, were clluiractei-izedl by species of oaks anldhickories. Because of' speci fic i rrc)guL an ties in topogralpha rit

of microclimates determined by mois;tu~r, iiW nd temperaltureobse rved among the th rce traicts SaM[ I cA T hese di ffereIUS esWere S t

as di fferenc es in specius compos it ion 5 ins e pciescomrposit ion tegntsvarious cli ma to logical and ecological d iffercene es into anl obe io'ii condijtion -their presence or absence.

In these stands the1 IlIICl' 01-an iiN* 1Worna d0;,1i; ant IV OCCUi ed'by1 sugar maple (.41t" t-.. e '. l w ich was I. ti ttes C. vIit1' l 11'c' -pe Itotal numbers and percent covtr inll an>.\A J-C ,1 nil 1' jjP di-t ionalI importance were -!)cc i c I ot ( I )1 i ko ri es. ins Ili 1 h

o pignut K.1, . an rickt mu::1:Jing white o :~. rock chestnut r,..i

zi z sh 11 l V. I 1 1 C i I Ac in'.

iL i sU I si ppery .2*,al.d w I10,

One COMIiimno feature' inl the three;_ p1 anld tor t t stIssi;lii.spcies diecinsite, obs(Ireed . 1n t rauss s1"I A - Ni I and-C I '27 species of trees w(-re observed. A tot;l Lt oli s S-. IOs winS heclthe three t runs ect s samipled.

Other conMMOn1 t ree spec ies included sa--,ai rasweet gum (F Y t uIip1 ro~ewh it e a sh ([?rtp to~ ~'T:, Il hc k 1Le rr 11"phornbeam i'.p

wood Vu)s issa fr is s's'.i Imi i nIor it 0.in i.l el t(<rVi~''~VWere-1 ob~ioUS udro ( () Pt'1 es in' sie

hickories, and hazelnut comprised the ci c iidmt_1 '4ory speciCs iLe;910, and I1)1

'11C groUndcover was composed ofIVP*'s I I', ' wood laud s)t-ibl 1oodroot *mo.'i .mU. ) x'0. .... ,. ikrob ins (Ti-*_'m,,r %pp. ),and green 1;mm '1im iiicreeper fi'. A:r thu o1 'i mi'muxii m'iol i ve (-.. .m . .-

exmnr) b~ecame local ly abundant.

As with agricultuiral/old field I .j5;.

extensive within the0 stutly arci inl....1; sIi :

vertebrate species . Lbhis report Ii '

-A130 639 BIOLOGICAL INVENTORY CAPE LA CR0I CREEK*WATERSHED CAPE /ARREGCUT

MSOU A OES AUENTERPRISES MAHOMET IL JAN 7 LMSSD-76-25-26UNCLASSIFIED F/G 6/6 NLEIEEllEEIlEEE

EEllEllllEEllEEEEIIIIIIIIIIEEIhIhIIEIhIhIIIEEEEIIIIIIIIEElhEllhllhEIImEllElllllII

La 0

1111.25 111. 4 1.6

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

,K'01

plAU 01f AUS"ORS16

89

29O A m : .0 020044 00 0

cooU~ ~ 4 Q c00 c40 0

100

CD04044 - . . . .

0. @

0_0.

41

0z 0

0, t41 U,...N ,- 4,04 - 04 t 4go

N444 4 . 0000 0, N, 4 400 4 C. 4~0 ra

-a lOt';C ' A A-

9,

90

C -~ -. -~ ~ ~ 0.4 - Clj~

~

'~ ~ 4 . . . .

444 In O~O40InN 0144 - gNCOOO 44444

NI- I~ I 419s111.4m4*0I I~0 411041 ... N00~ I144010 0

0

- 10,01014444111041401001110410000010040 00 0 444 In 444 *41444 144 00144U40 0144 0 U4- 1~ 0 N 004 - 04.41.1 04 NC N 04

C N -. 444

00

NW In 14N..IInN - - N.~N N IN - 0 -~ ;0.0.0000 Il 400114100001010 11,10104 In 44

V V V VV 0

0

4441-. '0 InONInO 0 0 00Cr- 0 .0 1. 0 0 -'0444 N N..4141N0 N 0 0e404t N 4'4 0 N 0 -

-- N4440404InN1444440 U..10,0, II 0~CIOlI0 Ill 114411 0

Z'- N N 0 ln-0

O ldlI'4C 0 IN..1004.-l I Ii,..41i11 .1'~'~'W 0401110101 o 44114In N .. 1N - N

44

.0

'0N 44

04 I.,

0 0

004 .440 NO - 04440.0 NO.-. NO - .-. 44t401t- N 0 04

~,iP ,NOlsO.OOZ '~-.--l0ll 00000114411101141 IC

00-' NO 4~U44 44

.4

4...01In4...100010N1 41410101.000-401-

040 144N0.44 014440 04.44 N .-. C-.044404 In 0 0

9~~.9 1 - ~ 'Th '~0 .- ~~IO04444 04 044

U N -- IINII 101141

I - lOIn It 1In14400 Nun..., -In 41 I...llOtflOlfll? 1 IllInlIll 444 00 - -- - - N 0 U

1 - u.4U

U

'1- U

.0

U14410. 0

11141111*I 0 444

.4 I-44 044 41-00

44 6444 --. 44

4.-'0

o 4 4..

.44. 0 44 4- 44 4. .0-.0 ~L-.444- C '

U1.4.44I ~ .41.1-44 44~

0444 *I.14 4 0

Z ~44 KS -~ 3..~U44 44,444 ,.~ a *44*

0~..4U oi.-..-I~ ~4'0I. 44544 -44 44 44 - 0 '440

~.044.. U 0.0.

U - 4444 U44'..UOU44 .~ 440! *~

o. .441440 'K

* ~U0 44144. 44 -~~ 4~l~' U.0 -

'4 .4 ~4l .4 ~. -

4l44.~ ~ ~ ~1.

fr

91

F , 1 0 1 1 .,.W .-I I -

2 S , S , a II

_t ft

-. . . . . . . - ,- -- N V 8 ,,,- ,- 0,,

I C f f I~C S f I S~ t f f 6ff S t t t t 0.9I I I I I I I I I I f I Iv v

r Ii i I I ;C ;IC ; IC ; 4C ; IC ;C

co 1 t 0:! C; I I-

I n. ASf ft . 1 1 ft .f t ft I I I 'D- I I I N I I a.. ...1 I I I

an 4)

Of aa o

.tt

Hit.... .. , I ii I .. .....I :lf.

92

likely to occur in upland forest habitat.

Eight amphibian species typically are taken in upland forest habitat,including toads and a few salamanders and frogs (Table 7). Many of thesalamanders are restricted to the bases of woody bluffs, and so would belimited in distribution even within the upland forest.

Reptiles are represented in upland forest habitat by 31 species inthe Cape La Croix Creek watershed (Table 8). These include many of thesnakes, all but one of the lizards, and both of the box turtles known orlikely to occur in the study area. Again, a number of these species wouldbe restricted to bluffs or rock-outcrop areas. Thus, not all of thesespecies would be widely distributed.

This inventory lists 102 species of birds as known or likely to oc-cur in upland forest habitats (Table 5). Especially abundant are hawksand owls (10 species), sparrows and relatives (12 species), woodpeckers (7species), and warblers (28 species). It should be noted that the methodof bird inventory from Christmas counts is especially insensitive forlisting upland forest species. Many transients and summer visitors usethese upland forests for cover and food during migration stopovers or forbreeding. Many additional thrashers, flycatchers, and, especially, war-blers are included here because of the availability of annual data.

This report lists 31 species of mammals as known or likely to occurin upland forest habitats (Table 6). Only 9 of these species are rodents,a substantial reduction in species from the agricultural/old field habitatmainly through a reduction in the Cricetidac. Upland forest habitat isimportant living space for most of the large carnivores listed as rare inthis inventory.

Upland forest habitat in the project area represents a major wild-life resource. The extent of this habitat and the large number of specieswhich utilize it form the basis for this statement. Especially signifi-cant is the magnitude of some upland forest tracts in the northern portionof the project area. Many of the larger forest mammals require such largeareas because of their large home ranges.

The forest edge, here considered to be an interface between uplandforest and agricultural habitat, is especially important. Numerousspecies listed as members of the upland forest habitat are more or lessconfined to this region. Typically the forest edge represents slow suc-cessional stages of the regrowth of cleared land to the climax condition.To the forest edge species, closing of the forest canopy brings a gradualreduction of suitable foods and cover and their numbers are reduced. Thehighly dissected margins of the upland forest tracts in the project area,coupled with the intensive agriculture on adjacent cleared areas, insuresthe continued existence of this valuable wildlife habitat.

Floodplain Forest anm$ Wooded Swamp

Wooded swamp, type 7 wetland, wi,; represented in the study area bya single small tract of woodland (25.o acres) southeast of the junction

93

of U. S. highway 61 and Missouri highway 74. Type 7 wetland represented0.2% of the Cape La Croix Creek watershed.

Floodplains may vary from narrow strips to wide expanses up to afew miles wide. These wider areas are generally considered to be swampphases of bottomland forests. Voigt and Mohlenbrock (1964) describe com-munities which illustrate the developmental stages in bottomland hardwoodforests as being related developmentally through decreased hydrophytism:the dominating influence of the degree of soil saturation is graduallyreplaced by increased shading in later developmental stages.

The remaining two transects sampled typified the two extremesdescribed above. The floodplain forest tract, summarized as transect B-B'in Table 12, characterized the thin band of forest adjacent to streams inthe Ozark Uplands, reasonably well drained and densely shaded. The woodedswamp tract, summarized as transect E-E' in Table 13, was a remnant ofwhat had been extensive wetland forests prior to drainage of the Southeast-ern Lowlands. Locations of these two transects are illustrated in Figure1 and described in Table 2.

The floodplain forest illustrated by transect B-B' was dominated bybox elder (Acer negundo) and ash (Fraxinus spp.). Although American elms(Uimus americana) occurred sporadically throughout the tract, theirlargest concentration was within 10 m of the bank of Cape La Croix Creek.The elms, in fact, were one of the predominant tree species at the edge ofthe stream.

Beyond the band of elms, however, was the virtually impenetrablethicket of sapling box elders and ash, young trees averaging 9 to 12 fttall. They occurred in an area of partial inundation throughout the year.Ash, especially green ash, is considered a pioneer in succession, oftenfollowing willow and cottonwood communities (Voigt and Mohlenbrock 1964).It is often found in association with other pioneering species like boxelder, as evidenced in this stand, or silver and red maples, pin oak, andsweet gum.

Predominant ground cover species included field bindweed (Convolvulusarven s), poison ivy (Toxicodendrcn radican), cup-plant (Silphiwn perfoZi-atuwn), marsh fleabane (Erifgemn philadeZphicus), and wild onion (Alliumnspp.). The edges of this stand were overgrown with a thick mantle of Jap-anese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonioa).

At the opposite extreme, the wooded swamp of transect E-E' typifiedthe constantly inundated areas of the watershed. In its original condition,the Southeastern Lowlands region was heavily timbered with cypress, ash,and gum as the predominant species (Pflieger 1971). Serious drainage ef-forts have virtually eliminated swamps, leaving only a few isolated rem-nants such as the stand sampled here. Even so, the species compositionhas been changed. In transect E-E', the overstory consisted of black wil-low (SaZix nigra) and ash (Frczamu sp.). Although reproduction was occur-ring among the willows, the large ash trees were virtually all dead, only abranch or two remaining alive on the individuals tallied. It would appearthat an abrupt change occurred in the water regime of this wetland withinthe last few years to have seriously affected the ash.

94

-- .NON - N

I I"-

'II,, , , , ,II,......,IIn ....

I--- -_

9,S

8 8

I

•

• ,I CAD , W, ,N , , N !

ii

96

Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentaZie) and swamp rose (Rosa palus-tris) comprised the shrubby understory layer. Cover of these species waslow, 3.6%. These species constitute the most frequently observed shrubsof deep swamps in this area (Voigt and Mohlenbrock 1964).

Arrow arum (Peitandra virginica) and lizard's-tail (Saururus cernuus)formed the predominant ground cover species. These species may be char-acterized as typical of heavy-wet (littoral-amphibious) habitats (Voigtand Mohlenbrock 1964). Duckweed formed virtually a complete mat over thesurface of the water. Water depth throughout the swamp varied from onlya few centimeters at the edge of the swamp to nearly 1 m in the centralareas.

Although technically a wetland, wooded swamp habitat in the projectarea has many faunal differences from the other wetland types. Thisinventory lists 204 species of non-fish vertebrates from floodplain forestalong Cape La Croix Creek and tributaries and 98 from wooded swamp. Twenty-two of 29 total species of amphibians are known or likely to occur in thishabitat. Most abundant here are a number of tree frogs (Hylidae) (Table 7).

Reptiles are less abundant in wooded swamps than in other wetlandtypes. The principal group not present is the turtles (1 species). Anumber of lizards (4 species), however, enter wetlands only in this habitat(Table 8).

One hundred three species of birds are recorded for floodplain forestalong Cape La Croix Creek and tributaries and 54 from wooded swamp (Table 5).Major wetland groups present in low numbers of species are ducks and herons.Warblers, however, are especially abundant during summer.

A remarkably large number of mammal species are known or likely tooccur in this habitat (Table 6). Thirty-five species are listed in thisinventory for floodplain forest along Cape La Croix Creek and tributarieswith 19 from wooded swamp. Bats and rodents predominated.

Wooded swamp existed formerly throughout much of the SoutheasternLowlands south of Cape Girardeau. The single tract noted in the studyarea represents a reli' " natural area and a refuge for many wooded swampspecies which do not ex -t elsewhere in the project area. The small sizeof the tract, however, precludes the existence of many animal species whichrequire large ranges. Rather, species characteristic of wooded swamps arerepresented by numerous invertebrate ind a few small and secretive verte-brate species. In practical terms, this wooded swamp contributes littleto the overall ecology of the area and has value mainly as an importantrelict natural area.

Iniand Shaliow and Drop Fresh Marshes

Inland shallow fresh marsh (type 3 wetland) was represented byone small 5.0-acre tract northeast of the junction of U. S. highway 61and Missouri highway 74. This constituted less than 0.1% of the studyarea. Inland deep fresh marsh (type 4 wetland) was present as two smalltracts of approximately 8.0 acres southwest of Cape Girardeau along U. S.highway 61. This represented 0.1% of the study area.

97

Within the aquatic community a series or sequence of plant commu-nities occurs proceeding from the open water area toward the shore andbeyond, extending up a considerable gradient. The development of aquaticvegetation and the succession of species toward the climax is referred toas a hydrosere. The generalized succession of hydrosere in and adjacentto southern Illinois has been demonstrated to include six distinct stages:(1) a submerged stage; (2) a floating leaf stage with either free-floatersor attached floaters; (3) an amphibious stage; (4) the wet meadow stage;(5) a shrub stage; and (6) a tree stage (Voigt and Mohlenbrock 1964).

Figure 4 illustrates the succession of aquatic vegetation observedfrom the "open water" or central area toward shore along transect F-F';Figure 5, the succession of aquatic vegetation from shore to shore alongtransect G-G'. In these two type 4 wetlands sampled, the floating leafand amphibious stages were present. Transect F-F', however, representeda type 4 wetland portion of a larger wetland which included a shrub swampcomprised almost exclusively of young willows (Salix) as a transition zonebetween F-F' and the wooded swamp, transect E-E'.

The floating leaf stage had duckweed (Lemna), a free floater, in tran-sect F-F', and yellow pond lily (Nup ha2, luteam macrophyliwn), an attachedfloater, in transect G-G'. However, along transect F-F', the floating

leaf and amphibious stages occurred simultaneously with arrow arum (Pel-tandra virginica) and lizard's-tail (Saururus cernuus) occurring as thepredominant, conspicuous amphibious representatives.

Along transect G-6', yellow pond lily occupied the central deeperareas of the wetland while lizard's-tail occurred in the shallower, marginalareas with occasional buttonbushes (Cephalanthus occidentaZis) pioneeringthe shrub stage. Thus, along G-G' the attached floating and amphibiousstages occupied distinct zones, while the amphibious and shrub stages oc-curred in the same zone.

Species diversity in the amphibious stage was greater in the wetlandsampled by transect F-F' than in G-G'. Five species became numericallyimportant along transect F-F'. These included bullrush (Scirpus atrovirens),soft rush (Juncus effusus var. solutus), cat-tail (Typha latifolia), swampdock (Rumex verticillatus), and smartweed (Polygonum spp.).

Successive stages were not observed in either wetland sampled. Thewetland sampled by transect F-F' was surrounded by encroaching agricultureand highways 61 and 74. Transect G-G' was bordered by highway 61 and sub-urban development.

Arrow arum was the predominant plant along transect F-F' and yellowpond lily along G-G'. Both species are adapted to exist in swampy areas:(1) shoot production occurs best when the rhizomes are virtually deprivedof oxygen and (2) seed germination may be stimulated by reduced oxygen ten-sion and low redox potential. In fact, the rhizomes and corms of yellowpond lily (Nuphar), sweet flig (Acor s), arrow arum (Pettandra), cat-tail(Typha), and bullrush (ScT 7 rw) could live anaerobically for long periodsof time. The ability to utilize anaerobic metabolism earned yellow pond lilyits nickname "brandy bottle" because the ethanol is an obvious odor of theplant tissues (Hutchinson 1971).

98

Figure 4. Aquatic macrophytes observed along transect F-F' (asnumber of stems per M)

99

301t .0

101.iru Pahoclravirgnlc

3030

201

~~60] ~ Jumpcs Offusus ver. sohdtus ______________________

600

60..

so- 1 60

40- 5 Soururus cernuus

10 ~14020 . 130

J o0 120

110 0

10 9020yrpha -aioicz s

40.~ u 0

4o j umox vorickillats4

20.1L 20

to. 10

.1.Polygenum 1*

0 10 20 30 40

0210

00

DM5APM PROM COMl (m)~

T-

100

Figure 5. Aquatic macrophytes &'bsx'rved along transect G-G' (asnumber of stems per m12).

9 101

C*Phalanthus occidentalis

110 -Scururus cornuus

100

E so

* 10

z0 AL

Nuphar luleum isp macrophyllum

10.

50

40

20

1)

0

a 10 20 20 to

DISTANCE TO CUNIUR (in)

U 102

The non-fish vertebrate fauna of shallow and deep fresh marshesare sufficiently similar to permit a common discussion. This inventorylists 119 species as known or likely to occur in the marshes and wetlands.Among these are nearly two-thirds of all amphibians listed for the CapeLa Croix Creek watershed (19 of 29 species) (Table 7). Especially abun-dant are the cricket and chorus frogs and the "true" frogs (Rana).

Among the reptiles, only turtles (12 species) and snakes (9 species)occur in shallow and deep fresh marshes, turtles being especially abundant(Table 8). Two species of venomous snakes, the cottonmouth and the cane-brake rattlesnake, probably occur in the wetlands south of Cape Girardeau.This area would represent the northernmost limits of the ranges of thesesouthern species.

Fifty-six species of birds are listed in this inventory for shallowand deep fresh marsh habitats (Table 5). Migratory waterfowl (13 speciesof Anatidae), herons and egrets (11 species of Ardeidae), and several groupsof smaller shorebirds and wading birds being especially abundant, althoughthe abundance of waterfowl fluctuates greatly with season.

Mammals are represented in the shallow and deep fresh marshes by 23species, including nine species each of bats and rodents (Table 6). Musk-rats are among the most conspicuous of these species, although some of thesmaller rodents are much more abundant.

The extent of these wetland habitats is so small that their impor-tance to the overall ecology of the project area might be overlooked.Their contribution is as a refuge for many small species, especially amongthe amphibians and turtles, which do not exist elsewhere in the watershed.

There is some question as to the origin of the type 3 wetland imme-diately northeast of the junction of U. S. highway 61 and Missouri highway74. Both highways are elevated above grade and drainage is routed throughculverts and ditches. These ditches converge in a low area which formsthe wetland. A drainage ditch then carries the water from the wetland toCape La Croix Creek. It is likely that conditions suitable for wetlanddevelopment were created when the highway gradework and drainage were com-pleted.

Inland Open Fresh Marsh

Inland open fresh marsh (type S wetland) was represented in thestudy area by several lakes and numerous small ponds. A total of 46.0acres of type S wetland existed there, representing 0.3% of the watershed.Nearly one-half of this acreage was contained in Lake Hollenbeck northwestof Cape Girardeau.

The flora of this habitat was remarkably similar to inland shallowand deep fresh marshes in areas where emergent vegetation developed. Deepwater areas were practically devoid of vegetation. Intermediate depthsdeveloped a characteristic flora (Table 4).

The non-fish vertebrate fauna of these lakes and ponds is similar

-

103

to that of the shallow and deep fresh marshes of the project area. Atotal of Ill species are listed in this inventory, including 17 speciesof amphibians (Table 7), 25 species of reptiles (Table 8), 52 species ofbirds (Table 5), and 17 species of mammals (Table 6). Notable differencesfrom shallow and deep fresh marshes include a greater number of ducks andgeese (22 species of Anatidae compared to 13 for shallow and deep freshmarshes) and a smaller number of rodents (2 species compared to 9 for theshallow and deep fresh marshes).

A more complete discussion of this habitat will be deferred to thesection on aquatic communities. It should be stated here, however, thatthe small acreage of this habitat type and the predominant location ofsmall ponds (generally in open pastureland) may preclude much of theirusefulness to many terrestrial wildlife species. Cape La Croix Creek andits tributaries are more uniformly dispersed in the project area and pro-vide ample cover in the form of riparian vegetation.

Cape La Croix Cre k (vd Tributaries

Cape La Croix Creek and its tributaries contain 57.7 mi (92.9 kin)of flowing water habitat. Table 14 summarizes the morphology of thedrainage net. The trellis-like drainage pattern evident in Figure 1 isreflected clearly by the large number of order 4 links. Although Horton-Strahler classification designated Cape La Croix Creek as an order 4stream, log2 analysis of order 1 links would make the stream order 5 down-stream from the junction of Walker Creek. Log 2 analysis is appropriatefor non-dendritic drainages such as the study stream.

Sand bars and mudflats are not plotted on the map of wildlife habi-tats (Fig. 3). Only small strips of this habitat existed, always withinthe banks of Cape La Croix Creek and its tributary streams. Th1is habitattype is grouped with Cape La Croix Creek in the inventory tables as theyshare common non-fish vertebrate fauna.

The riparian vegetation is discussed above under floodplain forestand wooded swamp. Aquatic vegetation is limited principally to attachedmicroflora in Cape La Croix Creek and its tributaries. Rooted macrophyteswere notably absent. The sand bar and mudflat flora consisted principallyof willows (Salix spp.), emergent and overhanging grasses, and invadingannuals from riparian areas.

Two hundred four species are listed in this inventory for the wild-life habitat Cape La Croix Creek and tributaries including 25 amphibians(Table 7), 41 reptiles (Table 8), 103 birds (Table 5), and 35 mammals (Table6). As stated above, this discussion is limited to organisms utilizing thishabitat mainly because of its riparian characteristics. Aquatic specieswill be discussed in the section on aquatic communities. In spite of thisdistinction, the "terrestrial" organisms to be considered here divide con-veniently into two categories: those which interact on a more or less con-tinuous basis with the aquatic components of this habitat type (as a sourceof food, cover, or nesting sites) and those which merely occupy riparianhabitat and which utilize the stream itself at most as a source of drinkingwater. Most of the species listed fail into this latter category (122 of

104

Table 14. Morphology of the Cape La Croix Creek drainage net.

HORTON- STRAIILER NUMBER LENGTH (kin)ORDER' OF LINKS MAX. MIN. MEAN S. D. TOTAL

1 38 3.15 0.75 1.547 0.65S 58.80

2 17 2.75 0.25 0.797 0.594 13.55

63 7 1.50 0.20 0.857 0.514 6.00

4 13 1.75 0.10 1.115 1.137 14.50

'Following Strahier (1954, 19S7).

FI

105

the 204 species).

Among amphibians, perhaps seven species utilize the stream as asource of food and cover. Frogs, especially cricket and bullfrogs, pre-dominate among these. The remaining species listed, mostly salamanders,seek the moist conditions of the floodplain forest rather than the rela-tively dry upland forest. Still portions of the stream such as backwatersand pools may serve as spawning sites for all of the amphibians listed.

Of the 41 reptiles listed for this habitat type, most (26 species)utilize the stream as a source of food and cover. Turtles have the great-est number of species occupying the creek and sand bar/mudflat habitats.Fourteen are listed in this inventory. Snakes represent the remainingreptiles from these habitats, especially the genus Natrix, having sixspecies. Snakes also comprise the bulk of the reptiles occupying riparianhabitat, but not interacting significantly with the aquatic components ofthe community.

One hundred three species of birds are recorded as known or likelyto occur in these wildlife habitats. Among the semi-aquatic species,perhaps 32, small wading birds are important species feeding almost exclu-sively upon larger aquatic organisms such as frogs, fishes, and crayfishes.The bulk of the bird species, however, are many of the smaller speciesassociated with riparian forests (e. g., Parulidae).

Seventeen of the 41 species of mammals are associated with creekand sand bar/mudflat habitats. Most of these are bats (10 species) whichfeed heavily upon emerging aquatic insects. Of the remaining, only muskratand beaver occur regularly in open waters. The remaining semi-aquaticspecies utilize the stream banks as hunting grounds and prey upon both ter-restrial and aquatic organisms. The terrestrial component of riparian mam-mals includes species associated with riparian forests as well as transientspecies which utilize this habitat as cover while moving between patches ofother habitats.

Cape La Croix Creek and its tributaries, and associated sand barsand mudflats, represent the principal water resource in the strict confinesof the project watershed. These habitats will be most affected by proposedwater resource developments. A discussion of the aquatic communities thesehabitats represent will be deferred to a later section of this report. Thepresent discussion will be limited to the role these habitats play in theterrestrial ecosystem.

Three factors contribute to Cape i.a Croix Creek as part of the ter-restrial ecosystem. Its riparian community provides cover and nesting sitesfor many species of terrestrial wildlife and is especially important as acorridor for wildlife movement. Many i,ildlife species are wary of openareas and rely upon these corridors as avenues for dispersal and movement.In the upper and extreme lower reache-; of the watershed, this vegetation hasbeen little disturbed by man. It has developed in areas, which for reasonsof access, slope, and/or flooding, arc unsuited for other uses. It is absentor very sparse in the middle reaches ,lon , the creek due to urban development.Elsewhere in the watershed, streamsid,. clearinig has produced a discontinuousband of riparian vegetation, thereby l nit ing its use as a wildlife corridor.

low,

106

The aquatic community of Cape La Croix Creek may be as productiveper unit area as adjacent agricultural land. In the presence of anagriculture limited to two or three principal crops, the diversity inavailable food provided by the creek's fishes, crayfishes, and, especiallyemerging aquatic insects is attractive to many species of terrestrial wild-life. Virtually all groups contain common species which depend upon thesefood sources.

Finally, Cape La Croix Creek and its tributaries are important tothe terrestrial community as a source of drinking water. As stated above,many species of terrestrial wildlife are wary of open areas. Hence, pondsin pastureland are unsuitable and will not be utilized by these species.The presence of tributaries in all parts of the watershed and the relativelyintact band of riparian vegetation along these streams provide good wateringareas for most wildlife species.

Mississippi River

A last wildlife habitat, the Mississippi River, is included herealthough it is not strictly within the bounds of this project area. Therationales for inclusion are (1) that many aquatic species will penetrateupstream from the river into the lower reaches of Cape La Croix Creek; (2)adults of many aquatic insects dispersing from the river will reach thecreek; and (3) migratory waterfowl following the river will pass over andperhaps rest and feed in the project area.

Table 7 lists seven species of amphibians as inhabitants of the Mis-sissippi River and associated habitats. Frogs are the predominant membersof this fauna. All species are common to creek and river habitats and acontinuous interchange of fauna is likely in the downstream portions ofthe project area.

Twenty-three species of reptiles are listed in this inventory forthe Mississippi River habitat (Table 8). Predominant among these are theturtles and watersnakes (Natrix spp.). All but one species also occurs inCape La Croix Creek and its tributaries. Snakes are relatively sedentaryin habit, but many turtles exhibit a regular pattern of seasonal movements.It is during these periods that a significant exchange between river andcreek faunas may occur. At these times turtles are likely to be killedwhile crossing roads.

Seventy-six species of birds are associated with Mississippi Riverhabitat (Table 5). Included here are large numbers of migratory waterfowl(22 species of Anatidae), herons and egrets (10 species of Ardeidae), num-erous other wading birds (18 species), six species of gulls and terns, andall of the larger accipiters, including two species of eagles, the Missis-sippi kite, and the osprey.

Table 6 lists 15 species of mammals which utilize Mississippi Riverhabitat. Bats predominate with nine species. They are commonly observedin the evening feeding over the river on emerging aquatic insects. Ingeneral, however, most of the remaining mammals are confined to the banksof the river. Exceptions venturing into open water areas include the river

ef

107

otter, muskrat, and beaver.

Wildlife habitats, as discussed above, arc illustrated in Figure 3.For convenience, the areas of the various wildlife habitats and the percent of the watershed each constitutes have been summarized in Table 15.

!I

I

0

108

Table 15. Summary of the extent of various wildlife habitat types inthe Cape La Croix Creek watershed.

AREAHABITAT TYPE (acres)' WATERSHED 2

Urban:City 328.3 2.3Suburban 2,063.6 14.6Exurban 336.5 2.4Other 270.0 1.9

Non-Urban:Agricultural/Old Field 7,992.1 S6.7Upland Forest 3,02S.0 21.5Wetlands

Type 3 (Inland Shallow Fresh Marsh) 5.0 0.1Type 4 (Inland Deep Fresh Marsh) 8.0 0.1Type 5 (Inland Open Fresh Marsh) 46.0 0.3Type 7 (Wooded Swamp) 25.0 0.2

Cape La Croix Creek & Tributaries/Sand Bars & Mudflats 57.7 mi -

Mississippi River/Sand Bars & Mudflats

'Units are area in acres unless otherwise indicated.2Based upon a total watershed acreage of 14,100 acres.

. .... a.

*

109

Species in habitats. Non-fish vertebrates known or likely to occur inthe Cape La Croix Creek watershed are listed as abundance by habitat inTables 5 through 8. The following discussion considers the principalspecies in general terms.

Amphibians

Twenty-nine species and subspecies of amphibians are known or likelyto occur in the project area. These include 13 species of salamanders and16 species of frogs and toads. These species are listed and relativeabundance of each is illustrated by habitat in Table 7.

Although most are terrestrial organisms, the amphibians are tiedclosely to the aquatic and wetland habitats. Reproduction and thedevelopment of larval forms (tadpoles) occurs in water. Further, manyspecies require an extremely moist habitat for proper elimination ofnitrogenous wastes and for gas exchange through the integument. Somespecies, s-¢h as the mudpuppy and siren, are totally aquatic. Notableexceptions are a few frogs (Rana) which will feed in damp pastures, and,especially, the toads (Bufo) which often are found far from water.Although the habitat preference for the eastern spadefoot indicates thatit is found in agricultural areas, presumably dry, it should be noted thatthis species lies dormant, buried for most of the year. It emerges onlywith the spring and early summer rains to reproduce in rain-filled pools.

A conspicuous southern species of salamander entering the projectarea as a northern limit of its range is the siren. This species islimited to the wetlands of the Southeastern Lowlands south of CapeGirardeau.

The most visible of the Amphibia are the toads, especially duringearly summer when their young have left the water to begin terrestrialexistence. Toads occur abundantly throughout the project area. Numerouslarger frogs (Ranidae) may be found by walking through the wetlands southof Cape Girardeau. Although not recorded during field portions of thisinventory, chorus and peeper frogs (ltylidae) are probably the mostabundant amphibian in the wetland areas. During early spring, tremendousnumbers should be found calling from these wetlands.

Reptiles

Fifty-eight species and subspecies of reptiles are known orthought to occur in the Cape La Croix Creek watershed. These includeeight species of lizards, 17 taxa of turtles, and 33 taxa of snakes, fiveof which are venomous (Crotalidae) (Table 8).

Most of the reptiles known or thought to occur in the project areaare not associated with water or wetland areas. Exceptions are theturtles (all but the box turtles, Terrapene), and a few groups of snakes(Natrix, Thamnophis, and Agkistrodon ioivorous). Although Natrix andThanrnophis could occur quite far upstream, the preferred habitat for mostof the aquatic reptiles would be the lower portions of Cape La CroixCreek, adjacent wetlands, and the many lakes and ponds in the watershed.

110

All of the lizards occurring in the project area are uncommon orrare in most of the available habitats. Exceptions are two skinks andthe racerunner, which may be common in some upland forest situations.

Many of the turtles listed in Table 8 are designated as uncommonor rare in the project area. Most of these are species more common insouthern regions which reach their northern limits in the marshes southof Cape Girardeau. During the field portions of this investigation, itwas noted that a substantial number of turtles were killed while attemptingto cross highways through the wetland areas. Highway deaths could repre-sent a major factor in the ecology of the lowland turtle populations.

Among the reptiles, snakes are the most diverse. A total of 33species and subspecies are recognized as possible inhabitants of theproject area. Most, if not all, of the venomous snakes of the studyarea are uncommon or rare. A possible exception would be the northerncopperhead. This species could be locally common on rocky hillsides inthe upland forest habitat.

Birds

Table 5 lists 247 species of birds known or likely to occur inthe Cape La Croix Creek watershed. Specific references to the watershedare unavailable and the list was drawn mainly from field studies andfrom published records from adjacent areas including the National AudubonSociety's annual Christmas bird census for Horseshoe Lake and UnionCounty, Illinois, Mingo National Wildlife Refuge, Missouri, and the per-sonal observations of Mr. Paul L. Heye of Cape Girardeau, Missouri. Al-though the adjacent areas provide a greater diversity of habitats than theproject area, their proximity and the great mobility of birds makes itreasonable to assume similarities in avifauna. Nomenclature used in thisreport follows the recommendation of the American Ornithologist's Union(1957, 1973).

As part of the Mississippi River waterfowl census for the U. S.Army Corps of Engineers, forested areas in the river bottom were surveyedfrom the air during 1973 to 1975 for colonies of breeding herons andegrets. Dr. Richard R. Graber, Wildlife Specialist of the Illinois NaturalHistory Survey has made available data for 18 survey flights. His dataindicate that no nesting colonies occur near the project area.

Prior to 1972, only limited aerial surveys had been made of thewaterfowl resources of the Mississippi River adjacent to southern Illinoisand southern Missouri. At the request of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,Wildlife Specialists Drs. Frank C. Bellrose and Glenn C. Sanderson andMr. Robert Crompton, all of the Illinois Natural History Survey, undertooka series of aerial censuses to determine the use of this area by waterfowl.A total of 30 survey flights, at approximately 2-week intervals, wereflown from 15 November 1972 through 21 March 1973, 6 December 1973 through2 April 1974, 4 December 1974 through 26 March 1975, and 19 Novemberthrough 17 December 1975. Results of these surveys have been summarizedby Drs. Bellrose and Sanderson and their data have been made available toUS.

U

The entire area censused extended from the confluence of theMississippi and Ohio Rivers upstream along the Mississippi River to St.Louis, Missouri. Two of their subdivisions occur within the projectarea: one, extending from Grand Tower, Illinois, to Cape Girardeau,Missouri, and the second, from Cape Girardeau to Cairo, Illinois. Re-sults of these censuses are summarized in Table 16.

In 1952 the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service began a questionnairesurvey of waterfowl harvest for each administrative flyway. This surveywas expanded in 1961 to include wing collections for verification aswell as provision for county-by-county breakdown of harvest. Results ofthis survey (Carney, Sorensen, and Martin 1975) yield the following com-bined average annual harvest of waterfowl for Alexander county, Illinois,and Cape Girardeau county, Missouri. These data are combined with thesummarized results of the aerial census program of the Illinois NaturalHistory Survey in Table 17.

When a prey species is abundant in a habitat, it does not neces-sarily form an important part of the diet of the predator which eats it.Predators are, to some extent, selective in what they eat. The same re-lationship exists for the hunter-prey interaction of man and migratorywaterfowl. Detailed studies of fish feeding have led to the formulationof an "electivity" index or availability factor. This concept is sum-marized by Hynes (1970). Essentially, the index is the ratio of the per-centage of that species in the harvest to its percentage in the fauna.When this ratio is 1.0, there is no selection, but if it is more than orless than 1.0, the species is being selected or rejected, respectively.Ease in locating and killing and palatability are principal among manyfactors contributing to this index.

Table 17 gives clectivity indices for all species having pairedobservations. Significantly, wood ducks ranked high (third.) among speciesharvested, but were not detected by the aerial census technique. Thesedata indicate very high selection for green-winged teal and pintail andmoderate selection for gadwall and Canada goose. Rejection clearly wasindicated for the coot which ranked third in abundance, but was not takenby hunters.

MAnia I

Table 6 lists mammals known or thought to occur in the Cape LaCroix Creek watershed. Fifty species are included in this list. Espe-cially evident on the list are the rodents (rats, mice, and squirrels)and the bats, representing 21 and 12 species, respectively, or approxi-mately two-thirds of all species of mammals. The following discussionconsiders important mammals of the project area. Harvest data are takenfrom Schwartz and Schwartz (1959), Porath and Torgerson (1975), andSampson (1975a, 1975b). Their summaries, especially those of Porath,Torgerson, and Sampson for 1974, indi, ite hunter and trapper success inMissouri.

The data of Porath and Torgerson (1975) and Sampson (1975a) aresummarized by county in the original publications. Data from Sampson

112

-e1 0 l I I r I tn I I I I N- I I I I I I Ln

- l (N Ln'0G

0%co

CUI Ln I I 0 00 1 1 1 0 1 1 RT I I

.0 -4 C0 A-4 -4

C 4

0r- LA I I I I a, 0 I I 1 0 I 1 1 1 1 1 Ln

Ln

0

14- I Ln I CD 0a - U I I I I ' I L

(N .-n NOrCU

co Nn I Ln I 1 0 1 CA I I I I 0Q I I n m ~a) 0D LA 0D LA

0A 0k

o m 00 '1 N D I I I ) C

CULA - LA t.0 I 0 I I I 1 0 1 1 LA OnC14 (N 0 0 Ln 0)L

Nn 0 tn

LA I I I D CD I CD I I I tn 0144 0 - 0 m0C4U CD LA cA

4) M N4(

0 (N (N

(N (N0 A0L

0 LA)LlA4 0 D 0Vk- 14 ) - 0c d-

4) LA LA co I 0% I 0 I I I L

01 ON 0 0 a)-N9 u -0 LA a) 0 N

-j )t '0 (N 00d (N 0 4 4to c

OW r. -3 V) r- CLC A u .

k) -4) V r 4 t ( 4 4- 0 '4)4 $ : . r s 4 9 0 C a 0 0

to- 4 1 c 0= a -

04 u f4i

-4 -nLAO

-11 I 0 n I LA 0 I 1 I 4 I I I O CO

I -~ 1 0( 0 r r 1 0 N

C1 "t MA a) M M ' I I In riIn I vi - M 00

-h r1 '0 r- a z A I c LO1 1 0 L '

tn~0

-4 C

r- Nl r- C I IO I N LA (1I04 C IO4 LA C- --t 00 CO n

-4 r4 (NC(NL

-4

O: 0 C d ~ - A~ l ~0 0 0 .

Ad(I . 0 N 0 WN 1-4 wA co W .) r.-. . C AC4 C4 0N U~ (N a~ 01 (VN (N - O -LN N

- ~ .(0 1) trC L I 4-

M ed 0 0 .4 0A r3 -4 d) 0 C A I I I

114

N- \0 LA 00 t N 1 N* \0 I t N t - a \0 I I t '

o- LnAt

-4'I o

0) 0 tn I N~ I - tl ta 01 o 1t %0 1 00 a C

-4 N 4 LN r- -0 -4 t o - \ - L

-4--4

0 t-- CD 1 0 00 a$) LA N) IA mA N) IA cc AN n '-I 0 LA VN tN tN Tr 00 0 t N

.4 00. -4 Nn No to)' -4 N'0

t-- 0- TI 0 1 C 0 M at I 1 00 Ln t- m I NA Cl

'. '14 Co .. 4 TT LA '.0 C4 t

Co L

NtN ' C I 0n 0n M~' -) 1 1 1 LA CA I 0I - N LN -' LA En O N '0 00 10 r4 0- ~ 4 .

N- N- 00. m4 Ln O N r- c0 n

M .. 4 00 C4 -

O~0 0CN- A ~. 0. - I m I- A 0. t a -

r- a 10

N ~ ~ ~ Q N Co 0a. A L ) I I

N NO0 X~' '4 04 NI N Vvi z 0 0 Co N oU u ZC

Lo u-a3 0 0$ w-

40 Vt Vtd m .e4r 4) 0p ) u a > 41 4) M0 aMo 0 V)4 4) "0~ 0

M. 0 0 t $ 0 -4 =' Ct 0 0Uo U U u0 Ut U -4 w 3c . '4

115

Table 17. Migratory waterfowl ranked by abundance from aerial censuses,numbers taken by waterfowl hunters, and the electivity indexe the hunter-prey relationship.

ABUNDANCE 1 HARVEST2 ELECTIVITYSPECIES RANK NUMBER RANK NUMBER INDEX'

Canada goose 1 163,525 1 8,102 1.35

Mallard 2 66,656 2 575 0.24

Coot 3 6,426 - - -

Wigeon 4 4,012 5 63 0.43

Lesser scaup 5 3,854 8 18 0.13

Black duck 6 3,730 11 3 0.02

Pintail 7 2,546 41 198 2.12

Blue & Snow geese 8 1,064 9 10 0.26

Common goldeneye 9 1,036 - - -

Ring-necked duck 10 1,033 7 29 0.77

Canvasback 11 905 - - -

Blue-winged teal 12 716 12 3 0.11

American merganser 13 637 - - -

'ireen-winged teal 14 33.1 6 39 3.18

Shoveler iS 327 - - -

Redhead 16 180 - -

Gadwall 17 172 10 10 1.58

Ruddy duck 18 38 - -

Wood duck - - 3 458 -

Bufflehead - 13 3 -

'Determined from aerial census program of the Illinois Natural HistorySurvey, Grand Tower to Cairo, Illinois.

2Numbers from Alexander county, Illinois, and Cape Girardeau county,Missouri (Carney, Sorensen, and Martin 1975).

3See text for explanation.

I/

116

(1975b) are from the north and east Ozark border wildlife managementunit and were scaled down to Cape Girardeau county by a percentage ofarea method.

A single marsupial, the opossum, occurs in the project area. Thisanimal is common to abundant in exurban and rural areas in both open andforest situations. Sampson (1975a) report a 1974 harvest of approximately1210 in Cape Girardeau county. Although there is some fur value to theopossum, most hunting is for meat or sport. The project area should sup-port a good population of opossum with a bag limit being the only controlnecessary to insure continued production.

The white-tailed deer is the only native ungulate known to occur inthe Cape La Croix Creek watershed. It is common in forest-edge habitatin bottomland and upland situations, frequently venturing into agricul-tural and exurban habitats. Porath and Torgerson (1975) report a harvestof 80 individuals from Cape Girardeau county in 1974, indicating that thedeer are important game animals as well as an asset to the aesthetics ofthe area. Effective management requires knowledge of the age and sex ofharvested animals in addition to numbers taken.

Two species of rabbits occur in the study area. Of these, theswamp rabbit, restricted to wetland areas, is rare. The cottontail iscommon or abundant in nearly all terrestrial habitats except for the com-mercial districts of cities. Sampson (1975b) reports a county harvest ofnearly 24000 in 1974. Clearly the cottontail is an important game animal.Suitable cottontail habitat exists throughout the project area and sub-stantial populations are present. Again, bag limit is the principal man-agement tool to insure continued yield.

The order Insectivora is represented in the project area by twospecies of shrews and one species of mole. All species are common orabundant in terrestrial habitats and some occur in wetlands as well. Allare voracious predators feeding upon anything which can be overpowered.Moles may be a problem because of their tunneling activities, but performa service by aerating the soil.

Four groups of carnivores occur or are likely to occur in the pro-ject area, including the raccoon, one native cat, three native dogs, andfive weasels and skunks. The raccoon is an important upland game speciesand Schwartz and Schwartz (1959) report that nearly 100,000 were takenannually during 1957 and 1958. Nearly three-fourths of those were takenby hunters with hounds. Sampson (1975a, 1975b) reports a 1974 harvest of1730 raccoon by trappers and 4625 by hunters from Cape Girardeau county.Raccoons are valuable fur bearers and do provide sport and meat. The)yare common or abundant throughout the project area and, no doubt, canwithstand considerable hunting pressure.

The bobcat is considered as rare and possibly occurring in theproject area, especially in heavily forested areas. Schwartz and Schwartz(1959) reported an annual harvest of three per year from Missouri in 1957and 1958. Sampson (1975a) reports a harvest of five in 1974 from CapeGirardeau county, alone. It is unfortunate that this species is consideredundesirable by many as large predators play an important role in maintaining

117

the populations of many smaller animals. Bobcat also have an aestheticvalue in that their persistence in an area reflects a sense of "wildness".

Schwartz and Schwartz (1959) reported an annual harvest of about400 each of red and gray fox, mostly by pelt hunters and trappers.Sampson (1975a, 1975b) reported a countywide harvest of 103 red fox and29 gray fox in 1974. In addition, eight coyotes were reported.

Of the five species of weasels and skunks known or likely to occurin the proje.t area, Schwartz and Schwartz (1959) reported an annual har-vest for four species. The river otter, not on their list, is now con-sidered endangered and is protected. They reported an annual harvest of30 long-tailed weasels in 1957 and 1958. This species is now considered--r, and is also protected. The remaining species (mink, spotted skunk,and striped skunk) presumably are still important fur bearers in Missouri,although the spotted skunk is rare throughout much of its range. Sampson(1975a) reported a countywide harvest of 110 mink and 7 striped skunk in1974.

The remaining mammals, 21 species of rodents and 12 species of bats,are ubiquitous, with at least some representatives in all wildlife habitats.Of these, only five rodents are considered game or fur bearers. Gray andfox squirrels are hunted primarily for sport and food. The 1957 and 1958annual harvest for these species (combined) was over 2 million in Missouri.Muskrats were next in numbers harvested, with nearly 47,000 per year beingtaken in the state. Schwartz and Schwartz (1959) noted that this was con-siderably lower than the 140,000 taken annually 10 years earlier. Beaverand woodchuck were also taken as game and fur bearers, but in lessernumbers.

Muskrat are still important fur bearers in the project area.Sampson (1975a) reported a harvest of 1,068 from Cape Girardeau countyin 1974. In addition, two beaver were taken.

118

AQUATIC COMMUNITIES

Limitations of time and funding imposed upon this study precludeddetailed analyses of all components of the aquatic communities comprisingall the aquatic habitats in the project area. The following discussionwas organized by major community (i. e., phytoplankton, zooplankton,benthos, and fishes). For the phytoplankton, zooplankton, and benthos,the discussion was restricted to results of collections made during thefield portions of this inventory. However, the availability of supple-mental published ecological information for Missouri fishes encouragedthe discussion of fishes by general aquatic habitats observed in theproject area.

The physical characteristics of the stream stations at the time ofsampling are summarized in Table 18 and discussed below. These datatypify the habitat separations of Ozark Uplands and Southeastern Lowlands

regions, the transitional zone between them, and the wetland areas. TheMississippi River and associated backwater areas were not sampled and arenot included in the table.

Phytoplankton. Three species and three genera of blue-green algae (Cyano-phyta), nine species and :0 genera of green algae (Chlorophyta), threespecies and four genera of euglenoids (Euglenophyta), three species andtwo genera of cryptomonads (Pyrrophyta, Cryptophyceae), and 62 species and21 genera of diatoms (Chrysophyta) were identified from phytoplankton col-lections from the six aquatic sampling stations in the Cape La Croix Creekwatershed. In all, 80 species and 40 genera were identified. All speciesand genera enumerated from these collections are summarized in Table 19,along with calculations of species diversity and species richness. Indi-vidual station summaries of phytoplankton samples are presented in Appendix1. General aquatic habitat descriptions representative of the samplingsites at the time of sampling are summarized in Table 18.

All stations demonstrated a relatively high species diversity (Table19), due principally to diatoms, which yielded the greatest number ofspecies at all stations.

Small streams typically do not develop a rich phytoplankton. In itsplace, an attached community called Aufiwuchs or periphyton develops onvirtually all available substrates. Sloughing and scour continually re-plenish the stream's "plankton" as bits of periphyton become dislodged andare swept up into the water column.

Many diatoms are adapted to periphytic existence. This is clearlydemonstrated by the results of samples taken at stations I and 5, which

had bedrock and cobble, and gravel substrates, respectively. Stations 3and 4, which did not have such suitable natural attachment surfaces, butrather had silt and clay substrates, did not yield large numbers of diatoms.Station 2, considered to be intermediate between the Ozark Uplands and theSoutheastern Lowlands, also was intermediate in numbers of diatoms enumer-ated. This probably was due to the presence of a rubble riffle in theproximity of the bridge at this station. Compared to the stream stations,diatoms were fairly abundant in the wetland samples (station 6). Here, in

-1 -4

.144

-14)

t 4)

ro .~ 0 0. - 0 v f

0 V).C u ~ .- ~

' LA) L) IfO

'3 C3i ... Q~"

t) V D )l 4 m- V r

4-) 00 -'

4.3 t)~ ) 0~ - F-

S4 +j~

.-4 4) 14 C;

40

0 ~ ~ - 0 to3 V0~4 013)0 .~0 u.0.

u 4))

4-4 4J n '. -

'-4 ).0 he

o 4)

cU4 0

s-1 - 0co . 4 0

:3 0 Uco V) U

w)C4-' .c

I-. -a> 5-

4)14J 0 .0 E3

-4 41 C" -0 r-

4 4'-' 4) 0U) +cc *0c' 41 4)0

.M s. t5-gm- Lo W

120

Table L4. lvictoplankton co11e~ted a~t stat ,...1 in the ire. . n,,.i 2" IL, I

S T A _I I 0 5S-TAXA 1 2 3 45

CYANOPIFYTAAynen.c:ur. .a2drup2 :ti" (FMeneghinil Br6bisson ---- 7Cr7

CnaLflnsgirg) trount 4 [ailv S 7 -w

.?Ch ;: tnrfw vae i (Agardi) Uunjiit 2 - 1135 59.3 43Ilnidveti Pie 1: Llament.-s - 95 '1.5

CIILURUPIF PTACh.~uceslip. [Lirenberg - t - 315 - 2o

'L.jilla spp, Beyeriiick -.-- 99;'A-h.

2u'ii a iSe- Firenheug - - 4

.2(45 pp. kuet~&ng'id~tjCOzCs FladnSgirgi boye-Peterseo - 128,

,%nr th 7, u ~. -(I (rn I Komi rko vdA- lgnerovf - 19 S- 91

j !uusk (Wo lus:-. I I i ndak , WoO r~ot A- Ilegntcruit A 3o .5 --31. "'nrutw \aegelil kunirkv-L gneroiA 15). 5 M34 524 l8.

t r Iest 1. bect Kom~rko -L i rot 14-. l

'l.er oork~ I2(,16lt zing 15" . S 2.

_ 257'22 'I Link--- 2)'

N [ALL.%VfFIVTA. spp. Vhrenberg 33. 9; 3

Lep- [ ' p ert 2P;Ivs O.l 7 a... hid k

17.10 . 1-: (Fluel 1 .1 , o rd i%

PYRROIPFFYTA* V;, 2 e. ISp. Ilansgi r.*,uist f ;, Lansgi rg 2 30(

t1

,u mo Qi a PtS Ehrunhurg, 1.31C .- 92 Lhr,-nberg -

CHRS SOPHFY TACheysoph>-ceae

.* n.8 5Lp- Perry 3('.. -

3p-hio 9 :L t . 1 t.: %ar. '.2 .c oevbiusI Lc'metrnann --

Bay iilariuphyceacCetrales

g2,e.2slip. Kuetzing II-.e'i1a2 Kuetzing2,

Welsa disv~nu L.renL'ergj Kuet: ing -

31. i rar.w.'ati var .:'u :4 '..lrun-w Miie 2 hrv-1 it~zio i (Ehrenberg) kuetzingM1. 2 ,ziadf Agardh 4w," 113-

ti~ilu 28 spp. Llirenlrg S . .

Unidentified Lentrics t,. 4PennialesA' -hnznthea sp. Bury t 22 31

A. Liungari&-i Gruno) , u~ino% 13.54 ... 'c 't2 var .2 . runow .2 i2A. Z-I*eiris :'. y,7. 1F. 1 . Sn. . .A. nu~tisaf' i Ikicixing, Cleve 5 1C'Arqiic ru rit Ketzing

7a-C'u!iI 2 ar .',z,; lirenberg. Ciece I7amt. euir (~' BrPiii-sn2 Smith - I

u:dmbe L., tumidaz ;Brfbison San Fieted. 1019 5 -C. turgika (Gregoryj Circe I' S32Fragtari, spy. Lynghye 42.5.;4F. Fi'inat, Ehrenberg 2F. iacchepiue (Kuetingl P'eters.;omphw'eru spp. Agad r7N5G. anguetatn LKuetzingi llabenhorst 29-. I

5..5302eFLynglipel Kutiting 10 I.,ta. ,ir 2 (Kuret:ing9 G rinow....-

3. piwerop .-r Eh~renberg - 1.Syroaignnu acal:.tviiuo Ikabenhnrst ) Cleve IMacai 3n ciryui. iwe ItCreci I I e Agardb 1NivicuLA spp. Bury 34L I191N5. 42fJ0. lustedtN1. xpitafti vat-, Lir''ou F(runow) 2 Foss%%.7. ir3j.t -oepha.' Kueting965 -. 35N. .rypto.cpbw- var..'z tl Iuetzing, RaF'enhorst . 43 95V . yastrir Ehrenberg .- 9".3N~jziura cf. dPI

2)..? z~s Mayer .3 .

N5. huaf,,eri var. :,, to-: 'uS -a 9N tysion) Patrick . S 2.5 . 9.N. nininua Gruno. 35 . L

r-w

121

table 19. (concluded).

IT1- INSiAXA 1 23 4

Pennales (concludedI).aicuia cf. klacentu4la (Ehrenberg) kuetzirnc - 15N. pelziculoaa (Brjbiss On) tut - 5 5-N. puputa Kuetzing - 20.5 -Savicula cf. rhyncuceiiw.2s Kuetziig II-N. r-hyncocephala var. gerranii 0iaLILice) vatrici. 2 42 --N. aainarum var. intnnmedia lGrunoaj) Ce 35. - --.. saoretl var. api- ulja Patrick -. 48.5Nitzaahia app. Hlassaul to 3 3 94.5 212.5 212.5N. acicularia Smith - li.S t, 74 14N. a'nphibia Grunow v - 191N. causii Hantzscti 20 5 -N. diaaipata (Kuetzingi Gruno. G 20.5 44.5 191N. filiforia (W. Smith) tHustedt - 11---N. fnuatuww var. per;..ai.2a )tthculnrst i Lx.ooh.7 ii 0. --Si Eaachia cf. inrsur...-ziftustedt Ii.-- 35.5 -

.N. kuerzingiana lithe . i, 13 S3v -

Nitaachia cf. inearir %. Smith - 05 SN. micrcsepha~a Grunow .N. patLea (Kuetzing) W. Smith 9f.. 523 - 5 93.5N. aigm Ikuetzing) W. Sm Ith It "N. aubtinearie ftustedt - 5;s-Pinnitar-ia spp. Ehrenberg 12.5.-Rnovaoaphe'ia oatj(kuetzung' i,rlihloiStauroneia spip. Ehrenberg --. 289.5.5. anc'epa f. g,..icU tii Habenhorst .- I ISurii-e Ita angus ta Kuetin . . 1S. minuta Br~bisson . . 20.S. oviata Kuetzing 1. 4. o In 1 190. 5 ilt-

Qu-.2ata var.prlt

a .Smt Il-dI. 21a5qneimai rw ;eps Kuietz-ing .- 31S. mirtpeena %ar. rn'85'L::Grunow 12"

:enera W. Smith 5..-.3 t~a Nitzsch) Ehrenht-rg .- 2.

Unidentified Pennates --..5 pI 971

TOTAL NUMBER OP SPECIES 22 is ;977

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS VIS 2188 Cu; 3609.5 2914.5 1541.5

SPECIES DIVERSITY . 3.1 37 3.0 5.4 3.6

SPECIES RICHNESS . 29 3.4 2.1 3.1 3.3

'Entries represent number of pbytoplankti rs petr litt-n en-t. t .t l'iclt dtensities to estilish :iccileate coinit

Summaries of alt phytoplantiton collections it eOt)i pi..

U

122

the absence of a hard substrate, the diatoms were associated with the stemsof the Nuphau'.

Although the remaining groups of algae were present at nearly all ofthe stream stations and, in fact, developed fairly large populations, par-ticularly at downstream sites, it was in the still waters of the wetlandsthat maximum development of these groups occurred. Blue-green algae, thecryptomonads, euglenoids, and especially the green algae proliferated. Forexample, green algae were the predominant forms there, representing over 63'of the total number of individuals counted.

Zooplankton. Nine species and eight genera of cladocerans, three speciesand three genera of copepods, and one species and 12 genera of rotiferswere identified from zooplankton collections from the six aquatic samplingsitcs in the Cape La Croix Creek watershed (Appendix 2). These data aresummarized in Table 20. Species diversity and species richness were cal-culated for each of the sampling stations and these data also appear inTable 20.

Zooplankton is never particularly abundant nor diverse in smallstreams. This fact is supported by data obtained in the present study(Table 20). At all stream stations, most taxa present occurred in insuf-ficient densities to establish an accurate count. Those stream stationsin proximity to large pools, as at station 4 and upstream from station 5,did yield sufficient densities of some taxa to permit accurate counting.

Despite generally poor representations of zooplankton populationsat stream sites, some general observations are possible. In general, therotifers predominated, with copepods comprising the balance of the commun-ity. Predominant forms included bdelloid rotifers and immature copepods(nauplii and copepodids).

The population density of zooplankton observed at station 6 reflectedthe obvious differences between lotic and lentic habitats. The density ofzooplankton in the wetland was nearly 20 times that observed at any of thestream stations. Also, the community observed in the wetland was clearlythe most diverse with 17 taxa reported. Nearly 75% of the zooplankton col-lected here, however, were immature copepods. Despite this numerical dom-inance by copepods, cladocerans represented more than 50% of the taxaidentified.

Benthos. Results of replicate quantitative sampling of benthic macro-invertebrates are presented in Appendix 3. These data are summarized andsupplemented with qualitative data in Table 21. This table also presentsthe results of species diversity and species richness calculations.

One hundred twenty-three taxa of benthic macroinvertebrates wereidentified from aquatic sampling stations 1 through 6. Especially abundantwere aquatic beetles, aquatic oligochacte worms, and aquatic flies, repre-senting 29.6%, 22.9%, and 22.0%, respectively, of the species found. It issignificant to note that only two of the 35 species of aqutic beetlestaken were collected by quantitative means, while all of the aquatic worms

123

Table 20. Zooplankton' observed at stations in the Cape La Croix Creek watershed, May,1976.

STAT IONS

TAXA 1 2 3 4 5 6

CLADOCERAAtona circnfimnbriata Megard - + - -

A. uttata Sars- +Bosmina spp. Baird (immature) + - -B. longirostra-i (0. F. Killer) + 9.5Ceriodaphnia spp. Dana (immature) - - - 1.5Chydortw ephae2,cus (0. F. Miller) - - - + - IDaphnia spp. 0. F. tiller (immature) - - - - 1.SD. anbigua Scourfield - - - - 7D. pa.vuZa Fordyce - - - - 2Kurzia Zatissira (Kurzj - 2Pleuroxrua dent' ,ulatua Birge - +Simocephalus ', ulus Schdller +

COPEPODADiaptomus patZ1i,Jue Herrick + 6Eucyclops spp. Claus + -E. agiZia (Koch) +Tropocyclops p;asinus (Fischer) - + -Nauplii + + + 3 + 142Calanoid Copepodids - - 1.5Cyclopoid Copepodids + + 0.5 0.5 2.5Harpacticoida + - -

ROTIFERABrachionus patulus Miller - 6CephalodeZia spp. Bory de St. Vincent + 5 1 -EuchZanis spp. Ehrenberg + + 4

Gaatropua spp. Imhof + -Keratella spp. Bory de St. Vincent 10Lecane spp. Nitzsch - +- +LepadelZa spp. Bory de St. Vincent +MonostyZa spp. Ehrenberg + +Notommata spp. Ehrenberg + - - -Testudinella spp. Bory de St. Vincent - 0.5 - 3.5Trichocerca spp. Lamarck 0.5 2 +Trichotria spp. Bory de St. Vincent + -Bdelloid Rotifers + 1 2

TOTAl NUMBER OF TAXA 1 5 5 11 10 17

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS - - 10.5 5.5 196

SPECIES DIVERSITY 0 2.3 2.3 1.9 2.2 3.2

SPECIES RICHNESS 0 4.(, 4.6 1.2 1.2 2.6

'Entries represent number of zooplankters per liter; "+ = present in insufficient den-sities to establish accurate count. Stamaries of all zooplankton collections arepresented in Appendix 2.

bo

124

lable 21l Renthic uacro invertebrates observed at stat ions in thv CTape La Cr(oix creek watershed. May mnd .]ino, 1976.

I AXA 234S6

Ifirud invaErpobdeffIidae~ A, kc.i. ilcidy) N .6 --

(.ossiphiofiidae

PI,0hd 4,. :,,.More

01 igochaeta

LulbbT6CUI Icr)

SAIdidadeA:,~~~~4 2 -ot.ialr

I hckent 249.4Nqi

24 -~ s [Igk,t - ill1.8 722.4

V. - ';'.rllv-- 249.4N., et 25.9 -

!.r our t4. nx, 154.t,

mI'-P -; 4 rinkhu, t --. t,5 -

Si . 1arz'je 4. 41 .9 1 b.; 91

fr-nhhur-,t 4, lao) - lixl'- 'P '.~ lj~-.e.4.4 94. t 3 1'

I (risen) -- 20b,.4Ip., rinkharst .--.

Z'r,-21 ! 4 Leidy . 7 .2 1 576.'pp. %'hr- PP \;dovs), G Mr,:, . - -(

)irahe) .11. 64- S'. . . Hrlrmk~nrt (,).- 1.2< 34.4

J fSCI Icr) S .6 .-

MALACOSTRA( AAmphirpod I(,ama rs i Ja

F ,er.,3, o a)i-,- i 29.62.7. 29 98 24.2

7 1l it rida,

I sopodaAsc1l I i ar

['(SF1 TAFiphemeropt era

Baet idae,r!r Tii4 slpP. i iton I 2.I

Caen idaeCdepnis spp. Stephen, 68..2 4.4 . . - P2

EphenrerellIidaeEp 7.r '3:, ' r, W' nnough *

Heptagen idac7:2"tero''

55'4~4, (Siryl .

Stax '"''''(say) 2 .2C. t ;unoi'jwr (Ranks) 35.2 13.2 *--

Leptophiebi idacPczmo.etohlobi "noro I (Mc Ounnough) II12 1

91 ecoptel-aPerlidae

Ne"qrr'x ,z'~i (Newman) 6'.6 4.4 -

Po - t * 2x:i (Hlagen) .Neuroptcna

SisqyridaeSiozy ri U3rd (Walkier) -

(ToleopteraDytisc idac

Ce~nz a'eac~tasAuh6 - --

.. p i* s (Say) ----

125

Table 21. (continued).

TAXA 1234S6

Dytiscidae (concluded)Copctoomus interrogatiis (Fabricius) --Hydreoporus cf. conimilis Leconte- - -

H. vitcatipemiert Geminger & Harold --

Laccphilus pnr,ximw Say --

Liodesauea ~ffinie (Say) --

Ther,,wnectes, ormat&,cllitz )irw't . Autb6- -

Uvarus lacustyis (Say) -

ElmidaeThbiraphia sp. I Sanderson-- -

LSubiraphia sp. 2 Sanderson --

Ahrnchusa ga raiti. ('-iy) - -

Stenelrje -renaW (Say) 1.A 13.11 2S.8 8. . tHal ipi idae

Pptody1t.s iunavani Young --

P. seenaul.atua Robert,llclodidae

PrwoW!Yphon sp. Redtenbacher +Hydrophil idae

Beroaus fraternuw LeconteB. infuacatut' Leconte -S-

B. pan thei'inuo LeconteB. r',regrinuae (Herbst)- --

Ch zrthr-ia atra (LeCon,,-) ---

Cymbiod,a cf. bIas h~n'' Horn --Enochrus N5,sor'tus Greei. -

E. ochy-atcus (Melsheimer) +E. Pygiiizeusa nebulosu8 (Savj + +Helophomiw spp. Fabricius +Hydrochoura obvuaatcz (Sayj +Parcyimns subouprt'us (Say) + +Tropisternus sp. Solier (immiature) ---

T. lateralis nimbats (Say), -

NoteridaeHs-1.rznthus 'Y-. .o 'or Sa ,v

ph-*q' *w3 -.- 2 (Sac)- -

PsephenidaePeephenwl herricki (DeKay) . 2. ---

TrichopteraHydropsych idae

Chew'iatoraohe sp. Wallingren 2:1

to.jtt~ti (Banks)Hyarosych-/c ,,rr., Ross -

Potzcyia flava (Hagen)teptoceridae

CerswZea tranevers (Hagen) -

Netps yhe alb-da (Walker))"e,-gincs vt (Walker)

Phi .opotamidae'hicirra sp. Stephens

C. aterr-b'ia HagenC. ",,Y-a Ross- - -

C. obscoura (Walker) I~Psychoiuyiidae

ernotina 5Zh5,'a RosBr ,-ieio repunuria (Walkeri

DipteraCeratopogonidae

Palpomy~,ia complex IMeigen -- 8.1.Chaohor idae

Chaoborw un wctipennia (Say) 1 4 .4Ch ironomidaeTanypodinae

Ablabeosmgia sp. Johannsen l.A. "iallo ,hi (Walley)Lcreia sp. -4.4Throctiijus spp. Skuse 61,6 Ri - 2. 21. beltua (Loew) 4t-I, .2 118.8 K. t os 43OPsectrotanypui 1w.ari (Coquillctt) -8'

'anypua neopunctflpcnnie Sublet I S.2atellaous Coquillett 6."

'hnemcznnPrmda complex Fittklu 17l..2.N 8.5 A.6Orthoc lad linae

'Iricct<c juo sp. Wulp . .-..:.bic.i'wiw (Meigen) 1..4 -'-

2' snoneum RrullaZat1 Winnertz 2.2 ---

ChironominaeChironomnusa ttenuatus (Walkerl - 34.4 136.4C. ripar-ius Meigen 7- 41 6.

126

Table 21. (concluded).

S TA TIO N STAXA 1 23 4S

Chironcainae (concluded)C2~ptochizona.ma fulu Johannsen - 30.8 43 - 611.bGlyptotewdipe tobifenoa (Say) 8.8 - 33Halvisohia sp. Kieffer - 11 -I

Niorotendipee pedellaua (De~eer) - i. 4 - 8.8 -

Paratendipe albiamw (Maigen) --- 8.8 -

Polyjpeditwwi ilzi,.oene (Malioch) - - 4.4 -P. soalaamm, (Schrank) - 15.4 133.6 -13.2 -Stenoohiron~m" sp. Kieffer - 2.2 - -2.2

Tw~tare.o sp. Wulp 2..2 0.6 25.8 19.68Siuliidae

SimulZit,, sp. Latreille - 03.8 - - --

TOTAL NUMB5ER OF SPFCIES (Quantitative) 14 29 23 1"

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 590.8 822.8 1877.8 3816 .4 S10.4 4919.1

SPECIES DIVERSITY 2.7 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.h .

SPECIES RICHNESS -'.4 3.1 30 3 34

l~ntries represen' numbers of benthic macroinvertebrates per m2; collected during non-quantiiti.tlv .ampiing. sumrof a11 benthic c ilections are preseioted in Appendix 3.

127

and aquatic flies came from quantitative samples. Differences in vulnera-bility to quantitative sampling devices, such as i; demonstrated herc . il-lustrate the need for supplemental collecting in inventory studies.

The aquatic insect fauna of Missouri ha- not been studied intensivcly.Although several groups currently are under investigation, only the aquaticHeteroptera have been treated in publication, and then only as a port ion ofa larger study of the total tteteroptera fauna of the state tFroeschnkr 1962).Although few specific records for the Cape Girardeau area exist, overalldistribution patterns for 41 species are such that they are either k:iown orlikely to occur in the Cape La Croix Creek %,atershed.

Results of sampling were especially interesting at t-tations S and 6(Table 21). A total of 26 taxa were taken at station 5, 23 of which ervmidges (Diptera: Chironomidae). Most of these midlts were ret r..n:ed bysmall tube-dwelling larvae attached to the gravel ;ut.crate wh iCl. .u .pCi.the stream bed. Apparently other benthic taxa were unabe to t.' ' ,.cessfully or were limited by other ecological or water qwality co": ilera-tions. The mid,es were represented bv l,:v ,w ta a in the wc' , ,I .ii:ple .I

The distribution of aquatic ol gue let 1 ,1',rns co !r,to the amount of silt in the substrate aiid, p resntnbla , I lso to i: -1171tof organic matte, present. The soft organic sCdiime'Ints of s, , r-mitted the development of a large number and great varicty :I 1 :worms (Table 21). Results of quantitative sampling illustr;tte a* , -tion with 97.8% of the numbers of individu. is and 8.3. of t1Ibeing oligochactes. [his station perhp.; hest eXhibits the cal IC ofplemental collecting byv qualitative means. An additional 2) spec I e'k nadded to the station , faunal list by this means (mostly- aqu.tic hccIcs).These organisms were from portions of th babi tat not sampled c kt '', vby quantitative means or were present in numbers too low to permit I a.q , tesampling by quantitative devices.

Fishes. Table 22 lists 121 species Of fishes known or likely' to 01,."' inthe Cape La Croix Creek watershed. Alhtlouh the Miss Vsip pi ki ,"c i adia-cent to the drainage basin, Mississippi River fishes are included i1 thctable. The fish faunas of both the state of Missouri and the Mississipp

River are well known and a substantial I iterg!ture exists detailing th.e precisesites where species have been taken. For thi; reason it ;, felt that thespecies list presented in Table 22 is quite complete. Ihis taIble includeshabitat preference and abundance data for all sp-cics.

Distribution patterns of the fish. ut MiOf sti pcr'l I'oit 'fl offour primary faunal regions: Ozark, lwiland, pr;iirie, :and hig r iver, i're-cise boundaries of these regions generally do not exist. Rather, the faunalregions are separated by transition -.one;. itl icger (1971 ) cons idcr:1 th iszone of transition an "Ozark border" where f ' s1(5 character i zing the ::a, rk,lowland, and prairie faunal regions meet and mix. lie points ouit that actualspecies composition of the Ozark border caries markedly from one area toanother and that it is best thought of' is a broad ecotone rather I han a dis-tinct faunal region.

128

j4-4 67 'k

-0

'PSI_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

/i's__ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _

0a

4C-. I. E

cis O)CI- '

+1.tj0 Z, w C

to 41 U V4) 0'- -) ,- 1 )0 -!=~~~~ ~ u t n 0 -C ) 4V

u0 0~ (A.- Z)co .V) w

S* 0b c q. N~ zo0 0-

z .)~V m- §1 C'n4 :04 ,-'ICCI, n

CLL

129

c~''10 'Z

(72 ~

' - ao,7yaU

//S Cc4

r4 C

- Ln t-' oJ - ,-

41 U 5:L -Q) 0 )

14) -0

-C) 4-J4-

z CD-G

130

01-1

ci-

AIA

4' 40,1a.5n ci

U) U) 4C) to) ~to fA) C) ;s

%U ~ ) $CI VC) = ~ to ~ V.02

0) 1) p~ N -' 4 1 p~ -IN ) -. U) t, ,

4J U 0- (3-4 0)'- a pt

0) LLI 0 n t

P~~~U)~~ C)) . ~.

o4 13 41 to- . r- t vo o t4 o

4.) .. (1) 4- Jk, -. ) .0 C)) r)a 0

0z ti co, u 0)0' 4 51 L

C)__________________________________ w')

131

*/4

%a :AC)4' w? Q a)c

1& t4 1 V ) 7'r ,, Z - -,) !U QU V

C~~~~ 'I C-C 7-

"004 a1 +J 4 C ,

cd k' C- -l t 4 j t

3 0

- ) ) -j L7r- :m)j;L

132

-.: u

a c

u~ Ce

o~IU C e~C

slo, 3 3 ' 41, 0

640 Q

Illyj U CeC

O'A4. A,,,.0 v t C -

.Jry V) ~ksn W

0. o

te o Ce .

C) C)CS C

E 0 cooV ' 4- ) + L) 0' L C) - c

;s (Z) to C, C1,4 "V) t

C7 .0n 0 4- U

uI .0 .) .-. . .

133

Z

j~ 410

0 IvIozs, ? 45

-r0 4

.0 2

z '- to 4 u3 L) '-'= )

t) f- J

to u ) (1

ca-~3 c~(

-it-

134

1110.

U-

CSC

C)44 --j cci k r. _

C4 m -4 0 C) 0

F- ;s -)4 co -

-H T) to 0 04 toJ= 14) P: =) )zs' w~ 4

oOC z ~ t C = 7

0 U -1 U) c t .ou -.. C) 2k. -4 0c30

V) ) - .0 0 .to to 0Co) to to ) toC to. to~- Co tol ~ '

44 m 0o 0 , 0 - 0 0 - 0j L 0 0 *0(D 0. 0

- rz 4.4 0. 0 $__ _ _ -4 a. i1*4. ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LU 43 + o 4N 4JE - ) 4 I -1V - n 41L

135

LI a ccw'C

a.

Zoe ~ L

4S, 4

C) - .4J

4C) - -4

0I 0 ri~A.-u) ul :zLj~~ ~ C C

4,)C'' "' C CO, +1 - -C

fl-. f',

P. ,*A ~ .

136

4,6 u

0) - =3 tAL 0 0 r- p- 0~

' ~ ~ -'4 C I :j w - '-

4-J 0 '00 t) .L 0£t= cI-o -4' '4 .-~ I ,

0)C m) C C- t4-4 'a V.!!4-, LL 1) (4) (U U- t.0ico

X.O co 000 0 < u1-- 4

= - . 4.) '40 V. CI C " 4-) ZLU0c ().s 0-4r

to .0 .L~ztz

Cw nA =2

137

,t,, 'to

to~S'

slo %ll~o 01

4ov _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

0 ~~ 44 0-7

Up -,-l t U

00

__) C.)

Z d4

--o

138

w- u

4

Q))

z 0 r

-) 0 C

,a CS .- 0f ~C

LU 75( U

L cli 0lQC., =- 4) w () to .)~

0 .0 a) C i 1-. 0 1 .) C ) 5r. 4N .00 ~ -C (4~~C

0 W r) -4 .. in i to m - ) 4.) 0. m Ci

Ci zL o~ 0U m~ 0t- .0.mu- ~~~ ~ t -. 0: 0-- -0'~ )- -

04) Q0U tA Q - 0V0 -v

Q) too to 0 0~4 a~ co- 4-sz 00- 73 c 0 :to 5 -q 11 1

.0 U.J W4U

:3 w $

139

01- C

4* 16,

4 - C- C

(A~t C) -' J

4540

C') L

(NI ~swum=

140

4* Ay

CQQ

K.-;

.WMMs ..-M

Pflieger (1971, 1975) doe.s noi : .between the big river and other l'wiitmitributary streams, any' transition :ont,

Based upon a map presented 1, 1vr .county is entirely within the Ozairk .faunal region represented here by the

Fishes were collected from the i .suits of these collections are pre-in.t ,below. Population density and stan'.by species and station in Table 23. V) ispecies diversity, and species ritm,.,i -Table 24.

Even casual analysis of th, fbetween str'am popul ations, doin nit,.comparatively high species diversitv.mosquitofish (Table 2-1). A more th,;however, reveals good separat ion iilt'regions and a transitional zone I a,

Cape La Croix Creek and tri hut,,.in this study by stations .1,nid 5, MT '.

of the stream (:ig. 2). Str'-i or ,- .

nificant factor in lefi nition of tthi 13 and 2, respectively). , perhips du t, T .In considering the physical clharactclv i .the only clear difference from otherareas in the stream hed. Ihese ar'.aThe water velocities necessary to I:i :the high stream gradient.

'Te flora inhabiting Ozatr IlIalgae (periphyton) which uti e s, . ' .in the water. Phytoplankton cons i :,l

spec iCs . 001p1lankt on is characieri,.tAmong the benthic macroinvertebrat,especially those species which feed

Of the fishes listed in thisoccurring in O:ark Iplands strcaJIscharacteri z'd by h ih popllat ion;creek chubs and hi ck.;pt tted top iialso be present if riffl es and p'ol

favor ingY the dcvel oplent of sllch ,t

water velocity and a streaIm N(!)Both would be totund in hilph- gr;1dis.

Ozark I1pl;jnds st ream,; pl ',resource in tite project area. .i,

142

.4 t-) t-

.4 In -1

41

u In.11o.

c4 IN o o o

.0lo lo l Go co In 1- I> I0 000X0

o ~~~ a-.'~

.1c wp

o V . k I~ 0 w " I( (

v- 0 0 00.0

.1 s.' . (aN a o w.

o0 c: c. W . a.0 (

f4 60 ( - - 0 <0 (N-~ ~ ~ t 0I F00 6 0 0

(4. to

V ~ ~ ~ ~ r - s to ~ S .I I NO C I 1 I*I 0 ' 0 ~ c o. 6-c

>4) (N (N z.0o

V 64-

.-. 4)u* u u

143

Table 24. Composition (% of total number), species diversity, and speciesrichness of fishes observed in stream and marsh habitats in theCape La Croix Cree watershed, June, 1976.

S '1" A 1 1 O N

1 2 3 4 5 6

Catostomidae 0.8 - 2.7 0.6 -

Centrarchidac 1.6 2.8 - 1.1 0.4

Cyprinidae 86.6 95.3 95.9 96.0 89.7

Cyprinodontidae 6.1 1.3 1.4 1.7 9.9 -

Ictaluridae - - - .o -

Percidae 4.9 0.6 -

Poeciliidae - - - - 100.0

Total (%) 100.0 100.0 1(0.0 1(40.0 1)0.0 100.0

Number of Specimens 247 320 73 17n 25 29

Species Diversity 1.2 1.5 1.1 o.7 0.9 0.0

Species Richness 1.1 1.3 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.0

Si

14 4

Cape La Croix Creek and its tributaries falls into this category. Usinggradient as a general criterion for classification, streams located above120 m above mean sea level (Fig. 2) may be considered Ozark Uplands.

The physical characteristics of most of these streams presentlyhave been altered little by man and, as stated above, water quality isgood. In these streams, the fish fauna is diverse. Results of samplingat station 5, while exhibiting components characteristic of the OzarkUplands, show the effect of even minimal stream alteration. Fewer thanone-half of the species taken at station 1 were taken here (Table 23).Station 5 was located in a public park in northern Cape Girardeau.

Proposed water resource devclopments are not likely to affect_ OzarkUplands streams. Rather, the principal threat appears to be urfhnizationof the areas north and northwest of Cape Girardeau. Undesirable activitiesin, lude removal of streamside cover, clearing of adjacent areas, diversionof stormwater, and the establishment of single-family septic fields.

Southeaster, TowZands

Cape La Croix Creek and tributaries (Southeastern owlands) arerepresented in this study by stations 3 and 4. Gradient is low (Fig. 2).as is water velocity (Table 18). The substrate consists of silt and clay.Both stations sampled were in order 4 portions of the stream (Table 14),but several order 1 tributaries were present which were also characteristicof the Southeastern Lowlands.

The virtually undetectable water velocity observed at these stationspermitted the development of an abundant phytoplankton and zooplankton.Oligochaetes were significant members of the benthic macroinvertebratecommunity and reached high densities in the soft sediments.

Among the fishes, Southeastern Lowlands streams are characterized bythe absence of stonerollers and darters, large populations of various minnowssuch as the red and redfin shiners, and presence of large-stream suckers(c ,nmon and spotted) and black bullheads. Physical factors favoring thedevelopment of this type of community include low water velocity and a siltor sand stream bed. Riffles would be rare to absent. Low gradient areassuch as this are provided by the Southeastern Lowlands wesi and south ofCape Girardeau.

Although its relatively high position in the altitudinal profile ofCape La Croix Creek (Fig. 2) suggested a tentative classification as transi-tional, similarities in composition of the fish population between stations3 and 4 make it clear that station 3 must be considered as Southeastern low-lands (Table 23). A total of 57 fish species are listed as representativeof Southeastern Lowlands streams (Table 22).

Transi t ionl 1

Cape La Croix Creek and tri hutaries (Transitiona I , "cpresent ed i1this study by station 2, arc intermediate in gradient between Ozark Uplands

14S

and Southeastern Lowlands. Station 2 is an order 3 stream (Table 14) andalternated between deep, wide pools (Table 18) and narrower riffle areas.These alternating habitats permitted simultaneous representation of ele-ments of upland and lowland biota.

Most of the substrate in these transitional streams is silt and clay.Hence, they are not suitable for the development of periphyton, exceptwhere other hard substrates are present such as sticks and branches. Gen-erally, the water is too turbid to permit an extensive phytoplankton, evenin the larger pools. Zooplankton, too, is characteristically low in bothabundance and diversity.

Among the benthic macroinvertebrates, species diversity is highbecause of the alternating upland and lowland habitat types with hard andsoft substrates. Again, mayflies and midges were important groups and oligo-chaetes, which will predominate downstream, are beginning to appear.

As would be expected, this station shows fish components of both majorzones. Stoncrollers and darters are present, but in low numbers while largenumbers of red and redfin shiners are present. Thie results of sampling CapeLa Croix Creek fish populations (Table 23) clearly reflect the ecotonalnature of this station. A total of 53 fish species are listed as representa-tive of such transitional habitats in the project area (Table 22).

Neither the transitional or Southeastern Lowlands portions of Cape LaCroix Creek presently are valuable water resources. Extensive developmentof city habitat along the creek in upstream areas has affected severelyriparian vegetation ard bank and bed materials. Stormnwater diversion nodoubt produces rapid aind extreme fluctuations in water level from theseurban areas downstream. Although limited water quality data from this area(Table 3) do not give evidence of pollution, the potential exists for seri-ous degradation of water quality.

Downstream from Cape Girardeau proper, past channel modificationshave been directed toward removal of flood water. Activities have includedchannel straightening, removal of streamside vegetation, and cutting andremoval of fallen trees.

In terms of implementation of feasible water resource developmentprojects, it is doubtful if further physical damage could be done to theSoutheastern lowlands portion of Cape La Croix Creek. Presently, this por-tion of the stream has little value for fish and wildlife. Substantialhabitat improvement could result from implementation of a project whichincluded a program for removal of stumps, log jams, trash, and for gradingand planting of the stream banks and adjacent areas.

Wr> . ,:z. /b '':

Limited samp] irig in wetland areas was incltided in this st udy toprovide g'enermalI inforimtiln oil tile aquattic communities representative ofinland sha1 low and deep fresh marsh,,; J1rd wooded swamps. As expected inclear, non- flow irig water, a substantial phytoplankton and :.ooplankton

146

developed (Tables 19, 20). The large number of taxa recorded attest tothe diversity of microhabitats such areas provide. In the benthos, oligo-chactes reached very high densities in the soft organic sediments and alarge number of insect taxa were observed (Table 21).

In spite of this diversity of plarkton and benthos, a surprisinglysmall number of fishes were characteristic of wetland habitats. Table 22lists only 13 species as likely to occur here and results of this samplingprogram (Table 23) yielded but a single species, the mosquitofish.

As stated above, the extent of all wetland habitats in the watershedis probably too small to contribute substantially to the overall ecologyof the project area. Their value lies principally in their role as refugiafor species which were once widespread and are now restricted to relictareas which escaped drainage as the Southeastern Lowlands was cleared anddrained for agriculture. Undisturbed wetland habitat typically has a rela-tively stable water level. The dying larger trees in the wooded swamp dis-cussed above indicated higher water levels in the recent past. The presenceof a diverse microflora and microfauna, with mosquitofish as the only fish,indicated that the wetlands periodically dry. Indirect effects such asthese may already have altered these wetland areas significantly. Waterresource development projects which would stabilize water levels in thewetlands would insure their continued usefulness at least in the naturalarea/outdoor classroom capacity. In addition, the arrow aru (PeZtandravirginica) observed here is considered to be rare in Missouri (Holt, et al.1974). Protection from drainage would preserve this population.

The wetland type open fresh marsh is represented in the project areaby several lakes and numerous small ponds. Nearly one-half of this acreageis contained in Lake Itollenbeck northwest of Cape Girardeau. Most of theselakes and ponds are north and northwest of the city and are artificial farmponds. Table 22 lists 19 species of fishes likely to occur in this habitat.

While not sampled specifically during the course of this project,experience in adjacent portions of Illinois has shown that most of thesefarm ponds are stocked initially with largemouth bass and either bluegillsor golden shiners or both. Contamination usually occurs from nearby streamsor by uninformed sportsmen. Hence, many farm ponds also contain green sun-fish, carp, bullheads, and other undesirable species. Typically, carp pre-dominate in biomass, small bluegills and green sunfish predominate in actualnumbers, and largemouth bass reproduction is eliminated or seriously reduced.Such severe population imbalance is best controlled by eradication and re-stocking. Properly managed, farm ponds could contribute substantially tothe fish and wildlife resources of the project area.

Mississippi River and Associated Backitcr Arrca,-

As stated above, Mlississippi River and associated backwater and oxbowhabitats are not strictly within the boundaries of the project watershed.Data presented here are meant to supplement information for the watershedand to provide perspective on the kinds of species which are available ascolonizers should high water permit them to invade the lower reaches ofCape La Croix Creek. Table 22 lists 76 species for the river and 26 for

147

associated backwater and oxbow habitats. Predominating are the minnows(Cyprinidae) with 24 species. Other abundant groups include the suckers(Catostomidae ) and darters (Percidae) with 10 species each, and thle sun-fishes (Centrarchidae) with 9 spccies., it is significant to note that 41of the fishes; listed in Table 22 are e-xclusive to the Mississippi Riverand associatod backwaters and oxbows. This high number serves to under-score the un queness of the large-river habitat.

Uf-" ab

148

PESTIFEROUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS

Among the pestiferous plants and animals known or thought to occurin the Cape La Croix Creek watershed are several plants, numerous inver-tebrate species or groups, two mammals, and representatives of two fami-lies of snakes.

Pois* ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) was a conspicuous plant in manyareas of the watershed. It formed one of the chief understory plants inthe lowlands and floodplain forest, occurred along roadside ditches,stream banks, and other waste areas. Contact with any part of this plantoften produces severe allergic reactions in individuals sensitive to itssap.

Ragweeds (Ambrosia spp.), common in waste areas and moist lowlandareas, is an annoyance because of the allergic reactions in individualssensitive to its pollen.

Stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) is a common herbaceous plant offloodplain or moist lowland woods and waste land. The sting of nettlesis caused by sharp hairs on the leaves and stem. Brushing against thesurfaces of the leaves may break off these hairs in the skin where theyliberate formic acid. This formic acid produces the irritation. If theplant is picked with the hairs pressing down against the stem, there isno sting.

Four of the invertebrate pests are common in upland forests alongthe bluffs of the Mississippi River. They czn, however, be transportedeasily either because of their association with humans (as with the brownrecluse spider) or movements of man or animals fron, upland forest areasto exurban, suburban, and urban areas.

Although the brown recluse spider (Loxosceles rec~usa Gertsch 1Muliak) favors the upland forest habitats, it may occur in populous areasof the watershed because of its association with man. Its bite resultsin a painful wound which is very slow to heal. The black widow spider[Latrodectus mactans (Fabricius)] also prefers upland forest situations,but may be a potential inhabitant of the exurban, suburban, and urbanareas.

No recent cases of spider bites have been reported to the MissouriDivision of Health from Cape Girardeau County. This does not rule outpossible bites, however, because reporting these incidents is not manda-tory. It should be further noted that most physicians are not familiarwith the symptoms of spider bites and many bites may be attributed toother causes.

Two ticks [Dermacentor variabilis (Say), the wood tick, and ArnbHy-oma americanus (Linnaeus), the lonestar tick) frequent the upland for-ests in the higher elevations on either side of the Mississippi River.Both species may be carriers of rocky mountain spotted fever. This dis-ease is caused by the pathogen Rickettsia rickettsii. In addition, thelonestar tick is also the vector for tularemia (Pasteure.a tw~a,'n.is).Both diseases, while infrequent, can be fatal to man.

U

149

The Diptera (flies) include many pests to man and livestock,especially the biting midges (Ceratopogonidae), black flies (SimuliidAe),and mosquitoes (Culicidae). Deer flies (Tabanidae) and robberflies(Asilidae) also produce painful, itching bites. Representatives of allthese families were observed in the watershed. With the exception ofthe Asilidae, all these insects have immature stages which are aquatic.Mosquitoes are potentially harmful to man and livestock through theirtransmittal of encephalitis-producing ultra-microscopic viruses.

No locally transmitted cases of malaria or yellow fever have occurredin Cape Girardeau County within the past three years (the period of inquiry).The Missouri Division of Health considered the reported cases as importedsince they were contracted by servicemen returning from the tropics. Two,potentially three, strains of encephalitis are known from Cape GirardeauCounty. Theie include the St. Louis, Western, and, possibly, Californiaencephalitis. One case of St. Louis and two unspecified cases of viralencephalitis were reported from Cape Girardeau County in 1976.

The biting and stinging Ilymenoptera [especially the honey bees andbumblebees (Apidae); yellow jackets, hornets, and paper wasps (Vespidae);and mud daubers (Sphecidae)] can produce painful bites and/or stings. Inhighly sensitive individuals the allergic response to these bites or stingscan be so rapid and severe that death can result if immediate medical atten-tion is not provided. These insects are common in urban, suburban, exurban,and agricultural habitats and are especially abundant in waste areas anddumps.

The striped skunk errhi tri mt 7: tiv) and the spotted skunk (SptiZo-gale putorius) are obvious pests to mnn and animals because of theirdefensive, offensive spraying. The scent of the spotted skunk is consid-ered to be stronger and more disagreeable than that of the striped skunk.

Five species and subspecies of Crotalidae, the venomous snakes inthe watershed, are summarized in Table 8. While they can inflict biteswhich are potentially fatal to man, these snakes are very secretive andare not often seen by casual observers. '17hree species are more character-istic of upland regions: the northern copperhead (Akistrodon contortrixmokeson), the southern copperhead (Agkit ;,e,,)dun c. contort'rix), and thetimber rattlesnake (Cr ktL, h. , . The western cottonmouth(A kistrodon p. o,!vor-i 1,('u,,os toM,;) and the canebrake ratt lesnake (C.'ota!ushorpidu.r atr!(?,-ouatu') are more frequently associated with lowland areas,floodplains, swamps, marshes, and wetlands.

No recent cases of venomous -nake hites have been reported to theMissouri Division of lealth from Cape Girardenu County . As was the casefor spider bites, reporting is not manlatory and unreported cases mayexist. SI

II 150

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED FLORA AND FAUNA

Federal law establishes two categories of endangerment: (1) thosespecies in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portionof their range, i. e., endangered species; and (2) those species whichare likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughoutall or a significant portion of their range, i. e., threateircd species.

Table 25 summarizes threatened or endangered flora and fauna of

the Cape La Croix Creek watershed. This list was compiled from twosources: Holt, et al. (1974), which summarizes the rare and endangeredspecies of Missouri, and U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wild-life Service (1974, 1976a, 1976b, 1976c, 1976d).

Holt, et al. (1974) list two plant species and one genus as beingthreatened or endangered in Cape Girardeau county: arrow arwua (Petardr zvirginica), the elms in general (Ulmus spp.), and the cucuiber tree (Ija'-nolia acuminata var. acuminata).

While arrow arum was abundant in the wetlands sampled south of CapeGirardeau (transects E-E' and F-F'), its occurrence was limited to thatone area. Should that wetland be drained, the arrow arum would likelydisappear.

Although many species of elms were commonly observed in the projectarea both in floodplain and upland forest areas, they were generally young

specimens, especially those of the American elm (UZmus aerricana). Theirinclusion in the list of threatened and endangered species results fromthe ravaging effects of Dutch elm disease.

While the cucumber tree was not observed in the project area, it hasbeen reported as occurring infrequently in the low woods in stream valleysat the bases of limestone and gravel bluffs. Its endangered status resultsmost likely from reductions in acreages of woods and quite possibly, har-vesting by man.

The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1976d) proposed two plants asendangered which occur in Missouri and are not specifically excluded fromthis inventory (Table 4) due to generic-level identification. They areAsclepiae meadii Torr., a milkweed, and Plantago cordata Lam., heartleafplantain. Mead's milkweed is rarely found in mesic, virgin prairies andheartleaf plantain occurs rarely in woods along streams (14ohlenbrock 1975).Holt, et al, (1974), however, do not include these species in their Missourilist of rare and endangered species.

The pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) is essentially restrictedto the mainstream of the Missouri River and the Mississippi River downstreamfrom the mouth of the Missouri. Its endangered status probably results fromoverexploitation by man and habitat destruction through the creation of dams.

The alligator gar (Lepisosteus spatula) and possibly the Alabama shad(Alosa atabamae) were never common in the Mississippi River in the vicinityof the project area; this region would represent the northern extension oftheir respectiva ranges.

I

151

Table 25. Rare and endangered plants and animals known or likely to occurin the Cape La Croix Creek watershed.

PLANT KINGDOM

MO DEPT. U. S. DEPT.SPECIES CONS. INTERIOR

ARACEAEPeltandra vi-qinica (L.) Kunth.Arrow arun R

U LMACEAEUlmus spp. L.

Elms

MAGNOLIACEAEMagnolia acarminata L. var. acumin,?ota

Cucumber tree E

ANIMAL K INGDOM

FISHESAlosa alabamce Jordan ti Lvermann

Alabama shad R

Cycteptus eZongatus (Lesuour)Blue sucker R

Hybopsis gelida (Girard)Sturgeon chub E

Hybopsis meeki Jordan & Evermann

Sicklefin chub E

Lepisosteus spatula Lec6p~deAlligator gar R

Scaphirhynchus albus (Forbes & Richardson)Pallid Sturgeon E

AMPIHIBIANSRana s. sylvatica LeConte

Wood frog E

REPTILESCro)alus hrridur (r.r7iaudatu.' Latrei lie

Canebrake rattlesnake R

Mai'rooa( 7W. t,,niminok (Troost)Alligator snapping turtle R

,7atrix o. cyclopion (Dum6ril, Bibron, ,Dum6ril)

(;reen water snake R

-~~ ~ --- - .. .I.. ... '1[ II.... ... .|" -t : - O a

IS2

Table 25. (continued).

ANIMAL KINGDOM

MO DEPT. U. S. DEPT.

SPECIES CONS. INTERIOR

BIRDSAccpiter cooperii (Bonaparte)

Cooper's Hawk E

Accipiter striatus VieillotSharp-shinned Hawk E

Bartrwnia longicauda (Bechstein)Upland Sandpiper E

Buteo lineatus (Gmelin)Red-shouldered Hawk R

Coragyps atratus (Bechstein)Black Vulture R

Corvus ossifragus WilsonFish Crow R

Falco peregrinus TunstallPeregrine Falcon E E

Haliaeetus leucocephalusalascanus Townsend

Bald Eagle (Northern) R

Haliaeetus Z. leucocephalus (Linnaeus)Bald Eagle (Southern) X E

Ictinia misisippiensis (Wilson)Mississippi Kite R

Limnothlypis swainsonii (Audubon)Swainson's Warbler R

Pandion haliaetus (Linnaeus)Osprey E

Phalacrocorax auritus (Lesson)Double-crested Cormorant E

RalZus elegans AudubonKing Rail It

Sterna albifrons PallasLeast Tern R

* J 2rannus verticaZis SayWestern Kingbird R

Tyto alba (Scopoli)Barn Owl R

153

'Fable 25. (cov. luded).

A N I N1 A I K I N G D 0 Mq

MtO DEPT. U. S. DEPT.

SPECIES CONS. INTERIOR

IAM\IA LSLutra canadc,::is (Schrcher)

River otter E

Mlustela frena .a Lichtcn cifLong-tailed weasel R

Myotis grise' -ens Ho,;,cllGray bat E E

MActis kee'ni, (Merr, ii,Keen's bat

Indiana bat 1E

SyuVilagus aq:¢aticui tBachwan)Swamp rabbit k

F = EndangeredR = RareX = Extirpated

I154

The occurrence of the sturgeon chub (Mybopsis ,7alida), the sicklefinchub (Hybopsis meeki), and the blue sucker (Cceptus eZonoatuo) has beenaffected most by habitat destruction, principally through the constructionof dams and reservoirs. These species inhabit swift channels and cAutcs inlarge rivers.

The wood frog (Rana syZvatica) exists ini Missouri only as relict popu-lations. Both the alligator snapping turtle (!7roulern-s tC?'minki) andthe canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus ratietaudatus) are threatenedin Missouri because of habitat destruction as wetlands in the SoutheasternLowlands are drained. Southeastern Missouri is the extreme northern exten-sion of the range of the green water snake (Natvix c. ccloion).

Many species of birds occur in Missouri and the project area only asthe northern or eastern extensions of their ranges or as transients. Theseinclude the black vulture, sharp-shinned hawk, Caoper's hawk, western king-bird, fish crow, and least tern. Others which were formerly widely dis-tributed, sonic even nesting in Missouri, have declined in general or havebecome restricted to the southern portions of the state because of habitatdestruction and overexploitation by man. These include the upland sandpiper,red-shouldered hawk, osprey, peregrine falcon, double-crested cormorant, andthe king rail. The barn owl, while a widely distributed permanent residentin Missouri, is uncommon throughout its range. Swainson's iwarbler is knownin Missouri only in the canebrake 1Tmlerstory of mature bottomland hardwoodsin the Southeastern Lowlands. The Mississippi kite nests ii the SoutheasternLowlands, straying north along the i'lississippi -iver to St. Louis. It isunconunon.

During waterfowl census flights conducted b the lllinois NaturalHistory Survey from 1972 through 1975, an efforz i:as made to census thepopulation of bald eagles occurring from St. Loiii:, M,1issouri, to Cairo,Illinois, along the Mississippi River. Teir data are summarized for sevensections of the river, two of which are pertinent to the study area: GrandTower to Cape Girardeau and Cape Girardeau to Cairo.

Data are available for 30 census flights from 15 November 19.2through 17 December 1975. Bald eagles were observed on 17 of these flights.Mean number of bald eagles observed on flights with sightings was 8.9 1 0.-eagles. Mean number of bald eagles observed on all flights was 5.0 6.4eagles. On 10 February 1975, 23 bald eagles were sighted. 'his is the naxi-mum number recorded in the census. These individ,ls are assuned to be thenorthern subspecies which winters in Missouri in reasonable numbers (lolt,et al. 1974). No evidence of nesting of the southcrn subspecies has beenobserved since 1966.

The Indiana bat (Mkiotis sodal7is) is recogni-el nationally ; as an endan-gered species, principally because it is extrenelY' colonial ;ind overwintersin only a few caves in the United States. Tle gr_. bat (! " , ,also recognized nationally a s endangered, is associt ed closely with thecentral and southern limestone cave region in Miqsn-i. Keen's bat ('. '1'okeenii) is considered to have always occurred in limited numbers in Missouri.

Populations of long-tailed weasels (tiza tc > ."' ) have undergonean obvious decrease in abundance throughout isotiri during the past 20 to

25 years. No explanation has been proposed although overexploitationthrough trapping might be a contibuting factor.

The river otter (Ltz.,: ,. j and swamp rabbit (Si-,,usaquaticus) are confined pri mavi ) tu so utheastern Missouri possibly asthe result of both intensive 1,mi development and wetland draiinage.

I,

SI

156

PROBLEMS AN) OPPORTUNITIES

During the course of field portions of this inventory, severalproblems and opportunities, or potential problems, were identified.Later study of several planning documents for the area served to clarifya number of these cases. The following statements, often seeminglyunrelated, are presented as they may prove aseful in making long-termplans for the watershed. Order of listing is nct used to prioritizethese items.

Problems. I. Bratton (1974) states that the land west and northwest ismost suitable for expansion of urban development from Cape Girardeau.lie further states that Cape La Croix Creek is a losing stre,-i in that itgives up water to the groundwater. It was noted by us that urban develop-ment is, in fact, spreading west ana northwest from Cape Girardeau. Asstated above, tile succession appears to be agricultural to extrban tosuburban. Trhe unorganized beginning of such developments leads us toconclude that wastewater treatment is by septic tanks. Since thesedevelopments are in tile Cape La Croix Creek watershed and since theseupland areas lose water to the groundwater, contamination of this waterresource by septic tank leachate is a distinct possibility. Adiscussion of groundwater hydrology is beyond the scope of this report,but it is appropriate to suggest that the matter be considered.

2. Much of the development of city habitat is occurring along U. S.highway 61 west and southwest of Cape Girardeau, in a large part alongthe banks of Cape La Croix Creek and alker Creek. The large pavedparking lots of these areas present two potential problems to tilereceiving stream: a) a degraded water quality of tile surface runoffdue to road chemicals and oils from automobiles, and b) a rapid anduncontrolled runoff from parking areas. '[le quality and quantity ofthis runoff should be evaluated to determine if retention and/or treatmentis necessary to prevent degradation of water quality in the receivingstream.

3. Proposed development of a park at the South Park site wouldinclude portions of Cape La Croix Creek downstream from aquatic samplingstation 3. Water resources frequently provide the focal point for suchpark areas. Stream banks in this area are steepand eroding. The stream bed is littered with trash (refrigerators andother large appliances) and undercut and toppled tree stumps. A clean-upprogram and extensive contouring and landscaping of the stream banksmust be included in any park development plan if the stream is to beconsidered an aesthetic attribute.

O2portunities. 1. A single wooded swamp was noted in the southwesternportion of tile study area (Fig. 3). it is felt that this swamp representsa relict habitat from a more extensive swamp which existed in tile South-eastern Lowlands prior to drainage. Urban development from Cape Girardeaudoes not yet threaten this wetland, and it is felt that early recognitionand protection as a natural area is desirable. laintenance of a naturalwater regime should be incorporated into any protection and lmatlagelentplan. It is felt that present water levels are cithe- higher or persistlonger that the past history of the swamp. Many of the larger trees

.... -..... ~~~-N,*"mm m m i m m mr -m m m

c- C', it 1Y Show t, - riCSS~ reClat~ t0 Cess f Io0djig.

- I wo si tes Ior jvtu n I i:j 1 . ak ei_ I eX ist , both Cont. igLOUi t 1i urbain a reas of Cape Gi rardee.i 0ei h 1 ark and SOUth Park, as.:-inat ed by the Southeaist Mi 5uLjItg jnoI Plainning Comm iss.3ion. The.,uhParh' Site is upilanld and MUiSt"'1 mitk,recsted. Creat ion of a park

mwual resC5ul1t in thle c reati3onl of 0o1 icl f;d hbit at , land manlagementprini tt i ng. The South Park site LS a t I forSted And inC IUdes; both

upland and bottomiland plus the di \i1 ii g i ,luffli me Ci ven t hc reI i (%f o fthe land, the potentijal for devel1o;o ii t oft Cape La Croix C:reek C sevproblem #7 ahove), tile vegetation differences between the North P;arkand South Park sites, arnd the prci~uscd expansion of urban areas westand northwest from the city, it, xmo d aipca r prudent to develop thleNo rth1 Park si te as an act iv ity- orit-nt ed park with. baseball, tennis,arnd other designated areas provi dd. The South Park site would besuitablec for developmrenit as a nat..rc park.

3. Potzntial exists for tIL' utat ion of a corridor park alongCape La Croix Croek, especially i ith of Cape Girardeau well into theOzark Uplands. In this region tic- streaim's aesthlet ic value is near-maximum ar-d urban development has; not 'vet encroached along most of tirewatercourse. Access is max1.imal 6LIC to tue proximhity of the PerryvilleRoad. Day-user faciliLties, perhaps as a series of access points, mighthe appropriate reCsource ut ilizait cr

4 . TFhe water quial ity ion r of Caipe La Croix Creek by,Southeast Mlissouri State Utii ye ls5v itdm ac ceptabi e water qualitythbrouighout tile watershed. :\llhooa i th. 0vConls idered their Study aspreliin ary and recomimended add it i ari st uidy, tihei r results indicatethat Cape La Croix C reck rep resenlt .- aVa IlnabIC walter resour1ce.

A% report by the Offi ce of 11! a in, isetriprtrntOf'(:0111 unity Affairs (1972) iderit if-i anumbecr of other potent i.ildevel 1oprment s orf outdoor recrieat i, o)pen space a reas in the npC iraro-dau arne~ji

LITERATURE CITED

American Ornithologists' Union. 1957. Check-lis t of North American birds,5th ed. American Ornithologists' Union, Baltimore. 691 pp.

American Ornithologists' U~nion. 1973. Thirty-second supploment to theAmerican Ornithologists' Union check-list of North American birds.The Auk 90:411-419.

Anderson, P). 196 5. The reptiles Of Missouri. Univ. MiSSOuri Press,Co I umh i a . 330 pp.

Anonymous. 1967. Christmas census in Mi ssouri : 1966-1967. Bluebird34(1) :11-18.

Bailey, R. M. (chairman), .1. E. Fitch, F'. S. Herald, E. A. 1Lachner, C. C.Lindsey, C. R. Robins, and 11. B. Scott. 1970. A list of commion andscientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada, 3rd ed.Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Pubi. No. 6. 150 pp.

Belirose, F. C. 1968. Waterfowl migration corridors east of the Rocky'

Mountains 'in the United States. Illinois Nat. Hist. Surv. , Biol.Notes No. ol. 24 pp.

Bellrose, F. C. 1976. Ducks, geese 1 swans of North America. StackpoleBook.--, Harrisburg, Pennsylvani a. 543 pp.

Bratton, K. M. 1974. Physical geology of the Cape GirardeauL - JaZcksonurban area , Cape Gi rardeau County, MiS SOUri . Sou1theast Mi ssouiriRegionalI Planning Commi ss ion, Perryvi lie, Missouri . 10-7 pp.

Carney, S. M. , M. F. Sorensen, and V. M. Martin. 1975. Distribution instates and counties of waterfowl species harvested during, 196(1-70hunting seasons. UI. S. Fish Wildi. Serv. Spec. Sci. Rep. Wildl.No. 187. 132 pp).

Froeschner, 11. C. 1962. Contributions to a synopsis; of the Hlemiptera: oliMissouri, Part V. Hlydrometridae, Gerridae, Vliidae, Saldidae,Ochteridae, Celastocoridac, Naucoridae, Belostoniatidac, Nepidae,Notonectidae, Pleidae, Corixidae. Axier. Midi. Nat. )7 (1) :208- 240.

lanselmann, S. 1906. Christmas census in Missouri: 1965-1960. Blueb1)i rd33(2) :13-24.

iiolt, F. 'r., .1. F. Keefe, IV. 11. Lewis, IV. L.. Pfl jeger, and M. 11. Sullivan.1974. Rare and enidangered species of Missouri. Missouri Dept.Conserv. , .Jefferson City. Unpaiged.

Hlutchinson, G. F. 1975. A treatise onl ]imnology. 111. Limnololpicalbotany. John Wiley &~ Sons, New York. 0pp

hlynes, It. B. N. 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ . TorontoPress, Toronto. 55S pp.

I 59

Kramer, C. Y . 1956. Exteusion of multiple range tests to group meanswith unequal numbers of replications. Biometrics 12:307-310.

Missouri Department of Communit.\ <[airs, Office of Planning. 1972.Outdoor recreation an1d ();- . plan for the Southeast MissouriRegion. Southeast Missouri R1<,. l 'lanning Comnission, 'erryville,Missouri. 216 pp.

Mohlenbrock, 1'. if. 1975. tluide tie vascular flora of Illinois.Southern Illinois Univ. Pl'k . C'1rubnda1e. 494 pp.

National Audulon Socicty. 1975. i,.' .;evcinty-fifth Christmas bird count.Amer. Birds 29:151-U58.

Pflieger, W. L. 1971. A distribiit ;KmaI study of Missouri fishes. Nlus.Nat. tist., Univ. Kansas lui. 2U (3) :225-570.

Pflieger, W. L. 1975. The fishtes of' Missouri. Missouri Dept. Conserv.,Jeffersin City. 343 pp.

Porath, IV. R., and 0. Torgerson. 1;5. i,Wite-tailed deer populationmeasurements and harve:;t rt-- ;,,icndations. Missouri Dept. Conserv.Proj. 1-13-R-29. 74 pi.

Sampson F. W. 1975a. Furbearer ,. t su'tycv. Missouri Dept. Conserv.Proj. W-13-R- 30. 12 pp.

Sampson, F. W. 1975h. ame ha .z .- es. :lissouri Dept. Conserv. Proj.IV-13-R-29. 25 pp.

Schwartz, C. N. , and F. K. Sch':, ' .1'. [he wild mamma Is of Missouri.Univ. Missouri Press, (:olu l t. . 11 pp.

Shannon, C. E., and W. Weaver. 1 1, 1lt, mathematical theory of communi-cation. Univ. Illinois P': 1!-! :. 117 pp.

Shaw, S. P., and C. 6. Fredine. ,d. etlands of the United States;their extent and their vai v,.iterfowl and other wildlife. U. S.Dept. Interior, Fish Wi 1d i irc. 39. 67 pp.

Smith, P. IV. 1961. The amphibi .: rItiles of Illinois. IllinoisNat. Ilist. Surv. Bull. 2<,. - .

Smith, P. N. , A. C. lop inot , anid I i eer. 1971 . A distributionalatlas of Upper Mississippi I " ' . lii ino is :Jt. Ilist. Surv.,Biol. Notes No. 73. 20 pp.

Southeast Mi ssouri State liiver; . i,ll oi- ;Cience Iand Mathiemat ics.

1975. Surface water qtl . it ion of the Cape Girardeau-Jackson Metro ;tudy area. ,,rt to U. S. Armv lgineer istrict,St. Liouis, Contract No. 1< "- YS!. .5 pp.

Strahler, A. N. 1951. . 1u1t i* , , lv f erosi'ual landscapes.19th Internat. Geol. [o . 11 2>

.1/

100

Strahler, A. N. 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology.Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union 38:913-920.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1974.United States list of endangered fauna, May 1974. U. S. GovernmentPrinting Office, Washington, D. C. 22 pp.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976a.Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Fed. Reg. for 28April 1976. 41(83):17736-17747.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976b.Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Fed. Reg. for14 June 1976. 41(115):24061-24007.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976c.Endangered species which may be affected by international trade.Fed. Reg. for 16 June 197o. 41(117):24367-24382.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1970d.Proposed additions to the list of endangered and threatened fauna.Fed. Rg. for 16 June 1976. 41(117):24524-2.1572.

Voigt, J. W., and R. II. Mohlenbrock. 1964. Plant communities of southernIllinois. Southern Illinois Univ. Press, Carbondale. 202 pp.

Weber, C. I., ed. 1973. Biological field and lhboratory methods formeasuring the quality of surface waters and effluents. Nat. Environ-mental Res. Cent., Cincinnati. Unpaged.

Woelkerling, W. J., 11. R. Kowal, and S. B. Gough. 1976. Scdgwick-Raftercell counts: a procedural analysis. Ilydrobiologia 18(2):95-107.

161

\ ,INi)IX 1

PIIYTOPLANKTON COLLECOV 11 IN SIREAM AND WFETlAND HABITATSIN THEli CAPF 1 A fRo)IX CRFEK WATERSHED

I..13 '1\ 14 MAbY 1976

PIyTrOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STATION 1CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

Rf:PLIC-ATE-1S_TAXA 1 2 MEAN

CYA1NOPL IYTA -________

Schizothrix caleicola 1 3 2

CIILOROPI IYTAC~adophorvz sp. + + +K ratoccy: -zt b.Lzaultu3 44 -22MlonoraphiJIum mjilutwn 319 - 159.5

PYRROPHYTACryptomona,-1, er, 'siZ 44 - 22

CHRYSOPHYTACentrales

Mez )Sira ?)ariavis 920 - 4t0Penna cos

Achyumzcn s p. 207 321 261A. hunwzrS -AZ 12 I5 13.5A. 7xioa var. Jiulia 12 70 40A. Zi.~i f.Cu'tzl 219 30o 262.5A. mai~usn 56 13-9 97.5Coocrzts placnula var. euglypti 12 - 6Oyrnbtlb tumi;da 219 - 109.5Fraqilaria sI). 56 27 41.5F. pinnata 56 - 28Gomp1-wnrma sp. 15i 7.5G. angustatwn 1403 10o7 5 1239Meridinn circu 7are 4 .2 21Nav.icu7la sp. 41 217 34N. accornoda 12 - 6Nlavicuja cf. gruaoi~oides -15 7.N. minim77a -715.5N. pelliculosa -5.42N. salinarwn var. intermedia 56 is 35 .5Nitza~ch-i'a sp. 139 85. 112lN. diosr rzta 28 -12 371N. frustithri var. pcrpuoill 0C 8 182 125Ni tnsuhia cf. [oF'/96 19 117.5

N. ~~tztm~a28 52 3SRho 7co.spbc!?,( o urvata 511 1 82.5

Suriv,'lbz oUvlt( 193 1o6 191.5S.ova/!i vo1r. p,*?7vta 15-.

Unidentified Pennatcs S5 154 10-1.5

TOTAL NUMBER O1: SPECIES 26 .532

163

PtIYTOPLANKTON COlI1'rEt AT STATION 1CAPE IA CROIX CREEK1

( -. licl ded)

REPEl CATES

TAXA 1 M ,EAN

TOTAL NUMBER O: INDIVIMIJAIS 4407 3030 3717.5

'Entries rcpresent nudwtr of ji I, ccr. per liter; "+" present ininsufficient t nsit ic, to .,,, -n ,iccxa cc ount.

I

. . . . .. ...3 , ,. . . . . I I I - I I I I l . .I . .

10b4

PIIYTQPLANKTON COLLECTED) AT STATION 2CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

REPLICATEs __

TAXA 1 2 MLAN

C ILO R PH Y TAChl-ydomonas sp. - 73 3.'Monoraphidiwn dybowskii - 73 3'l..M. minutum 1330 338 8.34Scenedesmus dimorphzus 132 73 102..

LUGLI3NOPH YTAEugiena sp. 191 - 9>

PY RROPI iyTAChroomonas sp. 73 73 73

CFIRYSOP'IYTAMaZ lonionas sp. - 7356.1Centraics

CyctotelZa sp. 28 - 14Mel1osira granula ta var. angus tissima - ++Stephanodiscus sp. 141 -70-73

S. aetraea var. rninzutuZa 84 -42

Unidentified Centrics 703 - 35 1 .PermalesAchnanthes minutissima 13 12 12.5

F yrnbella turgida 27 - 13.5Pragilaria vauche2riae - 2541 127Gornpfonema ol-ivaceum 13 49 31G. sphaerophorum 27 - 13.5Navicula spp. - 12 f)NaL'icula ciryptocephala 13 60 .30.5N. rhyncocephala var. germanii - 12bNitzschia spp. 53 49 51a. acicularis 27 - 13. 5Surtreija ovata 106 109 107.5Unidentified Pennates 119 36 77.5

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 15 16 12

TOTAL NUMBER 0OF INDIVIDUALS 3080 1296

lEntrics represent numbIer of phytoplankters per l iter; =present illinsufficient densities to establish accurate count.

165

PIIYTUPLANKTON COLLE'CI1L AT STATION 3CAIII 1.1 CROIX CREEK 1

RTTLICATLSA AA 1 2 MEAN

(:YANOPH YTAtiidentifiLcd Fil1ijclLoll; 39 - 19.5

UIL0 RU PH Y TAIoorp~tkncow". rtum 39 - 19.5

, . rinutiv: 18 330 5243coenedesm?,., U Lmo; ;.us 232 78 155

LUGL[:,OPUIYTAEuglena sp. 273 117 195

P'YkROPIIYTACrpono~.elros.z 468 195 331.5

CHRYSOPH YTACnt rales

yettaSp.31.

. rlcexiginian-i 5 2.5lMe zcsra Js " a);" 39

St&u~nJz~o~sSf) -51 25.5S.2tP(2var. W ua11 S.s

Unidenti fied Centrics 8 4Pennaics

AohnanthcLs ZanccZata var. dub,- - 12I

N. inia Sjj.22 - It

Akfluacf. p!,cuctuZ~l 11 12 11.5,'vieuacf. r? hy;:c 1a 22 - 11

N.h~whcrhz va r. 44 - 22Nit.,o,-hia sjpp. 55 25 40

.7. aircu~w 12 6N.aph i ta 1N. "s7.t 1.2 6

i. IL ''t.522 -11

.7 J~.: l~' vr.~Uph~ .22 - 11.7. i'o' i : z 89 163 12'46

12.5

;v. X 138 S 96.512 650t!67s SS.s

ispp. - 5 121.5z~h *~UCU .- aPi~t<. 14- 22

-7s

'0 a. ta. .:z d4 22

166

PiHYTOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STATION 3

CAPE LA CROIX CREEK1

(concluded)

REPLICATESTAXA 1 2 MEAN

Pennales (concluded)Synedra rumpens var. meneghiniana -25 12.5Synedra tenera - 175 87.5Unidentified Pennates - 38 19

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 21 24 35

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 2387 1687 2037

,Entries reprasent number of phytoplankters per liter.

II

167

PIIYIOPLANKTON COLLLCTED AT STATrION 4CAPE LA CROIX CREEK1

REPLI CATESTAA1 2 MEAN

CYAkNOPHYTASchizothy, x catci-u.>:z 1191 1068 1129.5Unidentified Filamnentous 159 - 79.5

CIILOROPHYTACh?-amydomnuas sp. - 73 .36.5AMonoraphidium mbz~iwni 1604 638 1121Scenedesurras dimci'phus 319 146 232.5

E1JGLENOPl1YTA~Euglena sp. -73 36.5

U CIRYSOPIIYTACentralcs

Cccotela +nwuw~ +

ouv .7i>z$ns + +

Penna I esAchrnanthes icJ i zvar .: 21 02 411 .

Co2coneis pLz( zzc ~a var. ta'.~ - 20o 10Gomphonevia anj., t-ztw,7 64 20 42/,. olivacewrz 21 - 10.5Navizcula spp. 107 41 74'V. 02'yptjoCcphaz! var. v, K - 41 20.5V. hu r r.lp-4 1 20. 5

'V. pel17iuuoazu 21 83 52p upu 1( - 41 20.5

~V hyoi~chalzvar. . 43 41 42~&::~a1zS~p.86 103 94.5

jo107 .11 74V. CiW7,-41 20.5

j%Jio s p Izt,-, 41 20.5. uta'_ 7' var. pci~pi.'- - 4 1 20.5

k w t' i z jm 129 145s 1370 .1 411 52.5

* ' ' -20 10

-41 20.5I1S 166 190.5

i AI. NULMBER Of: SlTCES 18 24; 29

0)1AI1, NtJMIHR Of. INIiIVIILIAIS .1151 3068 36)09.5

I t rics represeiantuI~mber 1 . iktk~v, per liter; "+=present in1iisufficjenit denisitijes t') ick ur.it c count .

168

PIHYTOPLANKION COLLECTED AT STATION 5WALKER CREEK'

REPLICNI'ESTAXA 1 2 MLAN

CYANOPI IYTASchizothrix calcicola 119 - 39.5

CHLOROPIIYTAPandorina morum - 232 !iL,Spirogyra sp. 319 - 159.3

CIIRYSOPIjYTAMallomonas sp. - 73 5. .Centrales

Melosira varians 2266 + 1131PennalesAchnanthes sp. 20 - 10A. lanceolata var. dubia - 170 85A. linearis f. curta 10 237 123.A. minutissima 10 - 5Amphora ovalis 20 - l0

Gomphonema angustatum 20 - l0Navicula spp. 20 102 01N. cryptocephala - b7 5.5N. cryptocephala var. veneta 20 170 95

NavicuLa cf. placentula 10 - 5N. pellicu iosa 10 -N. secreta var. apiculata 30 67 48.5Nitzschia spp. 20 405 212.5

N. acicularis 20 - 10N. dissipata - 67 3.Nitzschia cf. invisitata - 67 35.5N. kuetzingiana 70 642 356Nitzschia cf. linearis - 135 !o7.5

N. palea 40 67 53.5Surirella ovata - 202 101S. ovata var. pinnata - 35 17.5Synedra rumpens - 67 33.5

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 17 Is 27

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 3024 2805 291.1.5

lEntries represent number of phytoplankters per liter; + present ininsufficient densities to establish accurate count.

169

PHIYTOPLAuNKION COLLLCDLD A STATION 6UNNML) QLANL'1

REPLICAIESI AXA I MIEN

CYANCPHYTAAgmenel'c, q ..i i ,, L ,: ,.i 1330 -7 6SAnacsti," mz, z1077- 807 7790

oiZOt;*'..~ oC",,. K" 82 788 45S

CIILOROPIIY IAC: yarnt,h'cw sp .2-S - 2bC'hz/vi xL! spp. 1530 456 993Wih bP) e :<,Wr c;<',,:" 2, - 4591 2295.5Kcrato,.s bij, : . .' lJ 911 1285

.... 765 3S2.5.:1. minur,: 45;4 ,111 43582.5

1. to ,ti? (14 2554 1348.5chhoexchi sct :,_.,1(123 - 511.5

pirogig spp. 2019 1b092 9070.5

LUGLENOPI I IALCtiZC tis spp. 439 219.5

P. <' ''nc ,.,'.:1'0 1-P. p Icu I"14o

2rac~hr) / o[,cm~z<w i_: '._ .2 2 - ! 4

PYRROPI IYTAL'zc~uo 2; ;. r, :.U/ . . ". 1. 1 2 188 2,3L0

£r4t~m:,, J r -,292 1.1

C. u L';t1z -

CIIRYSOPIIYTA2io~ .i ,; .%t " *. . ., ,1530 765

Pennal es.::ch~i /z; ,,_:" sl. 22115859

A. 4;i j;: "Z ,13 191 117

A. "S?'i2i zt VI v I. 1 - SA !;in..,, {:u:.ir:t; '. 11 5.

i" %'i [ Slip). So) - 13; >.,'d r' ", i v,( .w', 191[ 95. 5

- 382 191

. ,, i v ir. ';o. .. 191 15.191 05.5

,,.1, % , ' vLI . ,: 1911 95.:,

* i" 1- 38 212.

"- 1913 'i 82 191

,'. ::,;191 95.'101' ,f:Sl) 57'. 289.5

191i

170

PHYTOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STATION 6UNNAMED WETLANDI

(concluded)

REPL ICATESTAXA 1 2 MELAN

Pennales (concluded)jynedra ulna 43 21.

Unidentified Pennates 11 1731 871

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 21 2, ;

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 32825 2258 3-11.

1Entries represent number of phytoplanktcrs per liter.

I,

RLSUI;1IN 111R ZLU1lPNL) I ld K WtAT1,IT'111:1) '[ I~BT~\

172

ZOOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STATION 1CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

REPLICATESTAXA 1 2 MEAN

COPE PODANauplii + + +

CyolIopoid Copepodids + + +

ROTI FERABdelloid Rotifers -+ +

TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA-11

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS-

'Entries represent number of zooplankters per liter; ""=present ininsufficient densities to establish accurate count.

173

LOOI~ANK1'N 'i I !A 1 1) %1 I '{ATION2

'IAx . 2 MEAN

cO)PITODA1ap i i ++ +

0 C L + + +

o u S p p.p .+

tu~ Spp +

BdelIlIo id Ji f rs+ +

F(YIAL NUMBER 01' TAXA 5 5

1*}I'Al. NUMBER OF INDILVIDLUAL.S

hint rics rcprcsent Iliuinhcr of 71) i. spc' liter ; 1+=present in

.IInsufficient dens it i s to st. C ,2 i Ccount .

.

174

ZOOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STATION 3CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

REPLICATESTAXA 1 2 MEAN

COPEPODAEucyclops agilis + +

Nauplii + + +

ROTIFERACephalodella spp. + +Euchianis spp. + + +

Notommata spp. + +Bdelloid Rotifers + +

TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 2 4 5

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS

'Entries represent number of zooplankters per liter; "+" = present ininsufficient densities to establish accurate count.

SI

175

-OPAKO CO) I A A l SAlI ON 4CAPI" LXA (11 CML

-AA RLPLICATES MA

C AI)OCERA

ii~O~a Spp. ( Illfnllt flre )

§~.:c tosSpp. ++

(Cclopoid Copepodids I .5flarpacticoida -+ +

ihztodeliffi SPI). 465ll w!hl anis spp. + + +-

[%roer s PP. +1 o.5;! - A00otpi spp. ().S+

'Afelloid Rot ifers111

P(}IAL Nl' MBERI OF TAXA 6 10 11

LUTAI, NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS J?1 10.5

i~tisrepre-sent nuImberl Of r,?S r lit eci- ' present ininsufficient densities to e~t ti%11.( counft.

1 70

ZOOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STATION SWALKER CREEK'

REPLICATES

TAXA 1 2 MEAN

CLADOCERABosmina longirostris + +

COPEPODADiaptomus pallidus + +Tropocyclops prasinus + + +Nauplii + + +Cyclopoid Copepodids + 1 0.5

ROTIFERACephaiodella spp. 1 1 1Euchlanis spp. + - +

Gastropus spp. + - +Lepadella spp. - + +MonostyZa spp. + - +Trichocerca spp. 3 1Bdelloid Rotifers 2 2 2

TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 9 6 10

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 6 S 5.5

1Entries represent number of zooplankters per liter; "+" = present in

insufficient densities to establish accurate count.

Si

177

ZOOPLANKTON COLLECTED AT STION 6UNNAIMED VEILAtND 1

REPLICATESTA\A 1 2 MEAN

C'LADOCERAAlona gutta&..- - +- +

Bosmina Zong ,rost i~s 12 7 9.5Cerz-odaphnia spp. ( ilimiattirc) 3 + 1.5Chydorus spveiw + IDaphnzia ambic ua [U 4 7D. Par2'u&,za 2 2 2DPiT'hnia spp. (immature) 3- 1.5XiUrzia zatis,;$rnc 2 2 2Pl~ouroxus dent ,*cuZ,, uo - + +

ScrnmocephaZus vctuLu, - + +

COPE PODADi~ztorrus paL Zidus 3 9 6Nauplii 124 160 142C lanoid Copepoclids 3 + 1.5Cyclopoid Copepodids 3 2 2.5

ROTIFERABrachionur pI-tuuus 5 7 6Keratella spp. 18 210Lecane spp. + + +

!Monzostjla spp. - +- +

Testudinet'la spp. 5 2 3.5Trichocer. a spp. +- - +

TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 13 is 17

TOTAL NUMBER OF: INDIVID)UALS 193 199 196

Entries represent number of zoop];inktt'rs per I iter; " =present inl

insufficient densities to ect~iblish aiccurate count.

178

APPENDIX 3

RESULTS OF BENTHIC COLLECTIONS IN STREAM AND WETLAND HAITATSIN THE CAPE LA CROIX CREEK WATERSHED

13 AND 14 MAY 1976

1 79

BENT) OS CoL1! LCTF ' D AT' STAT ION 1CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

'rAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEA

INSECTAfEphenieropt craBact idacCortroptiZicm sp. - - - - -+

Cacni daoCaenis sp. 22 33 77 110 99 68.2

EphomerellIid.,ii!j.,Vcx7 re'Z7J r.ou - - - - - +

fleptageni ida- 2 - 1 .Stenocron 22. 16.

.?tnonr'~~ f rnzh~; - - - 11 2.2S. tripunct :tzwl 44. 77 S5 - 35.2

Lep1)to0phieb i i 6;1Paiuc~ptop;,'cbi~ '~.J!l - 11 44 11 I

I occo 1)tcoraPerl idae

r-Wcr la cno~)el - 3,; - 6 .6Col coptera[)ytis c ida o

Elmridae[DtJi ra I hia sp. I - - - - -+

Dubirczp1ha sp. 2 +

,'-zron,chus gZ,-dbriztuo +---

stenolm~s uonata - I - 11 4.4fydrophi I idae

C;ha taithriu a ira - - - +C6'ibz~dyta cf. bi~v- - - -+

A'.10 ;JZ' pyrcu eb-.u - - - +

Plra2?y!fmua zwbupl'm" - - - - - +-

TrnX") Icrneua Spp. ( immItitlr;'- +

Not cr1dae[ 'aphieclhis bicolor - - +

nu rro 11 it - 4.4Trichoptera

Flydropsych idaeChewintopo , ijoh sp. - - - -

(.'.J)Cttt~l- - -- -+

91180

BENTHOS COLLECTED AT STATION 1CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

(concluded)

R E P L I C A T E STAXA 1 2 3 4 5 ME.V

Trichoptera (concluded)Philopotamidae

Chimarra aterrima - - - - - +C. feria - - - +

DipteraChironomidaeCricotopus sp. 11 - 11 22 -C. bicinutus - 66 - 198 33 59.1Corxjnonowa scuteZlata 11 - - - 2.2Tanytarsus sp. - 11 - 2.2

MIACOSTRACAAmphipodaGammaridaeGanmarus pseudolimnaeus 242 308 418 275 154 279.4

IsopodaAsellidaeAsellus b. brevicauda 22 88 11 55 275 90.2

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 2 6 8 9 6 7 14

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 352 605 682 671 594 580.8

'Entries represent numbers of benthic macroinvertebrates per m2 ; "+" =collected during non-quantitative sampling.

2Quantitative only.

SP

181

BIN1I 10 COLLECTED AT SI1A'[ON 2CAPE; LA CROIX CREEK'

*LXA1 2 3 4 s MEAN

A'INL IDA01 igochacta

m>~nodvi Iz hof!'m, - 2 4 .4L~*aJ9km2 :h3- - 11 I 4.4

Pist3ifla b' c:z11 - 11 - 4.4P. 7urnc.~c - - 11 -2.2

NSE(:TAFlphcincropte vaBaetidac

' toti:n Sp. .WI' 33 - 198 132

CacnidacSp. 1 11- 4.4

lieptageni idac1§i~en ~ r4~. zi,- 11 44 11 -13 .2

.clptop~hlbi idac

i1 ecoptera1'crl idae

~z ~r~u L - - 11 4.4>.~tz - - - 11 2.2

I'linidac:~. uc a'~ errwz~ 1 41 - - 11 13. 2

Sse phen idac~s ~ ~ - - - 11 2 .2

'Iri choptcral)'dropsyc h idLi

;2~z~ *. h*~ ~ I~~- - - 594 242h'l i I opotani i a

U. )b8U~Z I - - 22 6.6

(hi ronoinid-it''brm a. 1 31 22 - 2177

121 11 22 - 30.8+Wo~ uq h~- - - 44 8.8N' ~t9~i/'~ / -- 4.4

~a i/ ~ - 77 - - - 15.4

a sp.~ - 11 6.6bo I 1"wlj 1 88-1 66 33 4 6. 2

sp.. 11 -

6.6Sp. 22 11 61

182

BENTHOS COLLECTED AT STATION 2

CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'(concluded)

R E P L I " A T P STAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEAN

Chlronomidae (concluded)Thienemarimyia complex - 22 - - 44 13.2SimuliidaeSimuliwn sp. - 121 154 22 22 63.8

MALACOSTRACAAmphipodaGammaridaeGaninarus pscudolinmaeus 132 33 110 33 132 88

IsopodaAsellidaeAs2lus b. brvicauda 33 11 - 11 11 13.2

TOTAL NUIBER OF SPECIES 11 14 12 11 16 29

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 1023 1089 484 231 1287 822.8

'Entries represent number of benthic macroinvertebrates per in2

II

183

liLNTIIS COLLECTED N STATION 3CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

1, 1 P 1. 1 C A T E SiNXA 2 3 4 5 MEAN

A1,,,lt IDAi r,'.iiea

r: I odel 1 ida.

U l .,b ia .UiKt(Z>: -,1- - 8.6(i i .,ochacta

. , z~ 'u a , 'bT> ,"- 43 - 43 17.2;':odrfi~s spp. ti I,,twr,:) - 11 387 - 645 438.6

. , 37 - - - 77.4Fm c 'o ri . 50S 172 - 903 541.8

• i c' ~ a.~ 1.) 2"i "

4. ... ,t,:7129 - - 94.6258 9f6 215 111.8

&rb7, 13 8 - 25.8: cc r J12 .qa - - - 86 17.2

129 86 51.6'', , ?ot,,*/C~~ s Czo'( • ' ,,.;, - - - 86 17.2f-, Lfex I'"" - 8.6

rn,(: IO~t

Cl ell idiae

.sp. 43 43 - 17.2

!k ptagenii dac(1' P'4L 'O2?7 f !. 7")?'gg 4:."'-- +

'. [ ,?Z ,. L wrh~ +

opteraIivt i sc idUa

"t + ,"- - 4

ri p l idI (+

I od ida

, ,l ,,op ;h ' p.

tirph - - -

', optitl,11,4,1Tid L

. . ? ,, , ,,. ,' +

BENTIIOS COLILECTED) AT STAFTION 3CAPE LA C:RO IX CREE K

R F- P' 1, 1 C.:AT 1L S ______

TAXA 1 2 37 4 5 NTFAN

TrichopteraHydropsych idac

Lc.--toccridaeC 'racical - - -

Ph- lopotami'.dac

Psychomyi idac

DiPt eraCh ironom idac

i'~"o ~'172 - - - A.C. ma - 5)4 - 1-2 .3-

'a43 - 172 - - -

Po ar ~ :wt172 31 129) - 00 13.aPrc SI- - 4 - - - S

F'b 12 so 1-2 13 121 118.8

Tcznyuan1r" sp. 413 0 - 653.

MALACOS FRACAI sopodaAscii idac

TOTAL NUMBFIZ 01: SPECIES 2 8 13S 14 2 11 23S

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVI[DUAL.S 903 4300 1591 80 250)9 1877.8

1Entries represent number of hcnth; macro invertebratos per m; lilt,

2collected during noni-quantitative sampling.2Qantitative only.

DA30 639 BIOLOGICAL INVENTORY CAPE LA ROI CREEKWATRSHED CAPE 1/3GIRARDEAU COUNT MISSOUR(U) MIDWEST AQUICENTERPRISES MAHAMET I JAN 7 LMSSD-76-25-26

UNCLASSIFED FG 6/6 I

mEnhohEEEomEE'ErN

10

MICRCOP REOUTO TES CHAR20NAI*LGNA 1 TM S16-

185

BENTIHOS COLLECTED AT STATION 4CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

R E P L I C A T E STAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEAN

ANNELIDAOl igochaetaLimnodrilus spp. (iimature) ltu75 1032 946 731 688 894.4L. cervix - 43 - - 8.6L. clapared3ianus .:7 1032 43 43 301 361.2L. hoffmeisteri 1247 3t,98 2107 344 1419 1763L. maumeensis - - 215 - - 43L. udekemiaus 86 344 S59 172 129 258Peioscolex sp. 34 , - - - 68.8P. freyi 12, . . . . 25.8P. variegatus 17'2 258 129 - - 111.8Potanothrix sp. S6 - - - 86 34.4P. vejdovskyi - - 86Pristina breviseta - - - 43 - 8.6Psarmoryctides curvisetosus - 516 - - 103.2Tubifex tubifex - - - 43 8.6

INSECTAColeopteraElmidae

Stenelmis cf. crenata 43 - 8.6DipteraChironomidaeProcladius bellus 43 - - 8.6Thienemannimyia complex !3 - - 86 - 25.8

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 10 6 8 7 6 17

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 31),9 6.107 4558 1462 2666 3818.4

'Entries represent number of bcnthic macroinvertebrates per M2 .

S

A _______________________

BENTHOS COLLECTED AT STATION 5WALKER CREEK'

R EP LI C ATE STAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEAN

INSECTAEphemeroptera

Centr'optilwn sp. 5S - 11

ColeopteraElmidaeStenetmis cf. crenata - 11 - 22 -6.6

TrichopteraIHydropsychidaeChewriatopsychue sp. 33 - - 11 - 8.8

DipteraChi ronomidaeAhlabesmyia sp. 11 - - 77 11 19.8A. mcllochi 44 - - - - 8.8

Chiranus attenuatus 231 77 - 253 121 136.4C. riparius - 11 - 22 - 6.6Cricotopus bicinctus 44 - - 44 - 17.6Cryptochironomus fulvus 66 22 - 121 44 50.6Gtyptotei'di pee Zobiferus 121 - - 44 - 33Harnaischia sp. 5S - - - 11

Larsia sp. 22 - - - - 4.4

Microtendipee pedellus 44 - - - - 8.8

Paratendi pes atbimanus 11 33 - - - 8.8Polypediwn ittioense - - - 22 - 4.4

P. ecataen - - 33 33 13.2Procladius sp. - - - 11 - 2.2

P. beltus - 22 - 121 11 30.8Psectrotanypus dyariL 44 - - - - 8.8

Stenochironomus sp. 11 - - - - 2.2

Tanytarsus sp: 44 44 - 11 - 19.8Thienemznnimyia complex - - - 44 - 8.8

MALACOSTRACAAmphipoda

GammaridaeGamiarus ml.-fue 33 66 44 - 28.6G. pseudolinnaeus 11 11 22 66 11 24.2

IsopodaAsell1idaeAseltus b. brevicauda - 44 - 132 - 35.2

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES 16 10 2 17 6 25

0TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 847 308 88 1078 231 510.4

'Entries represent number of benthic macroinvertebrates per in2.

VIPwp187

BENTIIOS COLLECTIED ATr STATION 6(JNNAWLD WETLAND'

R E P L I C AT ESTAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEAN

AINNELIDAHirudineaGlossiphoniidaeHeiobdella punctatolineata - - - - -+

Placobdeilcr muZtiZineatu, - - +

01 igochaetaAulophorus 11wrcatus 172 - - 172 - 68.8Branchiura ,-owerbyi - 172 172 172 - 103.2Dero digitaa - - - - 387 77.4D. nivea 516 602 - - - 223.6D. obtusa - 344 86 516 301 249.4Limnodri~us spp. (jinnitucc) - 688 43 688 - 283.8L. claparedeianus - 430 - - - 86L. hoffmeisteri 344 688 215 602 129 395.6L. mawneensils - 86 258 - 215 111.8L. udekemianus 344 - - 172 - 103.2Lwnbriculus variegatus - - - - 43 8.6Plais coninunizs 189? 344 129 688 559 722.4N. simplexr 516 - - 602 129 249.4N. zariabiiis - - - 172 258 86Peloscolex ferox - 1032 - - - 206.4P. rultisetosus 688 - 43 - - 146.2P. variegatus 2580 - 301 - - 576.2Potamothrix vejdovskyi I18 ~02 172 516 387 645Pristina aequiseta - 86 - - - 17.2P. breviseta 172 - 43 516 43 154.8P. longiseta 7leidyi - - - 172 - 34.4P. plumaseta 172 - - - - 34.4Pswwloryctides curvisetou.c - 172 - - - 34.4SZavina appendiculata 516 - 43 - 111.8Sty lara tacustr'is 088i - - 137.6

I NSFCTAEphemeroptera

CaenidaeCaenis sp. - 43 43 - - 17.2

flcptageniidaeStenonema tripunctatwn * - - +

Col coptera* j ~Dytiscidae- - - - -

Ce line anguetata+Copelatus glyphicus +Hydx'oporus vittatipennip, +* j ~ ~~Laccophilue pioxiruu s

T~

188

BENKhOS COLLECTED AT STATION 6UNNAMED WETLAND'

(continued)

R E P L I C A T2 STAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEAN

Dytiscidae (concluded)The rmonea tes o. ormticottis - - - - -+

Uvarus tczcutr-a- - - - +

Hal iplidaePeitodytes dwiavani - - - - -+

P. nutticus - - - +

P. se3,aculatus - - - - -+

HelodidaePrionocyphon sp. - - - - +

HydrophilidaeBarosus fraternus - - - - -+

B. pant herinus - - - - -+

B. peregninus - - - - -+

Enochrus consortus - - - - -+

E. ochraceus - - - - -+

E. pygmaeus nebutosus - - - - - +Hetophorus sp. - - - - - +

Paracymus subaupreus - - - - - +Tropistermus tat era tisnimbatus - - - - - +

Not er idaeHydrocant hue irica tr - - - -+

TrichopteraHydropsychidaeChzemtopeyche pettiti - - - - - +Hydropsyche oris - - - - - +

Potwnyia flava - - - - -+

LeptoceridaeCeractea traneversUs - - - - - +Nectopsyche atbida - - - - -+

DipteraCeratopogonidaePalpomyia complex - - 43 - - 8.6Chaoboridae

Chaobo rue punctipennie - 172 - - - 34.4ChironomidaeProctadius bettue - 172 - - 43 43Thienemannimyia complex - - - - 43 8.6

* MALACOSTRACAAmph ipodaTal itridaeIfyatetta azteca +

slow4

189

bE-NTIIOS COLLI C'iEP AT STATION 6

TAXA 1 2 3 4 5 MEAN

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIS 13 15 13 12 12 30

TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 10148 S633 1S91 4988 2S37 4979.4

'Entries represent number of~ beiithic nmacroiznvertcbrates per Mi2; "

2collected during non-cluaintitat ivc swiipl i g.2Quantitative o)nly.

-0I1m

190

S3

APPENDIX 4

RESULTS OF FISH COLLECTIONS IN STREAM AND WETLAND HABITATSIN THE CAPE LA CROIX CREEK WATERSHED

11 JUNE 1976

I'

191

FISH COLLECTED AT STATION ICAPE LA CROIX CREEK 1

NUMBF-R OF RANGE WE I GHTTAXA SPECIMENS (T.L.,mm) (g)

CYPRINI FORMESCyprinidae

Campos toma anomalumStonerolle2 198 46 to 82 414.2

Notropis lute.ensisRed shiner 9 48 to 64 19.4

Pimephales notatusBluntnose minnow 1 62 2.6

Semoti lus atromacu/atu-S Creek chub 6 17 to 32 0.9

CatostomidaeErinmjzon oblongus

Creek chubsucker 63, 83 10.5

ATHERINIFORMESCyprinodontidae

Fundulus olivaceusBlackspotted topminnow 15 47 to 72 37.8

PERCIFORMESCentrarchidae

Lepomis cyanellusGreen sunfish 2 158, 167 198.0

Lepomis megalotisLongear sunfish 2 52, 58 6.1

PercidaeEtheostoma spectabiZe

Orangethroat darter 12 47 to 57 15.3

'Specimens collected while seining 125 m length of stream, mean width2.6 m; area sampled approximatly 315 m

2.

aid~

-

192

FISH COLLECTED AT STATION 2CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

NUMBER OF RANGE WEIGHTTAXA SPECIMENS (T.L.,mm) (g)

CYPRINIFORMESCyprinidaeCampostoma anomalwnStoneroller 1 69 3.1

fiotropis lutrensiaRed shiner 33 31 to 55 29.6

Notropis straineusSand shiner 4 44 to 54 4.3

Notropis wnbratilisRedfin shiner 226 43 to 71 260.3

Pimephales notatusBluntnose minnow 1 59 2.2

Semotilus atromaculatusCreek chub 40 14 to 31 10.0

ATHERINIFORMESCyprinodontidae

Fundutus otivaceusBlackspotted topminnow 4 52 to 62 6.8

PERCIFORMESCentrarchidae

Lepomis megalotisLongear sunfish 9 36 to 89 23.9

PercidaeEtheostoma nigrum

Johnny darter 1 32 0.3Etheoatoma spectabile

Orangethroat darter 1 25 0.2

'Specimens collectnO while seining 4S m length of stream, mean width 9m; area sampled al roximately 405 m.

I

193

FISH COLLECTED AT STATION 3CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

NUMBV.l UF RANGE WEIGHTTAXA SPECIM2ENS (T.L.,mm) (g)

CYPRINIFORMESCyprinidae

Dionda nuidb laOzark mii.inow 40 0.8

Nacomis F. .uttat.flornyhei ;.1 chub 1 27 0.2

Notropis 1.!trens,:,Red shinor 341 39 to 59 37.5

Notropis ienbrat~.i -,--SRedfin shiner SG44 to 65 42.3

CatostomidaeCatostomus cormnei-.,.,-i.

White sucker 2'34, 46 1.5

ATIIEiRINI FORMESCyprinodonti daeFunduZus o livaceuc

Blackspotted top]3innuw~ 1 60 2.0

'Speimes clleted hil ~'i i ~egth o--f strean, mean width 3.5m; area sampled approyi':.. b

I

194

FISH COLLECTED AT STATION 4CAPE LA CROIX CREEK'

NUMBER OF RANGE WEIGHTTAXA SPECIMENS (T.L.,m) (g)

CYPRINIFORMESCyprinidae

Notropis ZutrenaisRed shiner 7 40 to 58 10.1

flotropis umbratiZisRedfin shiner 159 39 to 68 209.1

Pimephales notatusBluntnose minnow 3 47 to 71 6.8

CatostomidaeMinytrema melanops

Spotted sucker 1 311 272.0

SI LURI FGRMESIctaluridaeIotalurus melas

Black bullhead 1 262 233.0

ATHERINI FORMESCyprinodontidae

Fundutus o livaceusBlackspotted topminnow 3 42 to 66 S.2

PERCI FORMESCentrarch idae

Lepomis cyanellueGreen sunfish 1 147 59.S

Lepotis macrochir-usBluegill 1 109 24.8

'Specimens collected while seining 77 m length of stream, mean width 6.5m; area sampled approximately S00 ma.

0:

. ', .2

195

FISH COLLECTED ATr STATION 5WALKER CREEK 1

NUMBER~ OF RANGE WEIGHT'I'i\XA SPECIMENS (T.L.,mmn) (g)

CYPRI NI FORMESGyprinidae

Ccz'postoma anoma liStoneruller 20 25 to 62 15.2

Semotilus atronmcl'z tasCreek chub 1&) 12 to 132 67.0

ATI JERI N IFORNLSCyprinodont idae

Fundulus oivac(-'a4..Blackspotted topininnow 2350 to 78 55.3

PERCIFORMvESCentrarchidae

Lepomis cyanellusGreen sunfish 1 119 45.9

'Specimens collected while iciilng 25 111, length of stream, mean width 4mn; area sampled appioximatovly' if,"II

* 196

FISH1 COLLECTED AT STATION 6'UNNAMED WETLAND'

NUMBER OF RANGE WEIGHTTAXA SPECIMENS (T.L.,mm) (g)

ATHERINI FORMLSPocci liidae

Cainbusia affinisMosquitofish 29 10 to 53 25.7

'Specimens collected while seining an approximate area of 15 in2

.

7N

--

I I

Q......... Fv

E~~--- ---- --~

E~~au~m~ws---- ----------- *~

O W . 0.IP ae r f

________________

-

77, NOW,

411

m w". mom 1 DATE,

FILME!

DTI

Alma