South Carolina alligator hunting guide for 2016

This booklet was developed to provide basic information regarding the alligator hunting season and what hunters will need in order to familiarize themselves with taking alligators. It includes common hunting techniques, safety tips, how to harvest an alligator, requirements for processing an alligator, and how to care for an alligator hide.

Magnitude and extent of sediment toxicity in selected estuaries of South Carolina and Georgia

Toxic chemicals can enter the marine environment through numerous routes: stormwater runoff, industrial point source discharges, municipal wastewater discharges, atmospheric deposition, accidental spills, illegal dumping, pesticide applications and agricultural practices. Once they enter a receiving system, toxicants often become bound to suspended particles and increase in density sufficiently to sink to the bottom. Sediments are one of the major repositories of contaminants in aquatic envronments. Furthermore, if they become sufficiently contaminated sediments can act as sources of toxicants to important biota. Sediment quality data are direct indicators of the health of coastal aquatic habitats. Sediment quality investigations conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and others have indicated that toxic chemicals are found in the sediments and biota of some estuaries in South Carolina and Georgia (NOAA, 1992). This report documents the toxicity of sediments collected within five selected estuaries: Savannah River, Winyah Bay, Charleston Harbor, St. Simons Sound, and Leadenwah Creek (Figure 1). (PDF contains 292 pages)

Shoal manipulation as an effective solution to site specific beach management, examples from three South Carolina beaches

Soft engineering solutions are the current standard for addressing coastal erosion in the US. In South Carolina, beach nourishment from offshore sand deposits and navigation channels has mostly replaced construction of seawalls and groins, which were common occurrences in earlier decades. Soft engineering solutions typically provide a more natural product than hard solutions, and also eliminate negative impacts to adjacent areas which are often associated with hard solutions. A soft engineering solution which may be underutilized in certain areas is shoal manipulation. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Poverty, Inequality and Natural Resources Degradation

The present study is an attempt to understand the link between natural resource degradation and poverty among people dependent on these resources. This is done by examining the impact of depletion of marine resources on the livelihood and socio-economic condition of the small-scale marine fishery community in South Kerala. In Kerala, nearly ten lakh fisherfolk depend on the marine fishery resources for their livelihood. The overall level of education of the small-scale fishing community is lower than that of the State’s rural population. Almost all the households surveyed, is one way or other, depend on fishery resources for livelihood. Low levels percapita income and high levels of inequality imply the existence of a large proportion of poor people in the community who are vulnerable to external shocks. The study reveals that poverty was comparatively higher among households with no fishing assets, with only one earner, with more than two children, and depending entirely on pensions/remittances. The study has not provided any evidence to show that poverty in the community is the result of depletion of marine resources.

Map of General Sherman's March : Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, 1865 (Raster Image)

This layer is a georeferenced raster image of the historic paper map: Map showing route of marches of the army of Genl. W.T. Sherman, from Atlanta, Ga. to Goldsboro, N.C. : to accompany the report of operations from Savannah, Ga. to Goldsboro, N.C., prepared by order of the Secretary of War for the officers of the U.S. Army under the command of Maj. Gen. W.T. Sherman. It was published by the Engineer Bureau, War Dept. in 1865. Scale [ca. 1:1,950,000]. Shows Sherman's March through the Carolinas covering South Carolina and portions of North Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee. The image inside the map neatline is georeferenced to the surface of the earth and fit to the Universal Transverse Mercator projection (WGS 1984 UTM Zone 17N). All map collar and inset information is also available as part of the raster image, including any inset maps, profiles, statistical tables, directories, text, illustrations, or other information associated with the principal map. This map shows features such as roads, railroads, cities and towns, drainage, and more. Relief shown by hachures. The routes of the 14th, 15th, 17th, and 20th corps and the cavalry are indicated by colors and symbols. This layer is part of a selection of digitally scanned and georeferenced historic maps of the Civil War from the Harvard Map Collection. Many items from this selection are from a collection of maps deposited by the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States Commandery of the State of Massachusetts (MOLLUS) in the Harvard Map Collection in 1938. These maps typically portray both natural and manmade features, in particular showing places of military importance. The selection represents a range of regions, originators, ground condition dates, scales, and purposes.

Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, 1863 (Raster Image)

This layer is a georeferenced raster image of the historic paper map: Charleston Harbor and its approaches showing the positions of the Rebel-batteries, [by] U.S. Coast Survey. It was published in 1863 by Lith. of J. Bien. Scale 1:30,000. Nautical chart covering Charleston Harbor and a portion of Charleston, South Carolina. The image inside the map neatline is georeferenced to the surface of the earth and fit to the South Carolina State Plane Coordinate System (in Meters) (Fipszone 3900). All map collar and inset information is also available as part of the raster image, including any inset maps, profiles, statistical tables, directories, text, illustrations, or other information associated with the principal map. This map shows features such as roads, railroads, houses, vegetation, drainage, military batteries and fortifications, coastal features (shoals, rocks, channels, floating batteries, etc.) and more. Overprinted to show 1/4-mile concentric circles centered on St. Michaels, Charleston; positions occupied by the Union Army and Navy; "Rebel batteries in possession of National forces [and] batteries still held by the Rebels [on] Sept. 7th 1863." Union positions are based "on the authority of Maj. T.B. Brooks." Relief shown by hachures; depths shown by soundings and shading. This layer is part of a selection of digitally scanned and georeferenced historic maps of the Civil War from the Harvard Map Collection. Many items from this selection are from a collection of maps deposited by the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States Commandery of the State of Massachusetts (MOLLUS) in the Harvard Map Collection in 1938. These maps typically portray both natural and manmade features, in particular showing places of military importance. The selection represents a range of regions, originators, ground condition dates, scales, and purposes.

Fort Wagner, Morris Island, South Carolina,1863 (Raster Image)

This layer is a georeferenced raster image of the historic paper manuscript map: Battery Wagner, Morris Isld., Francis D. Lee, Capt. Engrs. ; Langdon Cheves, Asst. Engr. in charge of work ; drawn by F.W. Bornemann, C.S. Engr. Office. It was drawn Nov 26, 1863. Scale [1:480]. The image inside the map neatline is georeferenced to the surface of the earth and fit to the South Carolina State Plane Coordinate System (in Meters) (Fipszone 3900). All map collar and inset information is also available as part of the raster image, including any inset maps, profiles, statistical tables, directories, text, illustrations, or other information associated with the principal map. This map shows features such as Fort dimensions and structures, landscape of area surrounding Fort, drainage, and more. This layer is part of a selection of digitally scanned and georeferenced historic maps of the Civil War from the Harvard Map Collection. Many items from this selection are from a collection of maps deposited by the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States Commandery of the State of Massachusetts (MOLLUS) in the Harvard Map Collection in 1938. These maps typically portray both natural and manmade features, in particular showing places of military importance. The selection represents a range of regions, originators, ground condition dates, scales, and purposes.

Natural resources on the Russian continental shelf: Foreign investors sought... on Russian terms. OSW Commentary No. 76, 2012-05-09

In recent weeks, Rosneft, a Russian state-owned oil company, has signed co-operation agreements with three Western corporations: America’s ExxonMobil, Italy’s Eni, and Norway’s Statoil. In exchange for access to Russian oil fields on the continental shelf as minority shareholders, these Western investors will finance and carry out exploration there. They will also offer to Rosnieft technology transfer, staff exchange and the purchase of shares in their assets outside Russia (for example in the North Sea or in South America). Rosneft’s deals with Western energy companies prove that the Russian government is resuming the policy of a controlled opening-up of the Russian energy sectors to foreign investors which it initiated in 2006. So far, investors have been given access to the Russian electric energy sector and some onshore gas fields. The agreements which have been signed so far also allow them to work on the Russian continental shelf. This process is being closely supervised by the Russian government, which has enabled the Kremlin to maintain full control of this sector. The primary goal of this policy is to attract modern technologies and capital to Russia and to gain access to foreign assets since this will help Russian corporations to reinforce their positions in international markets. The signing of the above agreements does not guarantee that production will commence. These are a high-risk projects. It remains uncertain whether crude can be extracted from those fields and whether its development will be cost-effective. According to estimates, the Russian Arctic shelf holds approximately 113 billion tonnes of hydrocarbons. The development of these fields, including building any necessary infrastructure, may consume over US$500 billion within 30 years. Furthermore, the legal regulations currently in force in Russia do not guarantee that foreign investors will have a share in the output from these fields. Without foreign support, Russian companies are unlikely to cope with such technologically complicated and extremely expensive investments. In the most optimistic scenario, the oil production in the Russian Arctic may commence in fifteen to twenty years at the earliest.

Report of radiometric reconnaissance in Virginia, North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and parts of South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama.

"Contract Number AT (49-1) 860 - Mod. # 1-4."

Exploration for heavy minerals on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina.

Includes bibliography.

The Conterminous United States Mineral Assessment Program : background information to accompany folio of geologic, geophysical, geochemical, mineral-occurrence, mineral-resource potential, mineral-production maps of the Charlotte 1⁰ x 2⁰ quadrangle, North Carolina and South Carolina /

Mode of access: Internet.