![]() ![]() ![]() This paragraph does not, in and of itself, create any right of appeal beyond that permitted by applicable statutes and decision law.įor individuals who wish to challenge an action, appeals must reach the Board within 30 days. The appeal form and the Board's rules of practice and procedure are also available in Braille or on audiotape from the Secretary of the Board at (717) 787-3483. Copies of the appeal form and the Board's rules of practice and procedure may be obtained from the Board. Appeals must be filed with the Board within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, unless the appropriate statute provides a different time period. TDD users should contact the Environmental Hearing Board (Board) through the Pennsylvania Relay Service, (800) 654-5984. §§ 501-508 and 701-704 (relating to the Administrative Agency Law), to the Environmental Hearing Board, Second Floor, Rachel Carson State Office Building, 400 Market Street, P. O. Persons aggrieved by an action may appeal, under section 4 of the Environmental Hearing Board Act (35 P. S. §§ 721.1-721.17) for the construction, substantial modification or operation of a public water system. The Department of Environmental Protection has taken the following actions on applications received under the Pennsylvania Safe Drinking Water Act (35 P. S. Southeast Region: Water Management Program Manager, 2 East Main Street, Norristown, PA 19401. General Permit Type-PAG-13 NPDES Permit No. General Permit Type-PAG-12 Facility Location and Municipality Washington Township Municipal Authority WWTF General Permit Type-PAG-8 Facility Location and MunicipalityĪbbottstown-Paradise Joint Sewer Authority WWTP In addition, site heterogeneity remained an important driver of vegetation dynamics even in the midst of high deer densities.PA Bulletin, Doc. Our results suggest that deer exclusion had contrasting effects on species richness, depending on plant life form, but that overall richness of both exotic and native plants declined with deer exclusion. In contrast, native shrub richness increased with deer exclusion at the plot scale. Native and exotic species richness were both higher in grazed than exclosure plots at the subplot scale, and native herbaceous richness was higher in grazed plots at both spatial scales. Forb cover was more than twice as abundant in exclosure as in grazed plots, whereas sedge ( Carex spp.) cover was 28 times more abundant, and exotic species cover generally higher in grazed than in exclosure plots. We compared species richness (at subplot and plot scale), individual species and life form group abundance (% cover), and community composition between grazed and exclosure plots, as well as between mesic and wet soil blocks. We examined the effect of 15 y of deer exclusion on the understory of a suburban hardwood forest in Connecticut exposed to decades of intensive herbivory by white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus). ![]() Less clear is the extent to which (and the direction in which) deer alter herbaceous layer diversity, where much of the plant diversity in a forest occurs. A large body of research has reported declines in height, abundance, and reproductive capacity of forbs and woody plants coupled with increases in abundance of graminoids, ferns, and exotic species due to deer herbivory. Herbivory by deer is one of the leading biotic disturbances on forest understories (i.e., herbs, small shrubs, and small tree seedlings).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |