|
Mid-Atlantic Ridge and Valley | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description
- The Mid-Atlantic Ridge and Valley extends from western Maryland, through
the mountains of Virginia and eastern West Virginia. Most of this
physiographic area consists of long mountainous ridges and intervening
valleys, but it also includes the higher Allegheny Mountains of West
Virginia. Predominant vegetation consists of oak and oak-hickory forests
on the ridges and northern hardwood forest in the Allegheny Mountains.
Important relict patches of spruce-fir exist in the Allegheny Mountains
and on higher mountains along the ridge and valley of Virginia. Much of
the lower valleys are in agricultural production or urban development.
Human populations are relatively sparse throughout the physiographic area
and are largely confined to the larger valleys. Suburban and second-home
development is rapidly encroaching from large urban centers to the East.
Timber extraction has been a major activity throughout the history of this
region, and it continues to be important on both public and privately
owned forest lands. Extraction of minerals, oil and gas, and coal are also
important land uses throughout this region. At present, one of the most
important disturbance factors affecting forested habitats in this region
is the prevalence and spread of native and exotic insect pests and
disease. Beginning with American chestnut blight, a series of such
elements threaten the integrity and health of Appalachian forest
ecosystems. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conservation recommendations and needs - Unlike most physiographic areas in the Northeast, nearly 40% of this area is public lands, including three important National Forests and Shenendoah National Park. Long-term planning on these lands is therefore critical to meeting the population objectives for high-priority forest birds. Conflicts between species requiring different age-structures of the forest need to be addressed in these plans. For example, use of clearcut forests and other silvicultural treatments by Golden-winged Warblers and Bewick’s Wrens must be evaluated and weighed against habitat needs for Cerulean Warblers and other mature forest species. The conservation importance of high-elevation spruce-fir habitats is also controversial. Although few species of this habitat rank highly in global importance, the existence of relict, disjunct populations of several species (often distinct subspecies) and the great reduction in these forests during the past century argue for greater priority for these habitats. Specific conservation recommendations for this physiographic area include:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please send comments to:
Kenneth Rosenberg, PIF Northeast
Regional Coordinator
kvr2@cornell.edu