<%BANNER%>

Assessment of Differences in Physical Properties of Sand Associated with Beach Nourishment and Effects on Loggerhead Sea...

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0022257/00001

Material Information

Title: Assessment of Differences in Physical Properties of Sand Associated with Beach Nourishment and Effects on Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) Nesting in Northwest Florida
Physical Description: 1 online resource (70 p.)
Language: english
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: beach, caretta, compaction, florida, loggerhead, nourishment, panhandle, sand, shear
Interdisciplinary Ecology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interdisciplinary Ecology thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Beach nourishment is increasing in scope and execution as a response to coastal erosion in Florida. However, if sand used for nourishment has different properties than natural sand, then the beach ecosystem may be altered. Regulatory agencies maintain sand specifications for nourishment projects to monitor quality of fill materials. The reproductive effort of nesting sea turtles requires a suitable incubation environment: the effects of substandard fill material may be immediate (false crawl) or sublethal (poor incubation environment). Our objective was to determine if the physical properties of sand on post-nourishment beaches differed from natural beach sand, and whether any differences observed appeared to affect nesting loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles. Compaction, bulk density, water content, color (chroma and value), and grain size distribution were analyzed on seven pairs of nourished beaches and natural beaches in northwest Florida in 2006. We hypothesized that any differences in these physical properties on nourished versus natural beaches could affect loggerhead sea turtle nesting success. While compaction measurements are often the primary method of evaluating beaches post-nourishment, measuring shear resistance may provide a more complete picture of a sea turtle's perception of the beach during nest chamber excavation. In summer 2007, shear resistance measurements were taken alongside compaction readings using a device developed for this study. Our shear vane device was more successful at depth than on the surface, and results were repeatable on the same beach over time. We saw a general trend of the physical properties of several recently nourished beaches returning over time to a state more similar to that of the native beach. The nesting density, hatching success, and emerging success of loggerhead sea turtles did not appear to be adversely affected by beach nourishment. Overall, it appears that the processes in place for nourishing and maintaining beaches in northwest Florida are not incompatible with loggerhead sea turtle nesting, and implementing shear resistance measurements as a management tool following beach nourishment projects would provide useful information to coastal managers which could be beneficial to nesting loggerhead sea turtles.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Carthy, Raymond R.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0022257:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0022257/00001

Material Information

Title: Assessment of Differences in Physical Properties of Sand Associated with Beach Nourishment and Effects on Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) Nesting in Northwest Florida
Physical Description: 1 online resource (70 p.)
Language: english
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: beach, caretta, compaction, florida, loggerhead, nourishment, panhandle, sand, shear
Interdisciplinary Ecology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interdisciplinary Ecology thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Beach nourishment is increasing in scope and execution as a response to coastal erosion in Florida. However, if sand used for nourishment has different properties than natural sand, then the beach ecosystem may be altered. Regulatory agencies maintain sand specifications for nourishment projects to monitor quality of fill materials. The reproductive effort of nesting sea turtles requires a suitable incubation environment: the effects of substandard fill material may be immediate (false crawl) or sublethal (poor incubation environment). Our objective was to determine if the physical properties of sand on post-nourishment beaches differed from natural beach sand, and whether any differences observed appeared to affect nesting loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles. Compaction, bulk density, water content, color (chroma and value), and grain size distribution were analyzed on seven pairs of nourished beaches and natural beaches in northwest Florida in 2006. We hypothesized that any differences in these physical properties on nourished versus natural beaches could affect loggerhead sea turtle nesting success. While compaction measurements are often the primary method of evaluating beaches post-nourishment, measuring shear resistance may provide a more complete picture of a sea turtle's perception of the beach during nest chamber excavation. In summer 2007, shear resistance measurements were taken alongside compaction readings using a device developed for this study. Our shear vane device was more successful at depth than on the surface, and results were repeatable on the same beach over time. We saw a general trend of the physical properties of several recently nourished beaches returning over time to a state more similar to that of the native beach. The nesting density, hatching success, and emerging success of loggerhead sea turtles did not appear to be adversely affected by beach nourishment. Overall, it appears that the processes in place for nourishing and maintaining beaches in northwest Florida are not incompatible with loggerhead sea turtle nesting, and implementing shear resistance measurements as a management tool following beach nourishment projects would provide useful information to coastal managers which could be beneficial to nesting loggerhead sea turtles.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Carthy, Raymond R.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0022257:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SAND ASSOCIATED WITH BEACH NOURISHMENT AND EFFECTS ON LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLE ( Caretta caretta ) NESTING IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA By LORI ANN BRINN A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRA DUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2008

PAGE 2

2 2008 Lori Ann Brinn

PAGE 3

3 To my wonderful and supportive hus band Burnie

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported by a grant from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Much gratitude is owed to Dr. Ray Carthy for being an excellent mentor and to committee members Dr. Jim Jawitz and Dr. Bob Dean for their advice a nd support. The following individuals played a significant role in the design and execution of this study, and without their help, this research would not have been possible: Lorna Patrick, Riley Hoggard, Dr. Willie Harris, Dr. Blair Witherington, Dr. Dav id Bloomquist, Miguel Figueroa, Glenn Moll, Bob Whitfield, Sam Jones, Donna Roberts, Joan Hill, Caprice McRae, Mario Mota, Gabby Hrycyshyn, Celeste Warner, Scott Warner, Meg Lamont, and Andrew Sterner. Research assistants Lindsey Thurman and Burnie Brinn deserve special recognition for their hard work and dedication. Last but not least, I thank my parents Glenn and Tina Moll and my sister Carla for always believing in me and encouraging me to follow my dreams.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 12 2 LOOKING AT SAND FROM A SEA TURTLES PERSPECTIVE: DEVELOPMENT OF A NOVEL SHEAR VANE D EVICE TO COMPARE SHEAR RESISTANCE OF SAND ON NATURAL AND NOURISHED BEACHES ................................ ...................... 16 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 16 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 18 Selection of Sampling Sites ................................ ................................ ............................. 18 Compaction and Shear Resistance ................................ ................................ ................... 18 Results ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 21 Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 22 3 ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SAND ON NATURAL AND NOURISHED BEACHES IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA ....................... 33 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 33 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 34 Selection of Sampling Sites ................................ ................................ ............................. 34 Compaction and Shear Resistance ................................ ................................ ................... 35 Bulk Density and Water Content ................................ ................................ ..................... 36 Grain Siz e Distribution and Soil Color ................................ ................................ ........... 37 Soil Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 39 Results and Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 39 Compaction and Shear Resistance ................................ ................................ ................... 40 Bulk Density and Water Content ................................ ................................ ..................... 41 Grain Size Distribution and Soil Color ................................ ................................ ........... 41 Discriminant Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 42 4 EFFECTS OF DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SAND ON LOGGERHEAD ( Caretta caretta ) SEA TURTLE NEST ING IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 53

PAGE 6

6 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 53 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 57 Results and Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 58 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................ ................................ .................. 62 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 64 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 70

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1 Shear resistance values for individual beaches in Newtonmeters. .......................................27 2-2 Proportion of zero values (too soft to read) and summary statistics for individual beaches. ..............................................................................................................................27 2-3 Proportion of zero values (too soft to r ead) on natural, nourished, and all beaches. .............28 2-4 Shear resistance values on Cape San Blas beaches over the course of the 2007 season. ......29 2-5 Proportion of zero values (too soft to read) and summary statistics for Cape San Blas beaches over the course of the 2007 season. ......................................................................30 2-6 Comparison of compaction and she ar resistance on natural and nourished beaches. ...........30 2-7 Comparison of compaction and shear resistance on Cape San Blas beaches over the course of the 2007 season. .................................................................................................30 2-8 Vane shear strength of soil (kPa) for all beaches measured in 2007. ....................................31 2-9 Mean compaction values (Newtons) for each depth range measured. ..................................32 3-1 Sampling locations of corresponding nourished and natural beaches included in this study. ..................................................................................................................................46 3-2 Timing and method of nouri shment of nourished beaches included in this study. ...............46 3-3 Selection of statistical tests for comparing physical properties of sand on natural versus nourished beaches. .............................................................................................................46 3-4 Differences in physical properties of sand on pairs of natural and nourished beaches. ........47 3-5 Differences in physical properties of sand on the same beach over the course of a season. ................................................................................................................................48 3-6 Mean color results for northwest Florida beaches in 2006. ...................................................48 3-7 Mean col or results for northwest Florida beaches in 2007. ...................................................49 3-8 Mean grain size results (% Passing) of each sieve size measured for northwest Florida beaches in 2006. .................................................................................................................49 3-9 Mean grain size results (% Passing) of each sieve size measured for northwest Florida beaches in 2007. .................................................................................................................50 3-10 ASTM standard sieve opening sizes ( cm) for sieves used in this study. .............................50

PAGE 8

8 3-11 Average bulk density (g/cm3), water content, and compaction (Newtons) results for northwest Florida beaches in 2006. ...................................................................................51 3-12 Average bulk density (g/cm3), water content, compaction (Newtons), and shear resistance results (Newtonmeters) for northwest Florida beaches in 2007. .....................51 3-13 Average values of all sand properties measured on natural, nourished, and all beaches. ...52 4-1 Nesting Density of loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2006. ............60 4-2 Nest counts of loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2006. ...................60 4-3 Ratio of false crawls to nests for loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2006. ..............................................................................................................................60 4-4 Hatching success and emerging success of loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2005. .............................................................................................................61

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 1 Enlarged shear vane device used to conduct shear resistance measurements, view from underneath. ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 24 2 2 Enlarged shear vane device used to conduct shear resistance measurements, view from above. ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 25 2 3 Linear Regression plot of shear versus compaction. ................................ ......................... 26 3 1 Map of sampling locations along the Florida panhandle. ................................ .................. 43 3 2 Sampling regime for core sand sampling, shear resistance, and penetrometer readings. ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 43 3 3 Canonical plot display of discriminant analysis results including normal 50% contours for nourished (Y) versus non nourished (N). ................................ ...................... 44 3 4 Graph of grain size distribution for all beaches, 2006 and 2007. ................................ ...... 45

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulf illment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SAND ASSOCIATED WITH BEACH NOURISHMENT AND EFFECTS ON LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLE (Caretta caretta) NESTING IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA By Lori Brinn Ma y 2008 Chair: Raymond R. Carthy Major: Interdisciplinary Ecology Beach nourishment is increasing in scope and execution as a response to coastal erosion in Florida. However, if sand used for nourishment has different properties than natural sand, then t he beach ecosystem may be altered. Regulatory agencies maintain sand specifications for nourishment projects to monitor quality of fill materials. The reproductive effort of nesting sea turtles requires a suitable incubation environment: the effects of s ubstandard fill material may be immediate (false crawl) or sublethal (poor incubation environment). Our objective was to determine if the physical properties of sand on post nourishment beaches differed from natural beach sand, and whether any differences observed appeared to affect nesting loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles. Compaction, bulk density, water content, color (chroma and value), and grain size distribution were analyzed on seven pairs of nourished beaches and natural beaches in northwes t Florida in 2006 We hypothesized that any differences in these physical properties on nourished versus natural beaches could affect loggerhead sea turtle nesting success. While compaction measurements are often the primary method of evaluating beaches post nourishment, measuring shear resistance may provide a more complete picture of a sea turtles perception of the beach during nest chamber excavation. In summer 2007, shear resistance measurements

PAGE 11

11 were take n alongside compaction readings using a devic e developed for this study Our shear vane device was more successful at depth than on the surface, and results were repeatable on the same beach over time. We saw a general trend of the physical properties of several recently nourished beaches returning over time to a state more similar to that of the native beach. The nesting density, hatching success, and emerging success of loggerhead sea turtles did not appear to be adversely affected by beach nourishment. Overall, it appears that the processes in place for nourishing and maintaining beaches in northwest Florida are not incompatible with loggerhead sea turtle nesting, and implementing shear resistance measurements as a management tool following beach nourishment projects would provide useful informa tion to coastal managers which could be beneficial to nesting loggerhead sea turtles.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Beach nourishment is the placement of large amounts of sand on a beach to mitigate coastal erosion by extending the shoreline seaward or by recon structing a dune ( D EAN 2002). Nourishing beaches provides protection of urban areas, recreational and tourism benefits, and if done properly, ecological benefits ( L UCAS and P ARKINSON 2002). Because beach nourishment can alter abiotic and biotic element s of the ecosystem, it has the potential to significantly affect all organisms in the coastal system. The effects can be harmful or advantageous, and can be either temporary or long term depending upon the nature of the system in question ( D EAN 2002). T hrough responsible design and monitoring, coastal managers seek to minimize negative impacts of beach nourishment and maximize recreational and economic benefits. Habitat alteration within an ecosystem is frequently a major cause of reduced species divers ity ( E HRENFELD 1970). Environmental changes occur naturally but can be interfered with, impeded by, or accelerated by human actions ( S OUTHWICK 1996). Severe storms and sea level rise cause coastal erosion, which means that the shoreline retreats inland ( W ALTON 1978). Human actions, such as the creation of artificial navigational inlets, can speed this natural recession by inhibiting the littoral transport and accretion of sands ( D OUGLAS 2002 K RIEBEL et al. 2003). Receding coastlines threaten human structures and recreation, thus increasing the desire to nourish beaches ( P ILKEY 1991 O LSEN and B ODGE 1991). A variety of organisms including invertebrates, fish, birds, and sea turtles, inhabit the coastal areas at some point in their life cycle. Beac h nourishment has the potential to significantly impact all of these groups. Invertebrates such as coquina clams ( Donax spp .) and mole crabs ( Emerita talpoida ) comprise a substantial portion of the prey base for ecologically and economically valuable coast al birds and fish. Schmitt and Haines (2003) found that the

PAGE 13

13 impact of beach nourishment on invertebrate populations is generally negative in the short term. Long term recovery time, however, depends on the duration and timing of the nourishment project and the interval between nourishment episodes. Because invertebrates comprise a large portion of the prey base for many shoreline fish, their loss could mean a reduction in fish populations. Nourishment also stirs up sediments near the project site, which ca n cause gill damage and even death of near shore fishes ( S CHMITT and H AINES 2003). Female turtles assess a nesting beach from the water before coming ashore to nest ( C ARR and O GREN 1960, H ENDRICKSON 1982). Loggerhead sea turtles tend to favor steeply sloped, moderate to high energy beaches that have moderately sloped offshore approaches ( P ROVANCHA and E HRHART 1987, W OOD and B JORNDAL 2000). Geomorphology and dimensions of the beach are considered important factors in nest site selection ( M ORTIMER 19 82, J OHANNES and R IMMER 1984), as are depth of offshore waters ( H UGHES 1974, M ORTIMER 1982), texture of the sediment ( S TANYCK and R OSS 1978, M ORTIMER 1990), and artificial lighting on the beach ( M ORTIMER 1982, W ITHERINGTON 1992, S ALMON et al. 1995) All marine turtle species exhibit a common core sequence of nesting behaviors. The female emerges from the water, crawls up the beach, excavates a body pit, digs out an egg chamber, oviposition occurs, and finally the egg chamber and body pit are fille d in with sand prior to her return to the ocean ( M ILLER et al. 2003). Nourishing beaches may influence nest digging, potentially causing the shape of the nest to be altered, if the nourished beach has different sand properties than the natural beach ( C AR THY 1996). Sediment characteristics play a vital role in the reproductive success of turtles and can profoundly influence embryological development and survival ( B USTARD 1973, M C G EHEE 1979, P ACKARD AND P ACKARD 1988). Both ambient nest temperature an d incubation duration

PAGE 14

14 are impacted by changes in sediment color, grain size, and grain shape resulting from beach nourishment ( M ILTON et al. 1997). Because the sex of marine turtles is determined by nest incubation temperature, with a higher proportion o f males produced at lower temperatures and a higher proportion females at higher temperatures, if a beach nourishment project alters physical properties of the sand capable of influencing the incubation temperature, sex determination of turtle hatchlings c ould be directly affected ( M ROSOVSKY et al. 1998). Although sea turtle nests deposited onto nourished beaches tend to hatch successfully ( E HRHART and R AYMOND 1983, Raymond 1984, Wolf et al. 1986, Nelson et al. 1987), monitoring of hatchling sex ratio s is important from a conservation standpoint ( M ROSOVSKY and Y NTEMA 1980, M ORREALE et al 1982) because they could alter the population sex ratio, thereby affecting the reproductive success of the population ( H ANSON et al. 1998). Approximately 90 perce nt of the loggerhead nests in the United States occur in Florida (Murphy and Hopkins 1984) where the sex ratios of hatchlings and immature sea turtles are significantly female biased ( M ROSOVSKY and P ROVANCHA 1989, 1992, W IBBLES et al. 1991). Beach nouri shment projects can alter hatchling development by changing beach characteristics such as sand compaction, nutrient availability and the gaseous, hydric, and thermal environments of the nest chamber ( C RAIN et al. 1995). Grain size and sorting are importa nt determinants of gas exchange, moisture content, and other vital characteristics of the nesting environment for developing sea turtles ( A CKERMAN 1980, N ELSON and D ICKERSON 1989, M ORTIMER 1990, A CKERMAN et al. 1992). Nourished beaches have demonstrate d positive impacts ( B ROADWELL 1991, E HRHART and H OLLOWAY A DKINS 2000, E HRHART and R OBERTS 2001), negative impacts ( E HRHART 1995, E COLOGICAL A SSOCIATES I NC 1998), or no apparent

PAGE 15

15 impact ( R AYMOND 1984, N ELSON et al. 1987, B ROADWELL ,1991 S TEINITZ et al. 1998) on marine turtle hatchling success. The goal of this study was to compare physical characteristics of sand on natural and nourished beaches including compaction, shear resistance, bulk density, water content, soil color, and grain size distri bution and to relate any differences in these physical sand characteristics to differences in loggerhead sea turtle ( Caretta caretta ) nesting success in northwest Florida.

PAGE 16

16 CHAPTER 2 LOOKING AT SAND FROM A SEA TURTLES PERSP ECTIVE: DEVELOPMENT OF A NOVEL S HEAR VANE DEVICE TO COMPARE SHEAR RESIST ANCE OF SAND ON NATURAL AND NOURISHE D BEACHES Introduction Following beach nourishment projects, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requires that beach compaction be measured to ensure that the nourished sand provide s viable habitat for sea turtle nesting ( C OOPER 1998). Steinitz et al. (1998) found that on nourished beaches, nesting success of sea turtles was significantly and negatively correlated with increasing compaction at a depth of 20 cm, while natural beache s experienced no correlation between compaction and nesting success. Compaction is also known to increase with sand depth ( N ELSON et al. 1987). This parameter could influence nest excavation and conditions such as temperature, moisture, and ease of gas exchange between incubating sea turtle eggs and their surrounding environment. A physical monitoring workshop undertaken at the 20th Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation cited beach hardness as the most important factor in measuring imp acts of beach nourishment ( P ARKINSON 2000). Between 30 and 40 percent of the time loggerhead s ea turtles emerging onto a nesting beach return to the ocean without excavating a nest chamber ( S TONEBURNER AND R ICHARDSON 1981, E HRHART AND R AYMOND 1983, W ILLIAMS W ALLS et al. 1983), a behavior known as a false crawl. Females may also perform a false dig, which involves emerging from the water, digging a nest chamber, and abandoning it without laying any eggs. False crawls and false digs could be caused by a turtles readiness to lay, physical characteristics of the beach, temperature of the beach sediment, and disturbances such as the presence of predators or lights on the beach ( M ANN 1978, F LETEMEYER 1981, S TONEBURNER and R ICHARDSON 1981, E HRHART a nd R AYMOND 1983). If the physical consistency of a nourished beach is too hard, females may be

PAGE 17

17 forced to spend more time on the beach nesting, which is physiologically taxing and increases potential exposure to disturbances and predation, all of which co uld lead to a false dig ( N ELSON and D ICKERSON 1989). Beach compaction is commonly measured using a device called a cone penetrometer, which measures the penetration resistance associated with pressing a conical point of known volume down into the soil u ntil it is just below the soil surface ( ELE I NTERNATIONAL 2004 ). While compaction is one important factor to examine on nourished beaches, it may not provide a complete picture of how the sand is perceived by a nesting sea turtle crawling onto the beach and excavating a body pit. Because nesting sea turtles follow a core sequence of behaviors that is more complex than simply inserting their limbs straight down into the sand, measuring other properties such as shear resistance may provide additional infor mation about a sea turtles perception of the beach ( M ILLER et al. 2003). Shearing resistance is a consequence of the pressure between sand grains and is influenced by grain size distribution, grain shape and orientation, and weight of overburden ( N ELSON et al. 1987). Synonyms for shear resistance are beach hardness and compaction ( P ARKINSON 2000). For the purposes of this study, shear resistance will refer to the force required to move sand in a horizontal direction, while compaction will be defined as the force required to penetrate the sand in a vertical direction. By measuring shear resistance in addition to sand compaction, we may gain insight about why sea turtles decide to false crawl or false dig on certain beaches. In summer 2007, we measured shear resistance as a separate entity from beach compaction using a slightly modified, enlarged version of a shear vane apparatus. The goal of conducting these shear resistance procedures was to provide insight about how nesting sea turtles perceive the beach while crawling up and digging a nest chamber. Work was conducted on 7

PAGE 18

18 pairs of natural (never nourished) and nourished (at least one nourishment project had occurred or was planned to begin before the study date) beaches in northwest Florida. Method s Selection of Sampling Sites Pairs of natural and nourished beaches were chosen based on two criteria: geographic orientation and distance apart. Each pair of beaches needed to have the same orientation, and pairs needed to be spaced closely enough to ea ch other to be comparable but not so close that a significant amount of sand was likely to mix between them Consultations with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists helped to finalize our sampling site selection. Sampling was confined to the Florida panhandle with sites ranging from Alligator Point in the east to Langdon Beach on Gulf Islands National Seashore property in the west. Compaction and Shear Resistance U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requirements dictate that reasonable measures of minimi zing the effects of nourishment on sea turtles include three years of beach monitoring after a nourishment project. Protocol states that sand compaction s hould be measured using a cone p enetrometer at 500 foot (152m) intervals along the nourished region a nd at three evenly spaced stations; one at the dune or bulkhead line, one at the high water line, and one directly between these reference points. At each station, the Penetrometer should be pressed to depths of 6, 12, and 18 inches (15.24cm, 30.48cm, and 45.72cm), using three replicate measure ments per location. Replicate measurements should be taken as close together as possible wit hout interacting with previous measurements. The three replicate compaction readings for each location should be averaged to yield final values for each depth at each station. Reports must include 27 compaction values for each beach monitored ( C OOPER 1998). For this study d epth

PAGE 19

19 of measurements replication, and spacing of transects followed the protocol above with regard to both compaction and shear measurements Shear resistance measurements were taken using a device and techniques developed in this course of study. An enlarged shear vane was constructed from steel. The four steel blades of the shear vane were welde d at approximately 90 angles to each other. Each blade measured approximately 4.75 cm wide by 7.25 cm tall, 2.5 times larger than a standard shear vane ( N EW Z EALAND G EOTECHNICAL S OCIETY 2001). The blades were welded to a 12 inch (30.48 cm) steel shaft with a inch male fitting at the top. An 8 cm long, 2 cm thick steel cylinder with an opening slightly wider than the diameter of the vane shaft was welded to the center of a 12 inch by 12 inch (30.48 cm by 30.48 cm) steel plate designed to provide stabi lity to the shear vane during measurements (Figure 2 1). Preliminary tests were done using several prototypes in sand at various depths, and the 2.5 times enlarged shear vane size was found to deliver the most consistent results within the operating range of the torque wrench used. Our enlarged shear vane was first inserted through the cylinder in the center of the steel plate for stability (Figure 2 1). The shear vane was able to rotate freely within the cylinder, minimizing unnecessary horizontal moveme nt. The plate was placed flat onto the surface of the sand and secured into place using a metal hammer. A TECH1 inch drive Snap on TECHWRENCH electronic torque wrench was attached to the top of the shear vane apparatus and rotated 90 using one const ant motion (Figure 2 2). The torque reading was recorded in Newton meters and reported as the shear resistance for that sample. The area ratio of our enlarged shear vane blades was calculated as a percentage using the equation area ratio = [8T(D millimeters, T is the thickness of the blades in millimeters, and d is the diameter of the vane rod

PAGE 20

20 in millimeters. In determining the area ratio, the average of the two blade widths was reported a s overall width D, and the average of the four blade thicknesse s at the midpoint of each blade was reported as the thickness of the blades T. Rod diameter d was measured at the midpoint of the rod. A Westward IP 54 Electronic Caliper, model number 2ZA60 was used to obtain dimensions of the shear vane and extension rod to the nearest 0.01 mm. According to New Zealand Geotechnical Society guidelines for hand held shear vane testing, the area ratio should not exceed 25% (2001). The area ratio of our shea r vane was calculated as 9.05%, which is well below the 25% limit, indicating that our shear vane meets the area ratio requirement. Shear resistance measurements were also used to determine the vane shear strength of soil, in kilopascals (kPa); which was c torque required to shear the soil in Newton meters, and K is a constant dependent on the (1 + D/3H) x 10 6; wh ere D is the overall width of the vane in millimeters, and H is the height of the vane in millimeters ( N EW Z EALAND G EOTECHNICAL S OCIETY 2001). A Westward IP 54 Electronic Caliper, model number 2ZA60, was used to obtain dimensions of the shear vane and e xtension rod to the nearest 0.01 mm. In determining the constant K, the average of the two blade widths was reported as overall width D, and the average of the four blade heights at the midpoint of each blade was reported as the height of the vane H. Be cause of the relatively large proportion of zero values in the data, a Wilcoxon Sign Rank test was used to statistically compare the shear resistance of natural versus nourished beaches. Compaction data did not follow a normal distribution; therefore the Wilcoxon Sign Rank test was also used to compare those values. The statistical program JMP was used to perform all statistical tests.

PAGE 21

21 Results Table 2 1 shows the raw data; all shear resistance measurements (in Newton meters) taken for all beaches. Table 2 2 displays the proportion of zeroes, or the proportion of the time that the device did not register a reading because the sand was too soft. These proportions are summarized in T able 2 3, which reports the proportion of zero readings for all beaches, al l natural beaches, and all nourished beaches separately. When all beaches were included, the overall success of the shear vane at registering a reading above zero was 68%. However, 78% of the zero readings occurred at the surface, while the readings take n at 6 inches and 12 inches ( 15.24 cm and 30.48 cm) had a much lower proportion of zero values. On nourished beaches, surface measurements registered a zero value 93% of the time. The mean vane shear strength of soil and standard deviation for each beach a re reported Table 2 8. Of the seven nourished beaches that we studied, two were not actually nourished by the time of the study. Four of the remaining five pairs of natural versus nourished beaches showed no statistically significant difference in overall shear resistance, while only two of the five pairs had no significant difference in overall compaction. Navarre beach, which was nourished most recently (2006) did have a significantly different overall shear resistance as compared to its natural counter part, Santa Rosa. Overall shear resistance may not be the best indicator of whether natural versus nourished beaches are significantly different because of the relatively high proportion of zero readings at the surface. However, when surface readings wer e excluded from the analysis, results were exactly the same for all beach pairs (Table 2 6). To test the repeatability of using the enlarged shear vane device, we sampled both Cape San Blas beaches twice in 2007. No significant differences were found in t he overall shear resistance over the course of the season (Table 2 7). When surface readings were excluded from the analysis, there was not enough data to compare Cape San Blas natural beach statistically over

PAGE 22

22 the course of the season because we were only able to sample two of three transects a second time due to erosion. The Cape San Blas not yet nourished beach was not significantly different over the course of the season when surface readings were excluded from the analysis. Sand compaction was signif icantly different on the natural Cape San Blas beach over the course of the season, probably due to the large amount of erosion that occurred on that beach during the season. We found no significant linear correlation between beach compaction and shear res istance measurements. Figure 2 3 shows a linear regression plot of shear versus compaction, with an R 2 correlation coefficient of 0.19. Table 2 9 shows overall compaction values and results for each depth range measured. Discussion One indicator of the s uccess of our shear vane device was the proportion of the time that the device gave a reliable reading. Our device did not register a reading due to soft surface sand more than half the time, indicating that it is a more useful tool at depth than on the s urface, particularly on nourished beaches. Perhaps using a shear vane that had even larger blades would yield more reliable readings at the surface. Because shear resistance may be present at nest depth even when surface sand has no shear measurable resis tance, beach monitoring protocol following a nourishment project should include the use of an enlarged shear vane device at nest depth. Our device detected no difference in shear resistance on either Cape San Blas beach over the course of the season, givi ng us confidence that our shear vane device delivered repeatable results. Because our findings suggest that sand compaction does not exhibit a positive linear correlation with shear resistance, we conclude that measuring shear resistance as a separate en tity from beach compaction is important. Compaction did tend to be lower on the surface than at depth in

PAGE 23

23 most cases, but the readings did not always increase with depth after the surface reading. The graph also indicates that there is a lower detectabili ty limit for the specific shear vane size and torque wrench that we used. Measuring shear resistance gives us additional information about the physical condition of sand placed on a beach during nourishment and may provide useful insight from a sea turtle conservation management perspective.

PAGE 24

24 Figure 2 1. Enlarged shear vane device used to conduct shear resistance measurements, view from underneath.

PAGE 25

25 Figure 2 2. Enlarged shear vane device used to c onduct shear resistance measurements, view from above.

PAGE 26

26 Figure 2 3. Linear Regression plot of shear versus compaction.

PAGE 27

27 Table 2 1. Shear resistance values for individual beaches in Newton meters. Shear Resistance (Nm) Raw Data Beach Cape Nat. 12.43 3.75 4.75 6.76 6.49 3.25 11.49 3.29 5.40 5.34 3.98 10.62 3.94 4.24 8.74 4.58 3.03 7.59 4.14 4.23 3.33 6.79 4.00 Cape Nour. 3.39 2.74 2.95 3.32 4.54 2.87 3.87 3.95 3.10 3.67 3.62 3.52 4.84 4.62 3.81 3.67 5.32 4.01 4.01 Alligator Point 3.31 3.89 6.78 4.78 3.97 3.31 3.35 9.20 7.08 3.89 10.61 8.84 6.56 6.42 5.63 4.39 9.10 4.12 6.73 9.58 6.63 7.39 7.07 7.63 8.74 Bald Point 3.42 4.10 2.89 3.85 3.02 3.07 3.34 3.96 4.15 3.36 2.89 2.71 Panama City 2.93 3.60 4.74 4.36 3.24 2.75 4.72 3.65 3.24 3.16 4.15 3.57 3.77 2.80 3.53 3.77 4.53 2.85 Camp Helen 3.18 4.06 3.16 3.01 3.34 3.60 3.27 3.58 3.82 3.51 3.59 3.52 3.90 5.04 Henderson 3.50 4.52 3.55 2.89 3.59 4.96 3.83 5.26 2.85 3.34 3.73 3.24 3.10 3.74 3.70 3.36 4.62 2.83 Okaloosa 2.85 3.78 3.15 3.12 2.76 3.76 4.22 3.43 3.14 3.67 3.52 3.09 3.28 3.76 2.76 3.41 3.60 3.58 Grayton 3.07 2.73 3.46 4.98 4.54 4.61 4.95 6.14 3.58 2.78 4.43 4.72 3.05 3.85 3.18 5.12 6.66 Sandestin 3.85 2.97 2.73 7.68 6.90 3.06 7.25 2.88 3.87 6.53 2.99 5.78 6.61 5.26 4.80 3.25 5.08 5.75 3.75 Pensacola 3.43 3.01 4.05 3.80 4.10 3.78 4.71 4.63 2.82 3.86 4.94 3.90 3.91 5.47 3.49 4.56 2.79 2.91 Langdon 3.69 3.11 2.92 3.52 2.76 3.89 4.57 2.71 4.37 2.95 3.60 5.11 6.67 4.41 3.23 4.10 5.55 Navarre 5.73 2.78 4.26 6.47 3.92 5.38 5.02 6.30 3.52 2.80 5.30 4.28 7.84 5.86 3.75 5.19 Santa Rosa 2.78 2.88 2.72 2.84 3.10 5.07 4.14 2.81 4.10 4.61 4.52 3.67 3.38 3.06 5.12 5.43 3.54 3.57 3.35 3.42 2.81 5.35 Surface 15.24 cm (6 inch) depth 30.48 cm (12 inch) depth Table 2 2. Proportion of zero values (too soft to read) and summary statistics for individual beaches. Beach Cape Nat. Cape Nour. Alligator Point Bald Point Panama City Camp Helen Henderson Okaloosa Grayton Sandestin Pensacola Langdon Navarre Santa Rosa Proportion of zero readings (too soft to read) Surface 0.11 0.56 0.22 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.44 6 inch depth 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 inch depth 0.33 0.22 0.00 0.33 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.11 Overall 0.15 0.30 0.07 0.56 0.33 0.48 0.33 0.33 0.37 0.30 0.33 0.37 0.41 0.19 Mean Torque Surface 6.53 3.10 4.20 N/A 2.93 N/A N/A 2.85 N/A 3.85 N/A 3.69 N/A 2.86 6 inch depth 5.54 3.64 6.96 3.39 3.72 3.39 3.88 3.42 4.31 4.87 3.81 3.42 4.82 3.93 12 inch depth 5.01 4.33 7.44 3.40 3.62 3.78 3.52 3.41 4.15 4.81 3.98 4.67 5.00 4.07 Overall 5.75 3.78 6.36 3.40 3.63 3.61 3.70 3.38 4.23 4.79 3.90 3.95 4.90 3.74 Standard Deviation Surface 3.62 0.31 1.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.15 6 inch depth 2.50 0.52 2.24 0.49 0.72 0.38 0.86 0.47 1.14 2.15 0.65 0.70 1.28 0.76 12 inch depth 1.73 0.61 1.63 0.57 0.59 0.55 0.52 0.32 1.23 1.24 0.89 1.20 1.63 1.05 Overall 2.74 0.69 2.21 0.51 0.65 0.51 0.71 0.40 1.15 1.67 0.76 1.08 1.39 0.91

PAGE 28

28 Table 2 3. P roportion of zero values (too soft to read) on natural, nourished, and all beaches. Proportion of zero readings (too soft to read) All Beaches All Natural Beaches All Nourished Beaches* Surface 0.78 0.780.93 6 in depth 0.07 0.11 0.02 12 in depth 0.12 0.16 0.07 Overall 0.32 0.35 0.34 *Excluding Alligator Point and Cape Nourished, which have not yet been nourished.

PAGE 29

29 Table 2 4. Shear resistance values on Cape San Blas beaches over the course of the 2007 season. Shear Resistance (Nm) Raw Data Beach Date Cape 5/10/2007 12.43 3.75 4.75 6.76 6.49 3.25 11.49 3.29 5.40 5.34 3.98 10.62 3.94 4.24 8.74 4.58 3.03 7.59 4.14 4.23 3.33 6.79 4.00 Natural 8/12/2007 3.55 3.07 3.93 3.39 2.91 N/A N/A N/A 4.74 3.52 4.61 5.00 6.70 4.17 N/A* N/A N/A 10.30 7.06 5.64 7.62 7.97 7.80 N/A N/A N/A Cape 5/11/2007 3.39 2.74 2.95 3.32 4.54 2.87 3.87 3.95 3.10 3.67 3.62 3.52 4.84 4.62 3.81 3.67 5.32 4.01 4.01 Nourished 8/12/2007 2.83 4.82 2.71 4.16 4.05 3.77 4.97 3.36 4.16 5.01 4.50 5.74 4.29 5.18 3.75 3.17 5.53 3.86 Surface 15.24 cm (6 inch) depth 30.48 cm (12 inch) depth

PAGE 30

30 Table 2 5. Proportion of zero values (too soft to read) and summary statistics for Cape San Blas beaches over the course of the 2007 season. Beach Sampling Date 5/10/07 8/12/07 5/11/07 8/12/07 Proportion of zero readings (too soft to read) Surface 0.11 0.17 0.56 1.00 6 inch depth 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 12 inch depth 0.33 0.00 0.22 0.00 Overall 0.15 0.06 0.30 0.33 Mean Torque Surface 6.53 3.37 3.10 N/A 6 inch depth 5.54 4.79 3.64 3.87 12 inch depth 5.01 7.73 4.33 4.56 Overall 5.75 5.41 3.78 4.21 Standard Deviation Surface 4.30 6.02 3.78 N/A 6 inch depth 5.58 2.56 2.75 0.00 12 inch depth 4.90 3.75 4.34 5.02 Overall 4.92 4.30 3.80 4.27 Cape Natural Cape (Not Yet Nourished) Table 2 6. Comparison of compaction and shear resistance on natural and nourished beaches. Physical Property of Soil Navarre* Pensacola* Panama City* Okaloosa* Sandestin* Cape* Alligator Point* 2007 Santa Rosa Langdon Camp Helen Henderson Grayton Cape Bald Point Compaction NS ** ** NS ** ** Shear Resistance NS NS NS NS ** ** Shear Resistance (excluding surface values) NS NS NS NS ** ** *Year of Last Nourishment 2006 2005 2005 2004 1988 Future Plans Future Plans Beach Pairs Compared Table 2 7. Compa rison of compaction and shear resistance on Cape San Blas beaches over the course of the 2007 season. Beach: Cape (Natural) Cape (Not Yet Nourished) Compaction ** NS Shear Resistance NS NS Sampling Dates: 5/10/07, 8/12/07 5/11/07, 8/12/07

PAGE 31

31 Table 2 8. Vane shear strength of soil (kPa) for all beaches measured in 2007. 2007 Vane Shear Strength of Soil Standard *Year of Last Beach Mean Deviation Nourishment Navarre* 14.85 4.222006 Santa Rosa 11.33 2.75 Pensacola* 11.81 2.30 2005 Langdon 11.97 3.28 Panama City* 11.00 1.97 2005 Camp Helen 10.95 1.53 Okaloosa* 9.71 2.63 2004 Henderson 11.21 2.15 Sandestin* 14.51 5.05 1988 Grayton 12.81 3.50 Cape* 5/11/07 11.45 2.08 N/A Cape 5/10/07 17.41 8.30 Future Plans Cape* 8/12/07 12.77 2.67 N/A Cape 8/12/07 16.40 6.49 Future Plans Alligator* 19.27 6.70 N/A Bald 10.29 1.54 Future Plans

PAGE 32

32 Table 2 9. Mean compaction values (Newtons) for each depth range me asured. Mean Compaction (Newtons) by Sampling Depth 2006 Cape Nat. Cape Nour. Bald Point Alligator Point Camp Helen Panama City Henderson Okaloosa Grayton Sandestin Langdon Pensacola Santa Rosa Navarre Overall 290.19 187.94 67.21 167.73 75.67 108.29 62.75 71.52 89.80 98.58 61.99 101.87 67.38 104.69 0-15.24cm 314.33 104.46 22.68 148.97 20.13 21.08 13.26 26.04 31.20 15.17 25.02 11.07 19.38 9.05 15.24-30.48cm 303.36 232.23 73.95 203.48 91.57 160.47 86.99 90.03 122.61 153.07 76.93 152.32 80.98 124.37 30.48-45.72cm 252.89 227.12 104.99 148.61 115.32 143.32 88.01 98.49 115.58 127.51 84.01 142.20 101.80 180.64 2007 Overall 167.37 76.31 70.19 146.50 73.42 105.20 58.69 25.09 70.21 65.50 32.21 51.16 53.88 40.59 0-15.24cm 136.40 21.88 14.80 76.19 18.10 18.42 19.75 5.86 20.07 11.02 12.03 6.28 19.97 7.93 15.24-30.48cm 188.95 84.23 83.06 173.40 99.83 142.68 78.90 39.19 87.63 91.95 40.36 70.97 74.27 63.09 30.48-45.72cm 181.47 122.83 112.71 189.91 102.33 154.50 77.41 30.24 102.91 93.54 44.24 76.24 67.40 50.74

PAGE 33

33 CHAPTER 3 ASSESSMENT OF DIFFER ENCES IN PHYSICAL PR OPERTIES OF SAND ON NATURAL AND NOURISHED BEACHE S IN NORTHWEST FLORI DA Introduction Erosion and sea level rise threaten structures along developed coastlines each year. The beach acts as a natura l barrier, protecting developed areas during storm events. Beaches are dynamic systems that erode during winter months, accrete in the summer, and shift constantly due to waves, currents, and wind ( S CHMITT and H AINES 2003). The forces of nature move and r eallocate portions of the shoreline considerably over time, sometimes causing accretion or even a temporary disappearance. Generally, sand is pulled offshore in winter and during storm events and pushed back onshore in spring and summer. Because of the con stant pressure of natural forces, beaches, especially on barrier islands, naturally migrate. Hardened structures imposed by humans may alter this natural cycle by impeding the transfer of sand needed for beach accretion. Human engineered solutions such as sea walls, groins, jetties, and other hardened structures intensify the problem. Beach nourishment is currently the most accepted engineered system for the protection of natural and man made areas from the effects of erosion ( J ONES and M ANGUN 2001). Sign ificant alterations in beach substrate properties could occur if fill sediment from physically incompatible sources is used. Beach nourishment can alter the density, compaction, shear resistance, moisture content, beach slope, sediment color, grain size, grain shape, and mineral content of sediment in the beach system ( P IATKOWSKI 2002). Differences in particle size can directly impact the shear resistance of the sediment, making the beach relatively harder after a nourishment project. Harder or more com pacted sand result primarily from the angular, finer grain sediment dredged out of stable offshore borrow pits. Softer, less compacted beaches result from smoother, coarse sediment dredged from high energy borrow sites such as inlets

PAGE 34

34 ( N ELSON and D ICKERSON 1989). Sediment used for beach nourishment projects is obtained from three main sources: inlets, channels, and offshore borrow sites ( C RAIN et al. 1995). Potential borrow sites of beach compatible sand for Floridas beaches include offshore interreefa l sedimentary infills, upland dunes, sand sheet inland deposits, and oolithic sand from the Bahama Banks. The cost of finding and transporting beach compatible sand may be a limiting factor in future beach nourishment projects in Florida, and alternatives such as recycled glass have been proposed as potential beach fill material ( M AKOWSKI and R USENKO 2007). Management agencies that regulate beach nourishment projects maintain specifications regarding the quality of fill material used. Our objective was to determine whether there were significant differences in physical properties of sand between natural and nourished beaches in northwest Florida. Specifically, compaction, shear resistance, bulk density, water content, grain size distribution, and soil c olor were measured. Methods Selection of Sampling Sites We sampled 14 beaches in northwest Florida in 2006 and again in 2007. Seven of the beaches were considered natural, meaning those beaches have never been nourished and no current plans for nourishmen t currently exist. The other seven partners had either undergone or planned at least one beach nourishment project. Northwest Florida was chosen because of the relatively large number of nourishment projects that are planned or have already taken place in that region. Also, these beaches are utilized by threatened loggerhead sea turtles ( Caretta caretta ) for nesting each year. Pairs of natural and nourished beaches were selected based primarily on two criteria: geographic orientation and distance apart Pairs of beaches needed to face the same direction and be spaced closely enough to each other to be comparable but not so close that a significant

PAGE 35

35 amount of sand was likely to mix between natural and nourished sites. Consultations with U.S. Fish and Wi ldlife Service biologists helped to finalize the sampling site selection process. Sampling was constrained to the Florida panhandle, and sites ranged from Alligator Point in the east to Langdon Beach on Gulf Islands National Seashore property in the west. Table 3 1 lists all seven pairs of natural and nourished beaches sampled in this study. Figure 3 1 displays the geographic location of all of the beaches on a map. Navarre beach was sampled twice in 2006 to observe change in physical properties on the same beach over the course of the season. Both Cape San Blas natural beaches were measured twice in 2007 for the same reason. Table 3 2 lists the nourishment method and years of nourishment for the seven nourished beaches sampled in this stud y. Compact ion and Shear Resistance According to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requirements, reasonable measures of minimizing the effects of nourishment on sea turtles include three years of beach monitoring following a nourishment project. Protocol mandates that compaction s hould be measured using a cone p enetrometer at 500 foot (152m) intervals along the nourished area and at three evenly spaced stations; one at the dune or bulkhead line, one at the high water line, and one directly between these reference points At each station, the Penetrometer should be pressed to depths of 6, 12, and 18 inches (15.24cm, 30.48cm, and 45.72cm) with three replicate measurements per location. Replications should be done as close together as possible without interacting with pr eviously measurements. The three replicate compaction values for each location are to be averaged to yield final values for each depth at each station. Reports must include 27 compaction values per each transect ( C OOPER 1998). For this study d epth of m easurements and spacing of transects followed the protocol above for both compaction and shear measurements Figure 3 2 illustrates the sampling regime used. A total of 27 measurements per beach were

PAGE 36

36 taken on each beach. Each measurement was based upon an average of three replicate measurements at the same depth and location. Portable Global Positioning System (GPS) units were used to mark each sampling location. Shear resistance measurements were taken using techniques described in Chapter 2. Bulk Dens ity and Water Content Standard methods of bulk density and water content determination were obtained from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requirements and from a report by Steinitz et al. that utilized similar procedures (1998). Core samples for these meas urements were obtained at intervals of 0 to 15.24cm, 15.24 to 30.48cm, and 30.48 to 45.72cm below the surface at each location used for shear resistance measurement. Portable Global Positioning System (GPS) units were used to record each sampling location One Ziploc bag was labeled for each sample to be collected (27 total per beach in 2006). A mallet was used to drive a PVC pipe (henceforth known as the core sampler) of known volume (308.889 cm3) directly into the ground, filling it comple tely to coll ect a core sample 15.24 centimeters in depth. The top of the core sampler was covered with a wide spatula to ensure that sand particles did not escape through the top. Sand was removed around the core sampler, and the outside was wiped clean with a rag. A wide spatula was then carefully placed underneath it, completely flush with the bottom of the tube. The spatula was then removed from the top of the core sampler and carefully replaced with a Ziploc bag. The sample was then inverted into the bag. Usi ng a narrow spatula, excess sand grains were scraped into the Ziploc bag from the inside of the core sampler. Samples were placed into an un iced cooler to avoid extreme heat or sun during transport. The inside of the core sampler and all spatulas were w iped clean with a rag between samples. These steps were repeated for depth ranges of 15.24 to 30.48 cm and 30.48 to 45.72 cm at each sampling location. Figure 3 2

PAGE 37

37 outlines the sampling regime used, and the same locations were used for core sampling as fo r compaction and shear resistance measurements. One 600 ml beaker was labeled for each sample to be analyzed using pencil and non volatile ink. Beakers were pre dried for two hours in a gravity convection scientific oven calibrated at 105C. The tare wei ght of each beaker was recorded to the nearest 0.01g. Sand samples were then randomly selected for analysis. The entire sample of known volume was placed into its corresponding beaker. Care was used to transfer all of the sand, to keep spilling or leavi ng sand in the sampling bag to a minimum. The weight of the beaker and wet sample was recorded to the nearest 0.01g. Each beaker was covered with Aluminum foil to prevent exposure to open air. All samples were dried for 16 hours at 105C. Samples were allowed to cool without exposure to open air. The weight of the beaker and dry sample was recorded to the nearest 0.01g. Bulk density (g/cm3) was determined by dividing the weight of dry sand by the volume inside the core sampler. Water content was also obtained by dividing the volume of water in each sample (assuming 1g/mL as the density of water) by the total volume of that sample. Each sample was returned to its original Ziploc bag and sealed in an un iced cooler for storage and transport. Grain Size Distribution and Soil Color U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requirements dictate that all fill material placed must be compatible with natural, undisturbed beach sand in the area being nourished. Grain size distribution must be similar such that it does n ot contain construction debris, rocks, or other foreign matter. Furthermore, fill material must not contain, on average, more than 10% silt and clay, which is defined as fine material passing the #200 (0.075 mm particle diameter) ASTM Standard Sieve; and must not contain, on average, more than 5% coarse gravel or cobbles,

PAGE 38

38 excluding shell material, that is retained by the #4 (4.75 mm) ASTM Standard Sieve (Mizzi 2005). Dried samples collected for bulk density and water content analysis were transported to t he University of Florida soil science laboratory in Gainesville, FL. All samples were analyzed on the basis of color and grain size distribution under laboratory conditions. ASTM standard mesh sieves of standard sizes #18 (1 mm), #35 (0.5 mm), #60 (0.25 mm), #140 (0.106 mm), and #325 (0.045 mm) were stacked in ascending order with a clean collecting pan on the bottom. A single sample was randomly selected for analysis. A subsample of approximately 100g was weighed and poured into the sieve stack. The l id was placed on the stack, and the unit was situated on a mechanical sieve shaker. The unit was shaken for 5 minutes using the timer on the sieve shaker. After removal from the mechanical sieve shaker, each sand fraction was weighed individually from to p to bottom. Weights were recorded to the nearest 0.01g. Each sieve and the collecting pan were cleaned gently with a small brush between samples. The mass of soil in all sieve fraction s was compared to the mass of the entire sample before sieving for m ass balance. For our purposes, the proportion of fine grains was considered that which passed through the smallest #325 (0.045 mm) sieve, and the proportion of coarse grains was considered that which was retained in the largest #18 (1 mm) sieve. These si eve sizes were the closest that we were able to obtain to the #200 and #4 standard sizes. Soil color was determined using a Munsell soil color book. A quarter sized pinch of dry soil was deposited into the palm of the gloved hand of the laboratory assis tant. Color charts were held over the sample under sunlight, and a match was identified. Chroma and value as well as the reference number of the color chart (the hue) were recorded. Using deionized water, the

PAGE 39

39 same sample was wet until glistening, and th e process of comparing the sample to the chart was repeated on a wet basis. Soil Data Analysis Data for each of the physical properties measured were first assembled into a histogram and checked for overall normality and to make sure that there was not a large proportion of zeroes. All variables were checked for dependency or correlation with other variables, and no significant correlations were found among any of the sand properties measured. If the normality assumption was reasonable and there were not too many zero values in the data, a paired t test was used for analysis. Compaction and shear resistance did not meet the normality assumption; therefore these properties were analyzed using a Wilcoxon Sign Rank test. Soil color, a categorical variable, was analyzed using a chi square distribution. Table 3 c outlines the normality assumption verification and test used for each variable measured. All statistical analyses were performed using the program JMP 7.0.1. Results and Discussion In 2007, Navarr e beach, which was nourished in 2006, and Pensacola beach, nourished in 2005, were more physically similar to their natural beach partners as compared to 2006 values (Table 3 4). This indicates recovery over time of these recently nourished beaches to a st ate that is physically more similar to the native beach. Navarre beach also experienced changes in physical properties over the course of the 2006 season, most likely a result of sand being added to the system (Table 3 5). Panama City beach, which was no urished in 2005, and Okaloosa Island, nourished in 2004, were less physically similar to their natural beach counterparts in 2007 than they were in 2006. Okaloosa Island had differences in grain size distribution and compaction in 2007 that were not seen in 2006, and Panama City beach had differences in bulk density in 2007 that were not observed the previous year. There may be many reasons for this

PAGE 40

40 variability in sand properties, which could be attributable to the dynamic nature of the beaches themselves human actions such as beach driving, tilling, or heavy foot traffic, or other factors. Even on nonnourished beaches, high levels of variability can be present among years. Cape San Blas beaches, which have not been nourished, were only different with r egard to sand compaction over the course of the 2007 season, yet these quickly eroding beaches were highly variable with regard to differences in their physical properties among years, as were Alligator Point and Bald Point, both of which have yet to be no urished. Although a fair amount of variability was observed, at least some of these beaches seem to be recovering over time to a state more similar to that of the natural beach. Compaction and Shear Resistance In 2006, overall sand compaction was signifi cantly different in only one of the five pairs of natural versus nourished beaches for which the nourished beach actually was nourished in time for this study. Three of the five pairs of beaches exhibited significant differences in compaction in 2007. Al ligator Point and Bald Point appear to have a high level of natural variation in sand compaction levels, as do the Cape San Blas beaches. Shear resistance, which was only measured in 2007, was different only for Navarre beach and Santa Rosa. Navarre beac h was nourished the most recently of all beaches studied, with sand placement occurring in 2006 (Table 3 4). Compaction was significantly different on Navarre beach upon the second sampling event in 2006. The natural Cape San Blas beach showed significan tly different overall compaction over the course of the 2007 season, but its not yet nourished counterpart did not. There was no significant change in shear resistance over the course of the 2007 season for either Cape San Blas beach (Table 3 5). Compact ion and shear resistance provide useful but different information and should both be included in monitoring programs following a beach nourishment project.

PAGE 41

41 Bulk Density and Water Content Differences in bulk density and water content were highly variable among all beach pairs during both study years (Table 3 4). Over the course of the 2006 and 2007 seasons respectively, bulk density was not found to be significantly different on any of the beaches that were sampled multiple times. Water content was sign ificantly different on Navarre beach during the second round of sampling in 2006, but both Cape San Blas beaches showed no significant difference in water content between sampling events in 2007 (Table 3 5). Because water content is highly variable and de pends on many factors including rainfall, tide, and time of day, it may not be the most useful indicator of the physical compatibility of sand on natural versus nourished beaches. However, results of a discriminant analysis (below) indicate that it may be an important contributing factor to measure. Bulk density is a property worthy of consideration because its measurements are less dependent upon daily fluctuations in ambient weather conditions. Grain Size Distribution and Soil Color No significant dif ferences were found in soil color on any of the beach pairs that we studied. The proportion of fine grains was significantly different on Navarre beach as compared to Santa Rosa beach in 2006, but no significant difference was found in the proportion of f ine grains on these beaches in 2007. Significant differences in the proportion of coarse grains were seen on Navarre beach versus Santa Rosa during both years of this study. There was no difference in the proportion of fine and coarse grains for either y ear on the two pairs of beaches for which the nourished counterparts were not nourished by the time of this study (Table 3 4). The proportion of fine and coarse grains was significantly different upon the second round of sampling in 2006 on Navarre beach. Cape San Blas beaches experienced no significant change in the proportion of fine or coarse grains over the course of the 2007 season (Table 3 5). Figure 3 4 displays the grain size distribution graphically for all beaches studied during both years,

PAGE 42

42 exc luding Alligator Point, Cape San Blas, and their natural beach counterparts. Table 3 13 gives average grain size distribution and soil color values for all natural beaches, all nourished beaches, and all beaches during both years. Cape San Blas beach, Al ligator Point beach, and their natural beach counterparts were excluded from table 3 13 because these beaches have not yet been nourished. Mean grain size was between 0.5mm and 0.25mm for all beaches, and neither the natural nor the nourished beaches had a high proportion of extremely coarse or extremely fine sand grains. The overall average color values for all beaches were 10Yellow Red hue, 7.95 value, and 1.04 chroma in dry sand, and 10Yellow Red hue, 6.66 value, and 1.36 chroma in wet sand. Florida h as legal guidelines concerning the color of sediment placed on a nourished beach. According to our findings, these guidelines are doing their job of ensuring that sand placed on nourished beaches in northwest Florida is the same color as the natural beach sand. Grain size distribution, particularly the proportion of coarse and fine grains on a beach, should be measured in future monitoring studies following beach nourishment projects. Discriminant Analysis Results of a discriminant analysis performed usin g bulk density, water content, and grain size distribution (proportion of fine and coarse) as Y covariates and Nourished (Yes or No) as the X category resulted in a 24.7% misclassification. The Canonical plot (Figure 3 3) displays nonoverlapping normal 50 % contours for Y (nourished) versus N (non nourished) using these properties. Because using only these properties yielded results similar in accuracy to results obtained using all properties measured (23.6% misclassification), we conclude that of the prop erties we measured, bulk density, water content, and grain size distribution are the most important indicators of a nourished beach. Cape San Blas beaches, Alligator Point, and Bald Point were excluded from this analysis because these pairs of beaches hav e not yet been nourished (Table 3 2).

PAGE 43

43 Figure 3 1. Map of sampling locations along the Florida panhandle. Figure 3 2. Sampling regime for core sand sampling, shear resistance, and penetrometer readings.

PAGE 44

44 Figure 3 3. Canonical plot display of disc riminant analysis results including normal 50% contours for nourished (Y) versus non nourished (N).

PAGE 45

45 Figure 3 4. Graph of grain size distribution for all beaches, 2006 and 2007.

PAGE 46

46 Table 3 1. Sampling locations of correspond ing nourished and natural beaches included in this study. Nourished Beach Corresponding Natural Beach County (Florida) Alligator Pointe Bald Pointe Franklin Cape San Blas (near State Park) Cape San Blas (near lighthouse) Gulf Panama City Beach Camp Helen State Park Bay Okaloosa Island Henderson Beach State Park Okaloosa Sandestin Development Beaches Grayton Beach State Park Walton Pensacola Beach Langdon Beach Escambia Navarre Beach Santa Rosa Island Authority Santa Rosa Table 3 2. Timing and method of nourishment of nourished beaches included in this study. Nourished Beach Year(s) of Nourishment Nourishment Method Alligator Pointe N/A, Future nourishment plans exist Dredge Cape San Blas N/A, Future nourishment plans exist (May 2008) Dredge, Bags (near State Park) Private groin bags (unpermitted) after Hurricane Ivan Panama City Beach 1976, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1996, 1998, 2004, 2005 Dredge Okaloosa Island 2004 Dredge Sandestin Development Beaches 1986, 1987, 1988 Dredge Pensacola Beach 1986, 2003, 2005 Dredge Navarre Beach 2006 Dredge Table 3 3. Selection of statistical tests for comparing physical properties of sand on natural versus nourished beaches. Physical Property of Soil Normality Assumption Reasonable? Test Selected for Comparison Compaction No, left skewed Wilcoxon Sign-Rank Test Bulk Density Yes Paired t-test Water Content Yes Paired t-test Prop. Fine Grains Yes Paired t-test Prop. Coarse Grains Yes Paired t-test Shear Resistance No, too many zeroes Wilcoxon Sign-Rank Test Soil Color N/A, categorical variable Chi-Square

PAGE 47

47 Table 3 4. Differences in physical properties of sand on pairs of natural and nourished beaches. Physical Property of Soil Navarre Pensacola Panama City Okaloosa Sandestin* Cape Alligator Point 2006 Santa Rosa Langdon Camp Helen Henderson Grayton Cape Bald Point Compaction NS NS ** NS NS ** Bulk Density ** NS NS ** NS NS Water Content NS ** ** ** Prop. Fine Grains NS NS NS NS NS NS Prop. Coarse Grains ** NS NS NS NS Soil Color NS NS NS NS NS NS NS 2007 Compaction NS ** ** NS ** ** Bulk Density NS NS ** ** Water Content ** NS NS ** NS ** ** Prop. Fine Grains NS NS NS NS NS NS Prop. Coarse Grains ** NS NS ** NS NS Soil Color NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Shear Resistance NS NS NS NS ** ** *Year of Last Nourishment 2006 2005 2005 2004 1988 Future Plans Future Plans indicates p<0.05, ** indicates p<0.01, NS indicates no significant difference. Beach Pairs Compared

PAGE 48

48 Table 3 5. Differences in physical properties of sand on the same beach over the course of a season. Beach Navarre Beach Cape (Natural) Cape (Not Yet Nourished) Compaction ** ** NS Bulk Density NS NS NS Water Content ** NS NS Prop. Fine Grains ** NS NS Prop. Coarse Grains ** NS NS Soil Color NS NS NS Shear Resistance N/A NS NS Sampling Dates 7/10/06, 9/29/06 5/10/07, 8/12/07 5/11/07, 8/12/07 indicates p<0.05, ** indicates p<0.01, NS indicates no significant difference. Table 3 6. Mean color resu lts for northwest Florida beaches in 2006. Mean Color Values 2006 Beach Value (Dry) Chroma (Dry) Value (Wet) Chroma (Wet) Cape Natural 7.85 1.19 5.89 2.07 Cape Nourished 7.96 1.00 6.85 1.96 Alligator Point 8.00 2.00 6.88 2.31 Bald Point 7.81 1.67 6.67 2.30 Panama City 8.00 1.30 6.85 2.33 Camp Helen 8.00 1.07 7.00 1.52 Henderson 8.00 1.00 7.00 1.48 Okaloosa 8.00 1.00 7.00 1.19 Grayton 7.59 1.04 5.74 1.11 Navarre 8.00 1.00 7.00 1.93 Pensacola 8.00 1.00 7.00 1.85 Langdon 8.00 1.00 6.96 1.19 Sandestin 8.00 1.04 7.00 1.56 Santa Rosa 8.00 1.07 6.93 1.19 *Munsell Color Book, 10 YR Chart

PAGE 49

49 Table 3 7. Mean color results for northwest Florida beaches in 2007. Mean Color Values 2007 Beach Value (Dry) Chroma (Dry) Value (Wet) Chroma (Wet)Cape Natural 7.92 1.08 6.00 1.33 Cape Nourished 7.85 1.07 5.89 1.33 Alligator Point 8.00 1.22 6.00 1.85 Bald Point 7.59 1.96 5.81 2.96 Panama City 7.81 1.15 6.00 1.81 Camp Helen 8.00 1.00 6.15 1.07 Henderson 8.00 1.00 6.89 1.00 Okaloosa 8.00 1.00 6.89 1.00 Grayton 7.56 1.00 5.74 1.00 Navarre 8.00 1.00 6.59 1.44 Pensacola 8.00 1.00 6.63 1.15 Langdon 8.00 1.00 7.00 1.00 Sandestin 8.00 1.00 6.33 1.11 Santa Rosa 7.96 1.11 6.41 1.26 Table 3 8. Mean grain size results (% Passing) of each sieve size measured for northwest Florida beaches in 2006. 2006 Grain Size (average % Passing for each sieve size) Beach no. 18 no.35 no.60 no.140 no.325 pan Cape Natural0.9946 0.9833 0.7101 0.0032 0.0003 0.0014 Cape Nourished 0.9979 0.9920 0.4857 0.0009 0.0001 0.0012 Alligator Point 0.9951 0.9762 0.6154 0.0130 0.0001 0.0010 Bald Point 0.9834 0.8028 0.1396 0.0080 0.0024 0.0021 Panama City 0.9842 0.8934 0.3564 0.0034 0.0003 0.0014 Camp Helen 0.9911 0.8265 0.1398 0.0003 0.0000 0.0012 Henderson 0.9952 0.8038 0.0716 0.0002 0.0000 0.0015 Okaloosa 0.9959 0.8511 0.1236 0.0002 0.0000 0.0019 Grayton 0.9965 0.9329 0.2981 0.0020 0.0000 0.0010 Navarre 0.9557 0.7171 0.1212 0.0013 0.0003 0.0019 Pensacola 0.9713 0.7891 0.0849 0.0008 0.0002 0.0011 Langdon 0.9920 0.8330 0.1011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0010 Sandestin 0.9942 0.9148 0.2729 0.0008 0.0001 0.0009 Santa Rosa 0.9920 0.7315 0.0317 0.0002 0.0001 0.0012

PAGE 50

50 Table 3 9. Mean gr ain size results (% Passing) of each sieve size measured for northwest Florida beaches in 2007. 2007 Grain Size (average % Passing for each sieve size) Beach no. 18 no.35 no.60 no.140 no.325 pan Cape Natural 1.0009 0.9908 0.6602 0.0025 0.0001 -0.0023 Cape Nourished 0.9944 0.9774 0.4786 0.0012 0.0002 0.0002 Alligator Point 0.9913 0.9758 0.6195 0.0084 0.0000 0.0010 Bald Point 0.9901 0.8610 0.1820 0.0084 0.0023 0.0019 Panama City 0.9764 0.8850 0.3746 0.0043 0.0002 0.0015 Camp Helen 0.9925 0.8119 0.1079 0.0002 0.0000 0.0010 Henderson 1.0003 0.8909 0.0950 0.0001 0.0000 -0.0007 Okaloosa 0.9972 0.8861 0.1293 0.0000 0.0000 0.0010 Grayton 0.9987 0.9509 0.2205 0.0009 0.0000 0.0009 Navarre 0.9651 0.6804 0.0653 0.0005 0.0002 0.0002 Pensacola 0.9770 0.8188 0.0801 0.0005 0.0002 0.0011 Langdon 0.9883 0.7784 0.0738 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Sandestin 0.9937 0.9198 0.2465 0.0005 0.0001 0.0011 Santa Rosa 0.9857 0.7297 0.0358 0.0003 0.0001 0.0013 Table 3 10. ASTM standard sieve opening sizes (cm) for sieves used in this study. ASTM Sieve Number Size of Opening (cm) 18 0.1 35 0.05 60 0.025 140 0.0106 325 0.0045

PAGE 51

51 Table 3 11. Average bulk density (g/cm 3 ), water content, and compactio n (Newtons) results for northwest Florida beaches in 2006. 2006 Average Values Beach Bulk Density Water Content Compaction Cape Natural 1.62 0.20 290.19 CapeNourished 1.60 0.13 187.94 Alligator Point 1.60 0.23 167.73 Bald Point 1.62 0.09 67.21 Panama City 1.61 0.06 108.29 Camp Helen 1.60 0.06 75.67 Henderson 1.61 0.04 62.75 Okaloosa 1.61 0.05 71.52 Grayton 1.72 0.13 89.80 Navarre 1.65 0.04 104.69 Pensacola 1.63 0.04 101.87 Langdon 1.60 0.06 61.99 Sandestin 1.51 0.77 98.58 Santa Rosa 1.62 0.05 67.38 Table 3 12. Average bulk density (g/cm 3 ), water content, compaction (Newtons), and shear resistance results (Newton meters) for northwest Florida beaches in 2007. 2007 Average Values Beach Bulk Density Water Content Compaction Shear Resistance Cape Natural 1.49 0.14 167.37 17.41 Cape Nourished 1.60 0.09 76.31 11.45 Alligator Point 1.67 0.14 146.50 19.27 Bald Point 1.69 0.07 70.19 10.29 Panama City 1.65 0.06 105.20 11.00 Camp Helen 1.63 0.07 73.42 10.95 Henderson 1.63 0.05 58.69 11.21 Okaloosa 1.63 0.64 25.09 9.71 Grayton 1.70 0.63 70.21 12.81 Navarre 1.64 0.64 40.59 14.85 Pensacola 1.65 0.63 51.16 11.81 Langdon 1.63 0.64 32.21 11.97 Sandestin 1.67 0.64 65.50 14.51 Santa Rosa 1.67 0.04 53.88 11.33

PAGE 52

52 Table 3 13. Average values of all sand properties measured on natural, nourished, and all beaches. 2006 and 2007 Bulk Density Water Content Compaction Shear Resistance All Natural 1.64 0.18 64.60 11.65 All Nourished 1.62 0.36 77.25 12.38 All beaches 1.63 0.27 70.93 12.02 Value (Dry) Chroma (Dry) Value (Wet) Chroma (Wet) All Natural 7.91 1.03 6.58 1.18 All Nourished 7.98 1.05 6.73 1.54 All beaches 7.95 1.04 6.66 1.36 1mm 0.5mm 0.25mm 0.106mm and finer All Natural 0.99 0.83 0.12 0.00 All Nourished 0.98 0.84 0.19 0.00 All beaches 0.99 0.83 0.15 0.00 *Excludes Alligator Point, Bald Point, and Cape San Blas Beaches, which have not yet been nourished. Average Values Color Grain Size (average % Passing for each sieve size)

PAGE 53

53 CHAPTER 4 EFFECTS OF DIFFERENC ES IN PHYSICAL PROPE RTIES OF SAND ON LOG GERHEAD ( CARETTA CARETTA ) SEA TURTLE NESTING IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA Introduction In oviparous species, the hab itat in which eggs are deposited greatly influences the survival of the offspring and therefore could have significant consequences for the reproductive success of the adult ( M ARTIN 1988 H AYS AND S PEAKMAN 1993). Marine turtles evolved secondarily into an aquatic existence and have unique adaptations pertaining to the species habitat relationship ( E HRHART 1998). All marine turtles possess modified limbs or flippers that work nicely for swimming but are poorly suited for terrestrial locomotion; but beca use marine turtles have retained an oviparous reproductive strategy, their survival hinges on their ability to nest terrestrially ( P RITCHARD 1997). Nest site selection is an adaptive compromise between the cost of searching and the reproductive benefits of selecting a successful site for egg incubation ( W OOD and B JORNDAL 2000). Tagging studies reveal that most nesting female loggerheads come back to the same area in successive nesting seasons and that males and females return to resident foraging area s between reproductive migrations ( L IMPUS et al. 1992). However, adult site fidelity may not require natal homing. Neophyte nesting females may follow experienced breeders to a nesting beach and focus on that area for subsequent nesting efforts, a behav ior known as social facilitation ( O WENS et al. 1982). Using social facilitation, the nesting beaches in a particular region would be linked by gene flow, whereas using natural homing, individual nesting colonies would be genetically isolated by homing be havior ( B OLTEN and W ITHERINGTON 2003). Reproductively active female turtle s tend to exhibit nest site fidelity for beaches that over evolutionary time have possessed characteristics conducive to successful nesting ( C ARR 1986, W ITHERINGTON 1986 B OWEN et al. 1992 W EISHAMPEL et al. 2003). This behavior results in

PAGE 54

54 high reproductive success and offspring survival in contrast to random beach selection ( B JORNDAL and B OLTEN 1992 C RAIN et al. 1995). However, the evolution of a females ability to selec t or be more drawn to beaches on which their eggs would stand a better chance of survival has not been demonstrated. Turt les sometimes nest in media that produce zero hatching success and contain sands that are less than optimal for clutch survival ( M ORTI MER 1990). Therefore, coastal managers should be mindful of the physical characteristics of fill material used in beach nourishment projects. Haplotype frequencies of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) have been used to determine how precise natal homing behavior is in loggerhead turtles. Pearce found that most adjacent beaches do not have significantly different mtDNA haplotype frequencies (2001). However, study results did resolve three independent clusters of nesting beaches corresponding to the Florida panha ndle (Gulf of Mexico), southern Florida, and northeast Florida, with additional management units indicated for the Dry Tortugas and possibly Volusia County (north of Cape Canaveral). Pearce suggests that population partitions are evident in loggerhead nes ting habitats separated by 100+ km of inappropriate nesting habitat, providing an approximate benchmark for natal site fidelity (2001). Nesting habitats are most likely ephemeral over an evolutionary timescale, continually arising and disappearing due to changes in the physical environment (sea level, geography, and beach characteristics), global climate (glacial intervals), and biotic environment (nest predation or competition for nesting space). Because rookeries are transient over evolutionary time, ab solute natal homing would be a formula for extinction ( B OLTEN and W ITHERINGTON 2003). A large proportion of sea turtles nests occur on nourished beaches in the United States ( N ELSON and Dickerson 198 9 ), therefore, consideration and careful monitoring i n regards to the

PAGE 55

55 effects of nourishment practices on these threatened and endangered species is critical to beach restoration ( C RAIN et al. 1995). Typically, in the first season following a nourishment episode, loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nes ting success is adversely affected, but a return to near average levels is usually observed by the second or third season. Nesting success on nourished and natural beaches is more comparable when the physical characteristics of the beach become similar ( S TEINITZ et al. 1998). Hardened sediment can prevent a female sea turtle from successfully excavating a nest chamber or result in a poorly constructed nest cavity. If n esting does occur in hardened sediment, embryonic development within a nourished n est cavity can be adversely affected by insufficient oxygen diffusion and variation in moisture content levels inside the egg clutch ( A CKERMAN 1980, M ORTIMER 1990, A CKERMAN et al. 1992). The use of physically compatible fill material is necessary to minimiz e the detrimental effects of beach nourishment on sea turtles and their hatchlings. Beach compaction due to the use of fine grained sand may make it difficult for a female to excavate a nest. Conversely, sand that is too coarse could cause the nest to coll apse during excavation ( M ORTIMER 1990). Another important factor relevant to nesting success is the temperature of the sand in which the eggs incubate. The sex of turtle hatchlings is temperature dependent, with cooler temperatures producing a higher pro portion of males and warmer temperatures producing a higher proportion of females, and the temperature of the incubation environment is very dependent upon the color of the sediment ( M ROSOVSKY and Y NTEMA 1980). Consequently, a nourishment project that ut ilizes sediment that does not match the natural color of a particular beach could alter the sex ratio of the hatchlings, which could potentially impact the future breeding success of already threatened sea turtle species ( M ILTON et al. 1997).

PAGE 56

56 Homing by females designates each nesting colony as a demographically independent unit having a distinct sex ratio, age class structure, survivorship, and other demographic characteristics. Male mediated gene flow does not modify the status of nesting populations a s independent management units. In terms of management implications, it is helpful to consider the extreme situations: if all females at a nesting colony were killed, mtDNA data indicate that the nesting colony would die away. If all breeding males in an area were killed, nDNA data indicate that other males would quickly fill the void. Therefore, nesting populations are still the fundamental unit of sea turtle management ( B OLTEN and W ITHERINGTON 2003). Floridas panhandle has low levels of loggerhead ne sting relative to other areas within the state, but these turtles are important in terms of conservation and management because they are genetically distinct contributors to the overall Florida loggerhead population as mentioned above Taken together, dat a from mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and data from nuclear DNA (nDNA) indicate that females show site fidelity for a particular nesting region in the southeast United States, while males supply an avenue of gene flow between nesting locations ( P EARCE 2001). Male mediated gene flow facilitates strong connections between regional nesting colonies throughout the southeastern United States, passing on nuclear genes that mediate disease resistance, response to environmental challenges, and thousands of other key s urvival traits. Because of this gene flow, small nesting colonies such as those in the Florida panhandle do not suffer the bottleneck effects of reduced genetic diversity ( P EARCE 2001). This puts to rest c oncerns about inbreeding and any corresponding lo ss of genetic diversity for this population ( B OLTEN and W ITHERINGTON 2003)

PAGE 57

57 The objective of this study was to determine whether differences existed in physical properties of sand from natural versus nourished beaches, and if any differences observed had an impact on loggerhead sea turtle nesting in northwest Florida. Methods In summer 2006, 27 core soil samples per beach were taken on seven pairs of natural and nourished beaches along the Florida Panhandle. Compaction measurements were also taken at each sampling site using a cone penetrometer. Each core sample was dried for 16 hours at 105C in a gravity convection oven. Bulk density and water content of samples were calculated. Samples were transported to Gainesville, FL in an un iced cooler where th ey were analyzed on the basis of color (wet and dry basis) and grain size distribution under laboratory conditions. In summer 2007, methods of core sampling, compaction reading, and other analyses were repeated on all beaches. In addition, shear resistanc e measurements were taken alongside compaction readings using a digital torque wrench attached to a 2.5 times magnified shear vane developed for this study which was rotated over a 90 degree angle. Data on lo ggerhead sea turtle nest counts, nesting dens ity, false crawls, and hatching success on the study beaches were obtained from the Florida Marine Research Institute and examined for patterns that could be related to sand quality and nourishment status. There was insufficient data for statistical analys is of the sea turtle data, but observations were made about general trends. Two measures of nesting success were used. The first was nesting density, which was calculated as the number of nests per kilometer of beach. The second was false crawl to nest ratio, which was the number of false crawls divided by the number of nests. Two measures of hatching success were also examined. Hatching success was calculated as the number of eggs that hatched divided by the total number of eggs in the nest. Emerging success

PAGE 58

58 was calculated by subtracting the number of turtles dead in the nest from the number that hatched before dividing by the total number of eggs in the nest. Results and Discussion Differences in physical properties of sand on pairs of natural and no urished beaches were discussed in Chapter 3 and are summarized in Table 3 4. Table 4 1 shows the 2002 to 2006 loggerhead sea turtle nesting density for all pairs of beaches studied. Figure 4 3 displays these results graphically. Although nesting density was slightly lower on Panama City beach during the year of and the year following nourishment, other beaches did not experience this trend. Also, the lower levels observed on Panama City beach following the nourishment were not drastically lower than in the years preceding the nourishment. Table 4 2 gives nesting counts for all beach pairs studied between 2002 and 2006. Data dating back from 2002 indicate that 2006 was not a significantly low off year, but that it was instead in keeping with normal ne sting levels for these Florida panhandle beaches. The ratio of false crawls to nests is given in Table 4 3 and in Figure 4 4. False crawl to nest ratio was higher on Panama City beach during its nourishment year, but not on other beaches during their nou rishment years. The highest false crawl to nest ratio observed was seen on Langdon beach, a natural, dark, undeveloped beach where turtles were least likely to be disturbed by human causes. Because of the high and unexplained variability in false crawl t o nest ratios, examining false crawls may not be the best indicator of sea turtle nesting success on the beaches of northwest Florida. Hatching success is displayed in Table 4 4 and in Figure 4 1. Lower hatching success was observed on Pensacola and Pana ma City beaches during 2005, their nourishment year, but not on Okaloosa Island during 2004, its nourishment year. Hatching success varied widely among natural beaches, particularly where nesting counts were very low, but this parameter is important to me asure following a beach nourishment project to ensure that nourishment efforts are not creating a poor

PAGE 59

59 incubation environment. Emerging success, which is displayed in Table 4 4 and in Figure 4 2, was similar to hatching success on all beaches studied. Th ere was also a similar level of variability among the natural beaches. Emerging success did not appear to be severely lower than hatching success on any beach; therefore, beach nourishment does not appear to be contributing to a lower emerging success rel ative to hatching success on the beaches studied

PAGE 60

60 Table 4 1. Nesting Density of loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2006. Loggerhead Sea Turtle Nesting Density (# of nests per km of beach) Nourished*/Natural 2002 20032004 2005 2006 Navarre*/Santa Rosa No Data/0.38 No Data/1.35 0.00/0.96 0.00/0.58 0.00/0.19 Pensacola*/Langdon 0.30/0.34 0.44/0.81 0.52/0.58 0.67/0.26 0.52/0.45 Panama City*/Camp Helen 0.76/No Data 0.36/0.83 0.97/0.00 0.76/0.83 0.40/1.67 Okaloosa*/Henderson 0.07/0.00 0.59/0.45 0.37/0.91 0.74/0.91 0.29/0.45 Sandestin*/Grayton 0.88/0.79 0.93/1.05 0.56/1.05 0.50/1.32 0.50/0.00 Cape*/Cape 1.33/6.46 2.29/12.29 1.24/10.21 1.14/3.13 0.86/5.00 Alligator Point*/Bald Point 1.57/No Data 3.57/1.67 2.71/0.83 1.29/0.00 0.14/1.04 Table 4 2. Nest counts of loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2006. Loggerhead Sea Turtle Nesting Counts (# of nests) Nourished*/Natural 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Navarre*/Santa Rosa No Data/2 No Data/7 0/5 0/3 0/1 Pensacola*/Langdon 4/13 6/31 7/22 9/10 7/17 Panama City*/Camp Helen 21/No Data 10/1 27/0 21/1 11/2 Okaloosa*/Henderson 1/0 8/1 5/2 10/2 4/1 Sandestin*/Grayton 33/3 35/4 21/4 19/5 19/0 Cape*/Cape 14/31 24/59 13/49 12/15 9/24 Alligator Point*/Bald Point 11/No Data 25/8 19/4 9/0 1/5 Table 4 3. Ratio of false crawls to nests for loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2006. Loggerhead Sea Turtle False Crawl/Nest Ratio (# of false crawls/# of nests) Nourished*/Natural 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Navarre*/Santa Rosa No Data/0.50 No Data/0.14 0FC /0.40 1FC /2.00 0FC /0.00 Pensacola*/Langdon 0.25/0.69 1.00/1.10 0.71/0.59 0.67/4.40 1.57/3.24 Panama City*/Camp Helen 0.62/No Data 1.50/0.00 0.30/ 0FC 1.57/0.00 0.64/0.00 Okaloosa*/Henderson 2.00/ 0FC 0.75/0.00 0.40/0.00 0.80/0.50 0.25/2.00 Sandestin*/Grayton 0.64/0.33 0.63/0.50 0.52/0.75 1.68/0.40 0.79/ 2FC Cape*/Cape 1.43/2.19 1.21/1.49 1.15/1.39 0.75/3.80 1.78/2.96 Alligator Point*/Bald Point 1.55/No Data 2.64/0.63 0.95/9.75 2.44/ 7FC 4.00/5.00

PAGE 61

61 Table 4 4. Hatching success and emerging success of loggerhead sea turtles in northwest Florida from 2002 to 2005. 2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 2005 2005 Hatching Emerging Hatching Emerging Hatching Emerging Hatching Emerging *Year of Last Beach Success Success Success Success Success Success Success Success Nourishment Navarre* No Data No Data No Data No Data No Nests No Nests No Nests No Nests 2006 Santa Rosa 0.93 0.93 0.88 0.88 0.63 0.62 0.95 0.93 Pensacola* 0.81 0.81 0.82 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.66 0.66 2005 Langdon 0.65 0.65 0.76 0.76 0.71 0.71 0.53 0.53 Panama City* 0.83 0.82 0.54 0.53 0.68 0.68 0.16 0.15 2005 Camp Helen No Data No Data No Data No Data No Nests No Nests 0.00 0.00 Okaloosa* No Data No Data 0.68 0.68 0.96 0.96 0.37 0.37 2004 Henderson Beach No Nests No Nests 0.01 0.01 0.90 0.90 0.24 0.24 Sandestin* 0.72 0.71 0.65 0.63 0.69 0.68 0.45 0.42 1988 Grayton 0.84 0.83 0.14 0.14 0.45 0.44 No Data No Data Cape Nourished* 0.68 0.67 0.61 0.60 0.75 0.75 0.48 0.48 Future Plans CapeNatural 0.39 0.36 0.58 0.57 0.33 0.27 No Data No Data Alligator Point* 0.71 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.64 0.64 No Data No Data Future Plans Bald Point No Data No Data 0.78 0.72 0.86 0.86 No Nests No Nests

PAGE 62

62 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCL US IONS Because our findings suggest that sand compaction is not linearly correlated with shear resistance, we conclude that measuring shear resistance as a separate entity from beach compaction is critical. Measuring shear resistance provides additional in formation about the physical condition of sand placed on a beach during nourishment and may offer valuable insights from a sea turtle conservation management perspective. In order for the shear vane device to be implemented as a management tool following beach nourishment projects, future studies should be conducted. Studies should focus on higher density nesting beaches with a goal of obtaining a tolerable range of shear resistance levels for loggerhead sea turtles, both on the surface and at depth. If a tolerable range of shear resistance could be determined for nesting sea turtles on Florida beaches, guidelines could be established to promote a more suitable nesting habitat for sea turtles on nourished beaches. O ur shear vane device was a more useful tool at depth than on surface sand, particularly on nourished beaches, where surface readings registered a zero value 93% of the time. These results may be improved by using a range of different shear vane sizes and perhaps pairing them with more or less sensitive torque wrenches, depending on the size of the shear vane used. Using different sized torque wrenches and shear vanes may combat the problem of the lower detectability limit observed for shear resistance measurements in this study. Overall, bea ch nourishment practices in northwest Florida seem to be compatible with loggerhead sea turtle ne s ting ; and implementing shear resistance measurements as an additional parameter to examine following a beach nourishment project would provide useful informat ion to coastal managers Other properties measured including compaction, bulk density, grain size distribution, water content, and soil color, also provide useful information and should be

PAGE 63

63 included in management protocol following a beach nourishment proj ect. Hatching success and emerging success seem to be good indicators of the suitability of the incubation environment for loggerhead sea turtles, while nesting density appears to be a more useful indicator of nesting success on a particular beach than do es the false crawl to nest ratio.

PAGE 64

64 LIST OF REFERENCES A CKERMAN R.A., 1980. Physiological and ecological aspects of gas exchange by sea turtle eggs. American Zoology 20, 575 583. A CKERMAN R.A., R IMKUS R., and H ORTON R., 1992. Hydric structure and cli mate of natural and renourished sea turtle nesting beaches along the coast of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida Department of Natural Resources A CKERMAN R.A., 1997. The nest environment and the embryonic development of sea turtles. In: L UTZ P.L. and M USICK J.A. (eds.), The Biology of Sea Turtles. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Inc., pp. 83 106. B JORNDAL K.A. and B OLTEN A.B., 1992. Spatial distribution of green turtle ( Chelonia mydas ) nests at Tortuguero, Costa Rica. Copeia 1992, 45 53. B O LTEN A.B. and W ITHERINGTON B.E. (eds.), 2003. Loggerhead Sea Turtles. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Books, 319p. B OWEN B.W., M EYLAN A.B., R OSS J.P., L IMPUS C.J., B ALAZS G.H., and A VISE J.C., 1992. Global population structure and natural history of the green turtle ( Chelonia mydas ) in terms of matriarchal phylogeny. Evolution 46, 865 881. B ROADWELL A.L., 1991. Effects of beach nourishment on the survival of loggerhead sea turtles. Boca Raton, Florida: Florida Atlantic University, Masters the sis, 42p. B USTARD H.R., 1973. Sea turtles: natural history and conservation. New York, New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 220p. C ARR A. and O GREN L., 1960. The ecology and migrations of sea turtles, 4. The green turtle in the Caribbean Sea. Bul letin of American Museum of Natural Hisotry 121(1), 1 48. C ARR A., 1986. Rips, FADs, and little loggerheads. Bioscience, 36, 92 100. C ARTHY R.R., 1996. The role of the eggshell and nest chamber in loggerhead turtle ( Caretta caretta ) egg incubation. G ainesville, Florida: University of Florida, Ph.D. thesis, 121 pp. C OOPER H., 1998. Public Notice: Biological Opinion for Panama City Beach Nourishment. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service C RAIN D.A., B OLTEN A.B., and B JORNDAL K.A., 1995. Effects of beach nourishment on sea turtles: review and initiatives. Restoration Ecology 3, 95 104. D EAN R.G. 2002. Beach Nourishment: theory and practice River Edge, New Jersey: World Scientific Publishing Company, Advanced Series on Ocean Engineering, 18, 420p. D OUGLAS S.L., 2002. Saving Americas beaches: the causes of and solutions to beach erosion. River Edge, New Jersey: World Scientific Publishing Company, 91p.

PAGE 65

65 E COLOGICAL A SSOCIATES I NC 1998. FIND Beach Nourishment Proj ect: results of the 1998 sea turtle monitoring, Jupiter Island, Florida. Vero Beach, Florida: Ecological Associates, Inc., Report to Coastal Technology Corp. 26p. E HRENFELD D.W., 1970. Biological Conservation. Chicago, Illinois: Holt, Rinehart, and Win ston Inc., 219p. E HRHART L.M., 1995. The relationship between marine turtle nesting and reproductive success and the beach nourishment project at Sebastian Inlet, Florida, in 1994. Melbourne, Florida: University of Central Florida, Technical Report to t he Florida Institute of Technology 55p. E HRHART L.M. 1998. Habitat protection revisited: debunking the Noah solution. In: Epperly, S.P. and Braun, J. (compilers), Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Sea Turtle Symposium. NOAA Technical Memorandum NM FS SEFSC 415 46 49. E HRHART L.M., and H OLLOWAY A DKINS K.G., 2000. Marine Turtle Nesting and Reproductive Success at Patrick Air Force Base; Summer, 2000. Orlando, Florida: University of Central Florida, Final Report to US Air Force Eastern Space and M issile Center; Patrick Air Force Base, Florida 45p. E HRHART L.M. and R AYMON d, R.W., 1983. The effects of beach restoration on marine turtles nesting in South Brevard County, Florida. Jacksonville, Florida: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 47p. E HRHART L.M. and R OBERTS K.A., 2001. Marine Turtle Nesting and Reproductive Success at Patrick Air Force Base; Summer, 2001. Orlando, Florida: University of Central Florida, Final Report to US Air Force Eastern Space and Missile Center; Patrick Air Force Base, Florida 58p. ELE I NTERNATIONAL 2004. Operating Instructions, Proving Ring Penetrometer, Model 29 3739 (CN 970). Loveland, Colorado: ELE International, Inc., 8p. F LETEMEYER J., 1981. Sea turtle monitoring project. Fort Lauderdale, Florida: Report to B roward County Environmental Quality Control Board, 82p. H ANSON J.; W IBBELS T., and M ARTIN R.E., 1998. Predicted female bias in sex ratios of hatchling loggerhead sea turtles from a Florida nesting beach Canadian Journal of Zoology 76, 1850 1861. H AY S G.C. and S PEAKMAN J.R., 1993. Nest placement by loggerhead turtles, Caretta caretta. Animal Behavior 45(1), 47 53. H ENDRICKSON J.R., 1982. Nesting behavior of sea turtles with emphasis on physical and behavioural determinants of nesting success or failure. In: Bjorndal, K.A. (ed.) Biology and Conservation of Sea Turtles. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 53 57.

PAGE 66

66 H UGHES G.R., 1974. The sea turtles of southeast Africa. 1. Status, morphology, and distribution. Oceanographic Research Institution Investigative Republic of Durban, 35, 1 144. J OHANNES R.E. and R IMMER D.W., 1984. Some distinguishing characteristics of nesting beaches of the green turtle Chelonia mydas on North West Cape Peninsula, Western Australia. Marine Bio logy 83, 149 154. J ONES S.R. and M ANGUN W.R., 2001. Beach Nourishment and Public Policy after Hurricane Floyd: Where do we go from here? Ocean & Coastal Management 44 (2001), 207 220. K RIEBEL D.L., W EGGEL J.R.J., and D ALRYMPLE R.A., 2003. Indep endent Coastal Engineering Study of Canaveral Harbor and the Brevard County Shore Protection Project. In: Tait, L.S. (compiler), Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology, Tallahassee, Florida. L IMPUS C.J., M ILLER J.D., P ARMENTER C.J., R EIMER D., M C L ACHLAN N., and W EBB R., 1992. Migration of green ( Chelonia mydas ) and loggerhead ( Caretta caretta ) turtles to and from eastern Australian rookeries. Wildlife Research 19:347 358. L UCAS L. and P ARKINSON R. 2002. Rationale for evaluation the design and function of monitoring programs undertaken in association with the nourishment of Floridas marine turtle nesting beaches. In: Mosier, A., Foley, A., and Brost, B. (compilers). Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation. Orlando, Florida: NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS SEFSC 477 77 79. M AKOWSKI C. and R USENKO K., 2007. Recycled glass cullet as an alternative beach fill material: results of biological and chemi cal analyses. Journal of Coastal Research 23(3) 545 552. M ANN T.M., 1978. Impacts of developed coastline on nesting and hatchling sea turtles in southeastern Florida. Florida Marine Research Publication 33, 53 55. M ARTIN T.E., 1988. Nest placemen t: implications for selected life history traits, with special reference to clutch size. American Naturalist, 132, 900 910. M C G EHEE M.A., 1979. Factors affecting the hatching success of loggerhead sea turtle eggs: ( Caretta caretta caretta ). Orlando, Fl orida: University of Centeral Florida, Masters thesis, 252p. M ILLER J.D., L IMPUS C.J., and G ODFREY M.H., 2003. Nest site selection, oviposition, eggs, development, hatching, and emergence of loggerhead turtles. In: B OLTEN A.B. and W ITHERINGTON B.E. ( eds.), 2003. Loggerhead Sea Turtles. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Books, pp.125 143. M ILTON S.L., S HULMAN A.A., and L UTZ P.L., 1997. The effect of beach renourishment with aragonite versus silicate sand on beach temperature and loggerhead sea turtle nesting success. Journal of Coastal Research 13, 904 915.

PAGE 67

67 M IZZI J., 2005. Hurricane Ivan Emergency Beach Restoration. Panama City, Florida: Federal Emergency Management Agency M ORREALE S.J., R UIZ G.J., S POTILA J.R., and S TANDORA E.A., 1982. Tem perature dependent sex determination: current practices threaten conservation of sea turtles. Science 216, 1245 1247. M ORTIMER J.A., 1982. Factors influencing beach selection by nesting sea turtles. In: Bjorndal, K.A. (ed.) Biology and Conservation o f Sea Turtles. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 45 51. M ORTIMER J.A., 1990. The influence of beach sand characteristics on the nesting behavior and clutch survival of green turtles ( Chelonia mydas ). Copeia 1990, 802 817. M ROSOVSKY N. and P ROVANCHA J., 1989. Sex ratio of hatchling loggerhead sea turtles hatching on a Florida beach. Canadian Journal of Zoology 67, 2533 2539. M ROSOVSKY N. and P ROVANCHA J., 1992. Sex ratio of hatchling loggerhead sea turtles: data and estimates from a 5 year study. Canadian Journal of Zoology 70, 530 538. M ROSOVSKY N. and Y NTEMA C.L., 1980. Temperature dependence of sexual differentiation in sea turtles: implications for conservation practices. Biological Conservation 18, 271 280. M ROSOVSK Y N., B APTISTOTTE C., and G ODFREY M.H., 1998. Validation of incubation duration as an index of the sex ratio of hatchling sea turtles. Canadian Journal of Zoology 77, 831 834. M URPHY T.M., and H OPKINS S.R., 1984. Aerial and ground surveys of marin e turtle nesting beaches in the southeast region Miami, Florida: Report to U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. N ELSON D.A. and D ICKERSON D.D., 1989. Comparison of loggerhead sea turtles nesting times on nourished and natural beaches. Vick sburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. N ELSON D.A., M AUCK K.A., and F LETEMYER J., 1987. Physical effects of beach nourishment on sea turtle nesting, Delray Beach, Florida. Vicksburg, Mississippi: USACE Waterways Experimental Station, Technical Report EL 87 15, 56p. N EW Z EALAND G EOTECHNICAL S OCIETY 2001. Guidelines for hand held shear vane test New Zealand: New Zealand Geotechnical Society, 10p. O LSEN E.J. and B ODGE K.R., 1991. The use of aragonite as an al ternate source of beach fill in southeast Florida. In: Proceedings of Coastal Sediments 91, American Society of Civil Engineers (Seattle, Washington), pp. 2130 2145.

PAGE 68

68 O WENS D.W., G RASSMAN M.A., and H ENDRICKSON J.R., 1982. The imprinting hypothesis an d sea turtle reproduction. Herpetologica 38, 124 135. P ACKARD G.C. and P ACKARD M.J., 1988. The physiological ecology of reptilian eggs and embryos. In: Gans, C. and Huey, R.B. (eds.), Biology of the Reptilia. Vol. 16, Ecology B. Defense and Life His tory. New York, New York: Alan R. Liss, pp. 523 605. P ARKINSON R.W. and B RANTLY R., 2000. Physical monitoring workshop: survey results and summary. Marine Turtle Newsletter 89, 17 20. P EARCE A.F., 2001. Contrasting population structure of the logge rhead turtle ( Caretta caretta ) using mitochondrial and nuclear DNA markers. Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida, Masters Thesis, 72p. P IATKOWSKI D., 2002. Effects of beach nourishment on the nesting environment of loggerhead sea turtles (Carett a caretta). Wilmington, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Wilmington, Masters Thesis, 56p. P ILKEY O.H., 1991. Coastal erosion. Episodes, 14(1), 46 51. P RITCHARD P.C.H., 1997. Evolution, phylogeny, and current status. In: L UTZ P.L. an d M USICK J.A. (eds), The Biology of Sea Turtles. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Inc., pp. 1 28. P ROVANCHA J.A. and E HRHART L.M., 1987. Sea turtle nesting trends at Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida, and relationships with factors influencing nest site selection. In: W ITZELL W.N. (ed.), Ecology of East Florida Sea Turtles, Proceedings of the Cape Canaveral, Florida Sea Turtle Workshop Miami, Florida. 26 27 February 1985, NOAA Technical Report NMFS 53, 33 44. R AYMOND P.W., 1984. Effects of beach restoration on marine turtle nesting in south Brevard County, Florida. Orlando, Florida: University of Central Florida, Masters thesis, 121p. S OUTHWICK C.H., 1996. Global ecology in human perspective New York, New York : Oxford University Press, 392p. S ALMON M., R EINERS R., L AVIN C., and W YNEKEN J., 1995. Behavior of loggerhead sea turtle on an urban beach. I. Correlates of nest placement. Journal of Herpetology 29, 560 567. S CHMITT M.A. and H AINES A.C., 2003. Beach Nourishment: The Magic Bullet for Georgia's Shore? In: Hatcher, K.J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 2003 Georgia Water Resources Conference. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia, Institute of Ecology. S OUTHWICK C.H., 1996. Global ecology in human pe rspective New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 392p.

PAGE 69

69 S TANYCK S.E. and R OSS J.P., 1978. An analysis of sand from green turtle nesting beaches on Ascension Island. Copeia 1978, 93 99. S TEINITZ M.J., S ALMON M., and W YNEKEN J., 1998. Beach renourishment and loggerhead turtle reproduction: a seven year study at Jupiter Island, Florida. Journal of Coastal Research, 14, 1000 1013. S TONEBURNER D.L. and R ICHARDSON J.I., 1981. Observation on the role of temperature in loggerhead turtle nest si te selection. Copeia 1981, 233 241. W ALTON T.L., 1978. Coastal erosion some causes and some consequences (with special emphasis on the state of Florida). Marine Technology Society Journal 12(4), 29 33. W EISHAMPEL J.F., B AGLEY D.A., E HRHART L.M., and R ODENBECK B.L., 2003. Spatiotemporal patterns of annual sea turtle nesting behaviors along an east central Florida beach. Biological Conservation 110, 295 303. W IBBELS T., M ARTIN R.E., O WENS D.W., and A MOSS M.S., 1991. Female biased sex ratio of immature loggerhead sea turtles inhabiting the Atlantic coastal waters of Florida. Canadian Journal of Zoology 69, 2973 2977. W ILLIAMS W ALLS N., OH ARA J., G ALLAGHER R.M., W ORTH D.F., P EARY B.D., and W ILCOX J.R., 1983. Spatial and temporal tre nds of sea turtle nesting on Hutchinson Island, Florida, 1971 1979. Bulletin of Marine Science 23, 55 66. W ITHERINGTON B.E., 1986. Human and natural causes of marine turtle clutch and hatchling mortality and their relationship to hatchling production o n an important Florida nesting beach. Orlando, Florida: University of Central Florida, Masters thesis, 141p. W ITHERINGTON B.E. 1992. Behavioral responses of nesting sea turtles to artificial lighting. Herpetologica 48, 31 39. W OLF R.E., S HOUP L.P. and P YLES W.T., 1986. 1986 sea turtle protection and nest monitoring program report. Boca Raton, Florida: City of Boca Raton Monitoring Report, 33p. W OOD D. and B JORNDAL K.A., 2000. Relation of temperature, moisture, salinity, and slope to nest sit e selection in loggerhead sea turtles. Copeia, 2000, 119 128.

PAGE 70

70 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH As a child, Lori always had a deep appreciation for the beauty and uniqueness of t he worlds oceans. At age 12, she became a certified scuba diver with her dad, and o ver the years she has become passionate about conserving the underwater environment and its inhabitants. In 2004, Lori was a sea turtle intern for the Bald Head Island Conservancy in North Carolina. That same year, Dr. Dean Hesterberg, a soil scientist a t N.C. State University, allowed her to work in his lab on an undergraduate research project and subsequently helped her develop a second project aimed at examining effects of beach nourishment on sea turtles. His efforts were probably the driving force b ehind Loris desire to pursue a career in science. Lori rec eived undergraduate degrees in biological sciences and b otany from North Carolina State University in 2005 and began applying to graduate schools with the hope of landing a sea turtle project. Dr Ray Carthy responded to her request and has provided outstanding mentoring and guidance throughout her tenure at the University of Florida. Upon graduation, Lori will be seeking employment in her field and hope s to make a positive difference in the futu re of our natural resources.


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101203_AAAADS INGEST_TIME 2010-12-03T21:19:36Z PACKAGE UFE0022257_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 1053954 DFID F20101203_AABNZK ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH brinn_l_Page_49.tif GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
13f00896253376617f4c748c44de0209
SHA-1
50178844c72b44f10aff9a9170c4d378b8b03c11
12283 F20101203_AABOBK brinn_l_Page_09.QC.jpg
fa0c145216afddd6f9a667576c17ab09
a0f17a870a94c7290f4dfd7a9733883cdd4a61b6
77832 F20101203_AABNUN brinn_l_Page_33.jpg
b5a260b1ac04d59716ea22f0f31b297b
8877c86335f09a9caef216dbd68639bcb7dfa340
F20101203_AABNZL brinn_l_Page_50.tif
a4087839a97d6c6f20e3b7b047b17b2f
29f2c51bb6996d31d0617f56334ef01f2cdeed04
27008 F20101203_AABOBL brinn_l_Page_17.QC.jpg
ea2a6d71d13d0453e3ab57fbd54affca
a24f333e61589e3ba00b427bbfc927fc53304666
73819 F20101203_AABNUO brinn_l_Page_34.jpg
a8679771bdad572c4f41916082aa0412
cf440840f1f974efb5c5860f1de5a040f721dd5d
F20101203_AABNZM brinn_l_Page_51.tif
5688ba1264a35a29564fe1e67c7b8d94
b987706463bceb6cd3a9691fc035510bc3288092
4529 F20101203_AABOBM brinn_l_Page_43thm.jpg
6abaae8e47e4c0b6094908aac12dd407
fd97efbe16cc06a8576d32a6d62f39866ab8d686
76356 F20101203_AABNUP brinn_l_Page_36.jpg
b0e8999cc710a19a45bd0f272eef774d
b217620a8f1f82d6c46c0e0e8906ba29b4dd647c
F20101203_AABNZN brinn_l_Page_52.tif
80c2f0cee87e3f83b7e7e5eb1e547049
4b9e52da4c3fcd2ce6bf3082e9e6414814026fed
25649 F20101203_AABOBN brinn_l_Page_40.QC.jpg
131842f74541aaf5b892ac28d22afd66
ba1fd585c61f4050996b8f2b8f16ae2b098f2c81
F20101203_AABNZO brinn_l_Page_55.tif
ab20a0c402c7c6f2bdd8d35be740ff64
ae282748d80dbbcadefa3ea28bfbf70a2da65cdc
7168 F20101203_AABOBO brinn_l_Page_17thm.jpg
11db0a25606a654d01346e9138d881dc
516db79fa8da6b09be9009172d1d233ba9a16819
73883 F20101203_AABNUQ brinn_l_Page_37.jpg
d83e4c3129c4e11a074d9b3b2eda02ca
4a9e611ff75ec9984fb1bd4a044a9dc4f93c684f
F20101203_AABNZP brinn_l_Page_56.tif
7d765a14bba2bf7c705d90ccfb55f74d
ea18cc0a9636e1df168676f177d9f3a4976556c6
26138 F20101203_AABOBP brinn_l_Page_33.QC.jpg
8277a1b63bd652afad2cd72774a0bca5
b78f4314af819ab30c16cbc74870d68f8252b0e9
74392 F20101203_AABNUR brinn_l_Page_39.jpg
c0204ae883a7f68d80e01f4a687e1ae4
e318628820f636446198cacf981ca5e0d82ea2bb
F20101203_AABNZQ brinn_l_Page_58.tif
9d61a7fa6f53ed419b388e403e7c7751
4f956a216cffb408d26f4b6a00d8ffc50d6f524f
23891 F20101203_AABOBQ brinn_l_Page_38.QC.jpg
5dbac2c430932b06bcc1f0f8ba046df8
734d9884642e94ebaa96694dbf4861dd82834ca1
77339 F20101203_AABNUS brinn_l_Page_40.jpg
2989892ce6eb04cd94605f1048f855e3
f3435c03b6144cfc7ecd83179a5122138953530e
F20101203_AABNZR brinn_l_Page_60.tif
d28982cbfe89c759dca5b6383a78938b
ca6f497b126dbaaadf52ab9c23b966501f79478e
26060 F20101203_AABOBR brinn_l_Page_68.QC.jpg
a772dcc0fb993b6f5ac8ca66f19b9cd0
5cf5ec9778581f84ea55b1a6d26f399be38d73b5
79073 F20101203_AABNUT brinn_l_Page_42.jpg
fffa2a0978ccadce0cf1dc09794c698c
bb2418d5c4520b47da46cc64a43cfbde0bd353ec
1054428 F20101203_AABNZS brinn_l_Page_61.tif
0c457ae636e0c2bb26441662eff6285f
bf5e255aebb4f4b3063e4bb7379bdb87267d8259
3038 F20101203_AABOBS brinn_l_Page_02.QC.jpg
ae90dae7f34c0b3741e6706fafd56f23
faf863ef591e2ea86014988c3e5ac14eaf0cea7d
49169 F20101203_AABNUU brinn_l_Page_43.jpg
47cae700068e4c592ba5882436e3428e
14ad90ede9d7fa778cac00e6a1b3054c6894168f
F20101203_AABNZT brinn_l_Page_62.tif
83470b5cd527dc060c375019540ff23a
dde582c0d28ce6c4d353dffa0f3cd3cd328342d8
7359 F20101203_AABOBT brinn_l_Page_66thm.jpg
17d6e01eda602e3be99f27ea7421bd2f
d453e927edecf08475d58b6b940559e7c2814941
31005 F20101203_AABNUV brinn_l_Page_45.jpg
902354951c396feb443627a5afe83211
3cee6d1c13fb0fff4370e3ae86b1971b00f154f7
F20101203_AABNZU brinn_l_Page_63.tif
5d4e7f1c98a8950652f31b5e25a8cc97
8ba8156ae4d15e76e609c7351767e1b8c4146160
6753 F20101203_AABOBU brinn_l_Page_54thm.jpg
59486c07c1ec0d7eab2f89a06c7f6eaf
d5cbbac964afae66b139d9b80210316b5907cd82
63407 F20101203_AABNUW brinn_l_Page_46.jpg
9fac88ef8274d8b1d41ec5cc19384d86
f45df25ac8c4751b46c943cc5e427c6f4582ada7
7207 F20101203_AABOBV brinn_l_Page_65thm.jpg
29751991eed324cb83aa77fd409b66ae
fb5c6ee93b7eb302ee2349441514977b3c9706fc
32601 F20101203_AABNUX brinn_l_Page_47.jpg
53d329077c54b4baca05cf3e27b5e949
0a698b690808ffd503cb598f350492500637cdad
F20101203_AABNZV brinn_l_Page_64.tif
c447ae661d17d45d56f51655c124c398
cdd68c56e3c9ad51986c47af2acab47294073017
7054 F20101203_AABOBW brinn_l_Page_21thm.jpg
1da2cf576b2cbe51da896a2fda5997d7
3fabe491db14f7ff7a1d44367b839e068dc2c495
126316 F20101203_AABNSA brinn_l_Page_27.jp2
a9fba930c70ac9e13e57fa9271544d8e
445ad27106c7498ad74d0fb0a255dc6780ae2926
51779 F20101203_AABNUY brinn_l_Page_48.jpg
ff53f9d360bbf57bf58542234903c5df
be333623c0bac56ad6138009efd8b6aa1bea0943
F20101203_AABNZW brinn_l_Page_66.tif
9d49cd1102b258bb4ecf5da995d40e0e
c820b5b91a582887cbe3aa96a666dea159677ec4
17719 F20101203_AABOBX brinn_l_Page_51.QC.jpg
5ece25d1bcb2218ee8cafd0472392eed
6023b49056797ba3122eea8b1efcd450629719f1
143695 F20101203_AABNSB brinn_l_Page_65.jp2
f39372b5148db30eae95ab4a5c6c8229
3706634eacc2f407611e1244bee6b6365b169e6e
70732 F20101203_AABNUZ brinn_l_Page_49.jpg
a14e4698a6b1e1486cabff75d67bf5f0
f3c71d1df449d1fdaf719b3e671a4d85378232a4
F20101203_AABNZX brinn_l_Page_67.tif
a0bd5fa8b9c87c6ad8f87de986227858
f106d16faf16671df0b454d08f4937af25368ceb
7106 F20101203_AABOBY brinn_l_Page_41thm.jpg
e527be49c9fb2aa8c07c1a04553181a7
713ca12e3c078322860333e2c55618fe6c283833
6606 F20101203_AABNSC brinn_l_Page_03.jp2
ba4f7511a0db0ea2c831463405a22804
d8f2810fc2324dd825d4fea88894d0c4c8bd2b1f
F20101203_AABNZY brinn_l_Page_69.tif
423c7d305be6199cfc1a8d940bafe928
9faca65f278664edf1cbff43b03465b3c3ac7406
26099 F20101203_AABOBZ brinn_l_Page_67.QC.jpg
03f70c01e492cd594e45ad3c82c33d47
e6395e6c41162966046f5d1dfe6a00bf1aac9cc7
4488 F20101203_AABNSD brinn_l_Page_24thm.jpg
db9d8490510efcccb80cca20fdafc600
15a3bba1d75f16fb705f875b1bb7bcf5a0fc08f6
415851 F20101203_AABNXA brinn_l_Page_44.jp2
84da28fb61a55281cec32d0198370871
8216f0b760f478e9b2212e1c28c3a6636edee71a
F20101203_AABNZZ brinn_l_Page_70.tif
3730b72ef2ee236f0affeca90b5b2ea9
9a27b1643b717a3d65ae98e1c5be285dc38d56d4
23960 F20101203_AABNSE brinn_l_Page_22.QC.jpg
d38feba311ab26c7d25c2b0c61db13dd
8921289bd4c78514e40d868dcb854547dccfd0fa
849909 F20101203_AABNXB brinn_l_Page_45.jp2
76dbbd164246978d6d51482ff042a7fe
5978f06a9621bc361d0a16cbb08dc17fd37c2375
48544 F20101203_AABNSF brinn_l_Page_25.jpg
a55502147b5bed5ab44d4076081ef942
39c4f7427bd6cc68edc7e539b2d938baaac743c5
90985 F20101203_AABNXC brinn_l_Page_46.jp2
f7bdfe7dc5bf7e51545f97414191a61b
8cf8981f7f2742efe80ce09e64256364e380da86
72732 F20101203_AABNSG brinn_l_Page_38.jpg
ded718bd2ce702cb501750f89835c616
6622126214d4d4437ebc5928b92aa0905b19cb99
7144 F20101203_AABOEA brinn_l_Page_58thm.jpg
5cefb64edb3782bd2a49aaade088f485
9b791f7cdda04fb72335d96b5395fc1094f462a3
588750 F20101203_AABNXD brinn_l_Page_47.jp2
73f7892ea116f1f5eb15b0fadabdc05f
d93191494e7bda09ae4f24afb7f3958b04d72c6e
5885 F20101203_AABNSH brinn_l_Page_05thm.jpg
ba8246205d59a8ad561aae454e9720f8
0fd8d17ab5b6ba5c0b1b16deaba5ff54ae529feb
77736 F20101203_AABOEB UFE0022257_00001.xml FULL
71c51eff419eaba849f57efa70ac8c16
5fae78f6ada9fece06f27a5ed7e931cd45542acc
75099 F20101203_AABNXE brinn_l_Page_50.jp2
00f58ab9388925aacde5d04711811ae3
9f7a84b385a262f44225c0c5cbe8a53f2a1a9e0b
F20101203_AABNSI brinn_l_Page_59.tif
4087cc46309601d3a2ef951d2e6d89f1
b0cd4e9eb43933b34a4e4c9528684ca356e509f4
6999 F20101203_AABOEC brinn_l_Page_07thm.jpg
4482047648fc50e1bae55a2a3c46e87a
45f3ba059db9de6ab81bc85704148735dc0a716e
79183 F20101203_AABNXF brinn_l_Page_51.jp2
7f9edad6c15e50c33fc92ddd8dfe4d3b
9707bbd63eec25dc29d04df610fbb7f4cfcc11e1
F20101203_AABNSJ brinn_l_Page_54.tif
13959176b34870a923a71f0d8c8cb7a0
3ff4907a26110e9b8cfad1851e3ceadadfd57181
22890 F20101203_AABOED brinn_l_Page_10.QC.jpg
e4e9224df25ba1482d92b0eb0c9e2149
0883aa6bbac49ba77718803b1e59604d0cc00006
118876 F20101203_AABNXG brinn_l_Page_53.jp2
4f1105959582d7562e2da362e5d50a46
47847a6ee2f3343cb3c79c902cb3041757bb02b3
1051973 F20101203_AABNSK brinn_l_Page_05.jp2
66c334c16231364a070e9ff77c2906e5
7adb80f6f1f3435e3bf92cf73f7ff8d17085bd30
6841 F20101203_AABOEE brinn_l_Page_20thm.jpg
069d779ce0521e569602a1c80eb78046
93ec774517d81eb9cc25fb23ba7525302fb9658b
115221 F20101203_AABNXH brinn_l_Page_54.jp2
c8487f33a312fdcb1a44917f13a76839
43b920075f4b63699a408fc2484d1a2471b9ec73
6820 F20101203_AABNSL brinn_l_Page_19thm.jpg
1c28551a20cda92fe1e41de13f2095df
09cb0cde40d044e1812d59a3cb8a9c70ebdd5869
2420 F20101203_AABOEF brinn_l_Page_23thm.jpg
8666ccda339a7f6f019cfeaea8589aa8
01932a61e3ea2fd80f491b69f5aa1a99fe142f64
115578 F20101203_AABNXI brinn_l_Page_55.jp2
66dfadeb3718eca89c1cb43632ab8a61
ed6b6cadd2dab84148396f8524240f579f63b4ea
25271604 F20101203_AABNSM brinn_l_Page_16.tif
10329902d9f4dce820e8a21e5b4e38f9
4e36aa820b66b6eb824063f3d459d5d84aa9d417
14608 F20101203_AABOEG brinn_l_Page_25.QC.jpg
31962b2c1dd36fba969a4f5e554c940d
e287999c95b5e06baa2e0091daf3e9e764f5d828
108563 F20101203_AABNXJ brinn_l_Page_56.jp2
602f387d67eaff4d6db1739089a75b7b
50b81dfe2e0a06f503dc90694311ee8fd3f361ef
152620 F20101203_AABNSN brinn_l_Page_66.jp2
7aa75318cb728650ac111fbeb10e9ed7
d0d4f94149b9bbdda034609122fdf96ca7999b42
25108 F20101203_AABOEH brinn_l_Page_34.QC.jpg
5c4f854c9515721ce743d30176798554
0b8b2f0859c8be51e961a1a303f8aa38168a5700
115346 F20101203_AABNXK brinn_l_Page_57.jp2
f09cbd96b41a34a20ce3b5253cc68798
9a8f835ae7d3202c0aa9da9a0e29814a8101086c
6921 F20101203_AABOEI brinn_l_Page_36thm.jpg
ead12cf414dc093517d7a142df5ec667
54b362b80857c7da0e76c56b190b84c8b3b346d3
121641 F20101203_AABNXL brinn_l_Page_58.jp2
894bf4f24cb605fedf10407357413a7b
91693934192cffd7fc6edff77fa80371cd3de815
2436 F20101203_AABNSO brinn_l_Page_28thm.jpg
d617be0b65fc5d4853b9b68159b29337
ca16e5539e0b0ca3f0aea5916791213ab8c31520
24869 F20101203_AABOEJ brinn_l_Page_37.QC.jpg
44aa1eec5f4819cb3a2305f9ed3a10a5
179ea880eda65f348f020e982191bd498d27ceb4
84066 F20101203_AABNXM brinn_l_Page_61.jp2
c4e889f61067f02fdc6b4edc0b172d92
b5b294bdb90f64c7dc6b4d4bbba48559ab71e6f6
6886 F20101203_AABNSP brinn_l_Page_39thm.jpg
1c8deddc18bd7cebd418eb7dcc2d019b
21a830e682eff7338eada3adf2a812ea302c6dcc
6575 F20101203_AABOEK brinn_l_Page_38thm.jpg
0cc511edce3b1e89422b46e7c71a32aa
2750493c7daa672d2182ab2ef0441c0f1545ec23
116380 F20101203_AABNXN brinn_l_Page_62.jp2
8c39bdcf1f5d2503d5767b1e850809b0
62d24951a102af0303615f08fe8464f297324386
72764 F20101203_AABNSQ brinn_l_Page_70.jp2
3fa9b04bc9271f1899f5b574080cbaec
41a3426471f810e2b8942c2b68bb5b36879cd4bd
10007 F20101203_AABOEL brinn_l_Page_47.QC.jpg
49a07246d65212b865c8f3c324cb4341
55139793f1a86688cafc3ce2ca9fec455494992d
24120 F20101203_AABNXO brinn_l_Page_63.jp2
f2fb02ceef0b0d2d9cec66e1545c261f
bd5618a1dfe9ad4e937394c9a7c92201dc5081ef
26240 F20101203_AABNSR brinn_l_Page_35.QC.jpg
928365da2c9b969bbd7c00aab9cc2d80
b8b01d5a29cf94a5e4b2899f196a83a203e11584
3360 F20101203_AABOEM brinn_l_Page_47thm.jpg
5283638848b9f92f6c91b2bf4750a1f4
3869385a4b88970cfec1661ca92fd22af41adfeb
137974 F20101203_AABNXP brinn_l_Page_64.jp2
163754b9e3a4cad70099c6b33e3dca51
397c4ff98310b12213b80d52c1e7281be6983821
76018 F20101203_AABNSS brinn_l_Page_55.jpg
a940f6a5babc99f3b4e894517c1854bd
2c322adf595b21307feb1e6ee1eb1efab87064cd
16015 F20101203_AABOEN brinn_l_Page_50.QC.jpg
1b653651533231b256483ebde2ff382b
2bd47c06e3951d7ba24c133ec78e0180567db05a
137242 F20101203_AABNXQ brinn_l_Page_67.jp2
bc20af283955b424fa52d9a68cc7bb7f
080ec6397e58f2ac29abf4ac3b8148f5b94e5ee6
29911 F20101203_AABNST brinn_l_Page_59.jp2
6a1d29aa15e36e0b54b9a80713d6bec1
4389220d723399a026dd0e27b5cdb67f2a0ec257
25215 F20101203_AABOEO brinn_l_Page_54.QC.jpg
0e2433e16257bfe3cae2b2a77d576e4b
3efd6316bdae7747e42678c1bb7a54f38071a433
136710 F20101203_AABNXR brinn_l_Page_68.jp2
21ddb3f53f4f8c93509ee51bffeaf70e
63ae612000eb7a8df6dab283403abc3e24864bf8
6764 F20101203_AABOEP brinn_l_Page_55thm.jpg
33fdf03373ec2bf22af13dcec9403597
96fffa37069df6d31f5925f2a2bdd6ae23211996
112578 F20101203_AABNXS brinn_l_Page_69.jp2
f4bab5500ab47e9298c6a4bf0e7e2203
df05069b004b69c1c983bdd88cea8dbd4be39fb1
80258 F20101203_AABNSU brinn_l_Page_58.jpg
80e79a9032f51e57b57dfc459ff63eb2
71de615790f601b0e78d86f8626f8a6d0941ec62
2438 F20101203_AABOEQ brinn_l_Page_59thm.jpg
4f52b48040cf6b3113e8210d4af1ba6c
32a2e135c5fadef1b0f325826cd5cf3ab55ae0c7
119764 F20101203_AABNSV brinn_l_Page_35.jp2
53309a521ec04ef32254921c0182db6e
f273dcbde345ac8983cd7a87e8400880fe95db4d
24916 F20101203_AABOER brinn_l_Page_60.QC.jpg
6a81f29036b668cabc98ba0b904d156b
08d4b21bae9e13c00a962f05111bf0d8be22840a
F20101203_AABNXT brinn_l_Page_01.tif
49d042576ba931d15f8fd6ed776656b2
868ea870fc7638eeafeedd5c86c2e97558ff7fe1
F20101203_AABNSW brinn_l_Page_57.tif
f94d2f50b3c9a07d294913a6b6393eb4
884b60f5efccd6351868ca604c72d42100ee7259
11985 F20101203_AABOES brinn_l_Page_61.QC.jpg
ea1dcbf9b0c33c41c757f70b10a0bf66
18882b32a974f9cd3b1ee5a2449a9b52a82b423a
F20101203_AABNXU brinn_l_Page_03.tif
56068cd5990d7ccb539587f96ea72fb3
cabcf78817813b3d3ae9b1074850a6179f5c149f
25124 F20101203_AABNSX brinn_l_Page_57.QC.jpg
595e41e7047c8d2fc7846f3e05c55d68
3f3196720869f206b99573f5de936ab218b5b992
2347 F20101203_AABOET brinn_l_Page_63thm.jpg
f52a7395c4c4c30dfa1f755e6ff883ee
47f1c7748e2eb96a0524552e44d50a7aba4ac123
F20101203_AABNXV brinn_l_Page_04.tif
88003735ba7858a875926a98071c24e7
9887d3d5fafc77891ccc1bf00a0bfc1131b14ac9
1051966 F20101203_AABNSY brinn_l_Page_07.jp2
345bfb8eb07cda9b1656bdc2ed9650de
d55ed4aac5619ea663992561c376c803fd875340
26720 F20101203_AABOEU brinn_l_Page_65.QC.jpg
715f18247b97d92f42b7b27503941cb9
6e9422970bc30ddcd476b3d857166036e93fcb38
F20101203_AABNXW brinn_l_Page_05.tif
7992911098c8d564152100f97c5668d7
120399209f91dc7cf169d45a7d6462f2bd6a6aa5
89223 F20101203_AABNSZ brinn_l_Page_16.jpg
79d21bbf2cda8cf5d070be9b24368a29
ebabeb0037736a82d8bc1da123b5b29ea1bd6d2f
6187 F20101203_AABOEV brinn_l_Page_69thm.jpg
850056518943b14d71054931e2669f07
42517b83288a96aba6a38f380015dddef3747376
F20101203_AABNXX brinn_l_Page_07.tif
6537e07cede8be8093a9d9a93038452f
26808f12eb33cdf801601deda57de972738f343b
53524 F20101203_AABNVA brinn_l_Page_50.jpg
13e842e14da9431eca726040bcafe032
5f14a0055dfb1e1b0fa1279248bb4ddf564708b4
F20101203_AABNXY brinn_l_Page_08.tif
f1b20c581ba8bf95c19d442511dc14fa
0ae2273dcfd619540a8b574a8885aa25cb2e3aca
58722 F20101203_AABNVB brinn_l_Page_51.jpg
3f7f2a6aa4ebe38b92645a49b7f80a71
459146f9321f27a18a9f140c8b95da644c00d84a
F20101203_AABNXZ brinn_l_Page_09.tif
1c0c2f89731ccd6fb0f6af97827d4a14
e9d42d68b6d1af093790148690b793d15c45a6fd
39081 F20101203_AABNVC brinn_l_Page_52.jpg
d4cae8e60262b4599a78c9d5d3b22e37
32fb4fe6d469f1bdc10c69ca9f3d5ef81167b481
79426 F20101203_AABNVD brinn_l_Page_53.jpg
4a59c5cd7199420cfb89a2577b1a992b
6541d4ddd66bfba482c0316b1c96604a96ff9457
6742 F20101203_AABOCA brinn_l_Page_22thm.jpg
1b62247b77564a0759cbd74d3192a8d1
f763199ffbd30da0f6b3c25d36d5f49226ae78f0
76128 F20101203_AABNVE brinn_l_Page_54.jpg
6ace4fab22681120b0c243ba4c575c0e
4db9b7b3368523e12f07f629f05e1ea5c3eaa83b
6874 F20101203_AABOCB brinn_l_Page_12thm.jpg
e0d2a9b574b1e77de9bc847c1b75d5e8
d2e57fe0b1e717f71cc9716b099379150bd60c15
72335 F20101203_AABNVF brinn_l_Page_56.jpg
439b69e14f1ae58259858013c08fc7a6
a3d61d4a5bce74dbf3e753416464f67d4ea47105
4731 F20101203_AABOCC brinn_l_Page_70thm.jpg
9594f0b622d5eda631df9e36efb6ef35
2189f5c16f15a07299a446fc02670088dcdcfeb8
74441 F20101203_AABNVG brinn_l_Page_57.jpg
953a2b9ea1ea85c141c228859618da72
ada5a8176abb16a73115ec64cbef29908f3a0dbe
26251 F20101203_AABOCD brinn_l_Page_21.QC.jpg
eace7de41e6691c4860aa5999d30df17
2b5af01394e6e9165bbd36bfd69513037c087b97
23372 F20101203_AABNVH brinn_l_Page_59.jpg
ff75c8b296945a9f92e2f1675bbe5776
be34380816af59f49ab99f7897a3896a7193ce4c
6804 F20101203_AABOCE brinn_l_Page_34thm.jpg
d658edddebe487e50e8944f7d5b64013
c19e13c9aab2d42f272b8afa39476593ff02bf11
85935 F20101203_AABNVI brinn_l_Page_60.jpg
ac2ee1d88979d9821a4884e0a6876f0c
9f0f896c5723dd727c2fecfe6a608422c75a62b0
26265 F20101203_AABOCF brinn_l_Page_42.QC.jpg
4e070863a6a5b3654cb6d7556a9cc1de
822bbca7f2818dfbac852074a494715a79fabe61
40320 F20101203_AABNVJ brinn_l_Page_61.jpg
8844d6f38e4d4f0919c305acd8e8d1cb
9393b95e3852550dd255c5bc60ea604d121610f8
1342 F20101203_AABOCG brinn_l_Page_02thm.jpg
19c084912fdb72c587d4bcc1e1e9938c
536ecc32717dd1acb54693dc8222dfc3f9de31ae
76139 F20101203_AABNVK brinn_l_Page_62.jpg
d341e89345e33566915a38ab1256c42d
15baf60cc02dd79af886f757e02a8f56e2e0776c
7570 F20101203_AABOCH brinn_l_Page_23.QC.jpg
e1a3abca776e9df94b355a24bee0c757
4aeb0587c1d52a48f792f782fa12b71d0bb9c533
20625 F20101203_AABNVL brinn_l_Page_63.jpg
9592da378cefb3df9a00080ac3a555c3
9a5958c7340d74fa66943bde68aa8ae44d828e33
7365 F20101203_AABOCI brinn_l_Page_28.QC.jpg
c7094a28071bdd411b76b3dc00d319be
73371de08242a0f8ff0ad3433962fb28dbaec2f6
86239 F20101203_AABNVM brinn_l_Page_64.jpg
e1844ded01a937600bdeb0eac4de8e56
8bd3d72863024d3be5bf873ecdbac769c908064b
5040 F20101203_AABOCJ brinn_l_Page_46thm.jpg
1eacd6453fcb87a44ae43ea8e511a0e4
ad8fbb6fbad076569e6fa5f8dcba7af42745dd46
95496 F20101203_AABNVN brinn_l_Page_65.jpg
77881c7287a7521a60864b01ab0bfb6e
a948edf081a5228978a62c0184dbaeae8787445a
6937 F20101203_AABOCK brinn_l_Page_68thm.jpg
2c82c7583f8b906f3d96315ba402c8e4
70e0f0cd200da3121675c6a684f66c8419ef170e
101932 F20101203_AABNVO brinn_l_Page_66.jpg
77cc4388d34c35aeaa419aab53a99f1a
b0334ffbb6d1bbd73ff404aa6cf26b03ab740a55
5459 F20101203_AABOCL brinn_l_Page_49thm.jpg
f90cbca2ebeec7c36854982ac6205b31
8dc1c3fc7fe4e17e19d0be986dae46b7ba681274
91384 F20101203_AABNVP brinn_l_Page_67.jpg
08d00b29dddd28223c2d6673c604a3ca
1f46b4cb24525eac259feae4a7165889eb9783a1
24522 F20101203_AABOCM brinn_l_Page_14.QC.jpg
2a2eb79b1303895183b81b70fd8e27b7
ed1356f55f24973ae12e83dc5865dd3593c46424
90223 F20101203_AABNVQ brinn_l_Page_68.jpg
ba395f8eb61386c7ed6cb3f93cb5d74b
1875e18623ca4ab872887b6b3fa1c94ccf710094
1400 F20101203_AABOCN brinn_l_Page_03thm.jpg
5c2f86c33144d12be99d98a06c32b574
ee69ed2e69ae3c5e6f47e9d979d482150420f504
6448 F20101203_AABOCO brinn_l_Page_18thm.jpg
3f083b0aae28cff106eccac90e9ae77a
469084b413354eb5c1a5dc8a2f8187ad847f2334
10680 F20101203_AABOCP brinn_l_Page_26.QC.jpg
8647412f393522867926b9f1bbf75218
df8025be8a24fc09bdbd5cf03e08d51db81945e6
79387 F20101203_AABNVR brinn_l_Page_69.jpg
c0d6d97e855b502a6a3ccaec0f60393a
343f6cd9bcacf400c04b9be7d196334765121c97
24367 F20101203_AABOCQ brinn_l_Page_39.QC.jpg
bcc8d5480642a158261c0af84f19aea7
1486ed0c00d61daaab638a97d09e2458b36ee818
51473 F20101203_AABNVS brinn_l_Page_70.jpg
5e5079266b04e078ca0b3decc113504d
3432950c35f8184f045ebeb7f5e14f0f437b0900
20740 F20101203_AABOCR brinn_l_Page_49.QC.jpg
a2a5cf1ed94d2f67c1dd6950b9f33e0a
a2b6da9ea767ab9f466a46efcc3843715adb83ea
29929 F20101203_AABNVT brinn_l_Page_01.jp2
1a37592c4f535c8816e788ef1ba038b9
74fd35f85701f22393ed2b4a2030653cb793731d
3519 F20101203_AABOCS brinn_l_Page_08thm.jpg
091cb9c8ed80edd2a4b875963a7b9b7f
23763e8678b6909b1c611cc60eee966896262961
4949 F20101203_AABNVU brinn_l_Page_02.jp2
ab7de964744c97fe2049c7f955959833
c3a1daaaabafa026f92828200dac9d520ba9acd1
7037 F20101203_AABOCT brinn_l_Page_62thm.jpg
63e3c00c963e51c83ad23846dcb9aca4
3ef236589989684e8ded54c5a4958820bb8f0744
58213 F20101203_AABNVV brinn_l_Page_04.jp2
875da9c98bf71348224dbbd9ed9d6e0d
1224026618034a48b56cc469e81f9cc10032538c
6280 F20101203_AABOCU brinn_l_Page_60thm.jpg
922adf59efe98027e9077f5cb2775ffc
bce161d13058955a8ecc056b20d03739fcd75d37
426271 F20101203_AABNVW brinn_l_Page_06.jp2
dd0b5b0e85f4be7c3200fb63ff4daf8c
d09422a33ea79ee4e455572a5bb7aa0f7ddcc7a0
7850 F20101203_AABOCV brinn_l_Page_59.QC.jpg
25905651241394e5f82a7c6260a0e740
69877202992a97c653c0761bfab99cab3df110b8
F20101203_AABNVX brinn_l_Page_08.jp2
34a4c5b8b8512975dcc328038bb2918d
1f2e74c0479ce4df8f0078d71b61f311089ce327
12500 F20101203_AABOCW brinn_l_Page_52.QC.jpg
eaa117052a1d0948824262b57438d31a
55633c9663b1d1cf7f82a431dc5e3d5ab34b1217
119167 F20101203_AABNTA brinn_l_Page_60.jp2
06f9c5153f8de3baf3d8f3d65976ac23
a1e081373f52f61448b35a8a7736a5154653a704
1043822 F20101203_AABNVY brinn_l_Page_09.jp2
88813e6fe0b2058416abcf54f9fdca64
3011cd7d038f48d4a02c9b9b06e04f51b984f25f
7165 F20101203_AABOCX brinn_l_Page_33thm.jpg
4a370bd9f24293fd52248bde720b9818
43a42141321107bd9bfa591d758b9cf32f8eca76
25657 F20101203_AABNTB brinn_l_Page_28.jp2
e14d237fd386826322a96b9c408e21ca
10ba765c48a39e02a144cf6a736a91a7ecf734de
107649 F20101203_AABNVZ brinn_l_Page_10.jp2
357d34330bd3630f794052f633f69420
c68d63a256c8c86aef23b18c19db15c9bc25f9f6
9764 F20101203_AABOCY brinn_l_Page_44.QC.jpg
05a2e4dab2db9c32db1bb9486b25a0ce
07d46b8e546eccf0c08b6328ec82c5a4c48f34e4
25727 F20101203_AABNTC brinn_l_Page_36.QC.jpg
60e5522fbcdb0a901e68540e2844fce4
696d89ae46bf5d587f299f3d65157076256faa5d
F20101203_AABNYA brinn_l_Page_10.tif
3770fd154894f379d65054da73a3977d
3a6052e4b5eb342a63aa1c7605355b69444d6e45
2525 F20101203_AABOAA brinn_l_Page_01thm.jpg
43a580bf1dbb1284f8841cc401d4c9df
4b00ff15660dc2bb97e03bf1deeefeed67a11c88
1768 F20101203_AABOCZ brinn_l_Page_29thm.jpg
7ddcc4065c8f008ae60ccaaea1a7857d
9fe4a80e9050a337a137034a3c67a3b123a92553
5326 F20101203_AABNTD brinn_l_Page_29.QC.jpg
4ac60147b7bce42d635810bb4e4106cc
1b4d1c2575095ef7b8906ed7655515f40383a1a2
F20101203_AABNYB brinn_l_Page_11.tif
42b82d0109f8ee89a90d716673a32029
d2a9944da25c67d206354aa0f076c8ec41f617b7
1584417 F20101203_AABOAB brinn_l.pdf
2c08cce26e587f116af6ee868262d176
c174032f081acd1e8a0c86c7f7846cfc2c673457
3202 F20101203_AABNTE brinn_l_Page_31thm.jpg
8175fbb35558803755deca628d3d78c6
59f0ed7492578fa2cf1c98cb2caeb9f6bae7f09d
F20101203_AABNYC brinn_l_Page_12.tif
207cdc3c3db3e2a408ef69d35baf78eb
7551d9db705c87e87b9e99f1cc71e51954e1deb8
2207 F20101203_AABOAC brinn_l_Page_32thm.jpg
b812464005028dc508c160f7108b17da
fe3eeef13f7b68ed84b71f5ed2a8530890a93c7b
3667 F20101203_AABNTF brinn_l_Page_52thm.jpg
7b610014fd133a44964a608d43a014cd
686204476d023d387e569fafd65dfc78d01acc01
F20101203_AABNYD brinn_l_Page_13.tif
f7a5fad9537f9874e3b08b982e2623a9
7387a7acefe680c571ab18efe82b28532f2c7257
4832 F20101203_AABOAD brinn_l_Page_51thm.jpg
9a22123573432e3549f0f36c5f3d8a7c
72dc1ef321f37f4a92ca2c274318567a23f30ceb
117972 F20101203_AABNTG brinn_l_Page_40.jp2
14f65b105df49950dd43508a236a3c42
3787a1c865b7adb4cce92be4e101f0ed3130cc92
F20101203_AABNYE brinn_l_Page_14.tif
7863d81eef952f76680063f273807010
2be3badea045311c083ec1a6f8bbec6e14fee0fa
6910 F20101203_AABOAE brinn_l_Page_42thm.jpg
5da3e43ed8fc29029cacc2c96198eccf
7b5f752103ed5e5cc8f28080542f05805f774f24
F20101203_AABNTH brinn_l_Page_65.tif
dba802344293a9032a77564255922ca5
8793a311f7ce99d2f86f03d3faeaa3329f721c80
F20101203_AABNYF brinn_l_Page_15.tif
cd6b6b6f979693802d0214a5ddbfc86c
2ccb269ac9ecdab9b5dc2d7f783aec01c344e643
5584 F20101203_AABOAF brinn_l_Page_30thm.jpg
393ef30e3c2dbbdd6895b80bd930eadf
83515b855079e7a1a9d7361d3c01348632bc19d3
69285 F20101203_AABNTI brinn_l_Page_48.jp2
4b31b3482e2ec1cc6604f93f55c4b316
95dd0c568589ba1687e4c15d3b7bdc604297c8d1
F20101203_AABNYG brinn_l_Page_17.tif
30478de441eb12fc107e0cbdaef6f714
4cdb0e69b70a414c624be61cfa386cb6d918e4f5
22567 F20101203_AABOAG brinn_l_Page_69.QC.jpg
2b531933ab442c504eae6e1bdb5903fe
3a21ee3cf9d17a5d5eb825bb1f6fdc174685c83d
53905 F20101203_AABNTJ UFE0022257_00001.mets
83f60e7906494ca895398e3bf09838fa
4a0da23fc847b42134ac2bd7ec787ef24223585f
F20101203_AABNYH brinn_l_Page_18.tif
70f95157a464c9080debe72102f7d68f
0d0629091b34f6b790c1a9f21a89ded404af4ef4
12797 F20101203_AABOAH brinn_l_Page_11.QC.jpg
ac698d2f97f989aab7957f52e669b51c
e841eaa5820da135dcabf26fc2665282c0a98e0d
F20101203_AABNYI brinn_l_Page_19.tif
852abac48ed7f78a69bb58571c5572cd
6ea4ed15e62e19a8f95c43b714e35067dc3df457
4423 F20101203_AABOAI brinn_l_Page_50thm.jpg
b6c57656a352cd20d491bd4d37d3376e
571a600a53e98d316a0336face7b20719b5f8aca
F20101203_AABNYJ brinn_l_Page_20.tif
abad89a4af75661e4268ccea9d4d09cb
ebc5aaa15202e81e13231709d294e4127cf3d1cd
26764 F20101203_AABOAJ brinn_l_Page_58.QC.jpg
ff22f2b22bbc9a3a6923468bb9e65146
d53dd77aa6b6fb42242b72e41faf5483b671d1b2
28059 F20101203_AABNTM brinn_l_Page_01.jpg
d3a05bc5c63ac96e72f3496f8d4c7a57
7ea9e616c39a3bde2e4376fb02b10d778800bfa2
F20101203_AABNYK brinn_l_Page_22.tif
ad490aabe865172f6dac5dd0d1bb7835
c84be8e5f173e2e7a3e5d430b9ef4ce5efcf282b
6795 F20101203_AABOAK brinn_l_Page_57thm.jpg
fca9a9c11fa8660e512ffef50b6d714d
e673b8131633744baccca1dc109c7c84aff4998e
9784 F20101203_AABNTN brinn_l_Page_02.jpg
e4991284ffaf16b599fa364f29a64379
c3c73530a414e1b54e0366412c0cc9452c526989
F20101203_AABNYL brinn_l_Page_23.tif
0980b2823c9c1947a8cf2633b2e202f2
f00239569dc494dc2addfd3d954e832416194d23
12740 F20101203_AABOAL brinn_l_Page_08.QC.jpg
f1844b66c723e0af535d8474759f5624
729119179d9029904eb24771e023562777d4aa00
10716 F20101203_AABNTO brinn_l_Page_03.jpg
e0e7e4fb7eee76c9ef1dacebb62ef518
5d7e1063d80e7174208fbeb0495e65f14e7ea427
F20101203_AABNYM brinn_l_Page_24.tif
cfcdb458930e3fe61b8a009dc2c9dec3
14ae367cfd42c9545464e8087fe88941fbee832b
28199 F20101203_AABOAM brinn_l_Page_66.QC.jpg
b4bdf065ece97d998a2b7c187f0b205a
fa6907f9b0bc312426c61f08f2d396d8b0b64ba4
6334 F20101203_AABOAN brinn_l_Page_06.QC.jpg
09c1ed59c48646ed9422e25fc3e77316
9ae3103fbd555a3141a82a8faa717319341a5d9f
42586 F20101203_AABNTP brinn_l_Page_04.jpg
62c2b385c79c711e1ca703458385980a
2f1f45138da127bd9532b1bb02bafc492028f0c8
F20101203_AABNYN brinn_l_Page_25.tif
f18d05ee55ee96d67ba2ef6dd788a929
bfb60a8e49962a6bf7bb03bee6b513835e2f8424
8223 F20101203_AABOAO brinn_l_Page_01.QC.jpg
e3d93d1be169c7bc43cb66cb3bba8928
5b965089ba9f2d5c425f2b0be306ce4bb2d7bf72
85973 F20101203_AABNTQ brinn_l_Page_05.jpg
326d5d576ad930cef3471ba81cbd6d2a
662511078fb74ac890eaf4bc6ee3d4eef69a746e
F20101203_AABNYO brinn_l_Page_26.tif
d698453cedd3d26c7c1ed33539d641d1
c2f2660a6af2b6c575d0c9705458e04aeef61733
26654 F20101203_AABOAP brinn_l_Page_64.QC.jpg
c915db39743aa4971fea05c22a8114eb
4ebe4c927f76fd57406e4e546f95ddfe380a949f
22725 F20101203_AABNTR brinn_l_Page_06.jpg
b11762addcffaffc8a5cf5d10904d1f0
472cbde71010979b60fa32db88baf9b35151949c
F20101203_AABNYP brinn_l_Page_27.tif
a689fd88dfa3e2aeada004f65d93bbdd
c46f391c84ba217ac103cf7c1a2436cd028d8a57
3523 F20101203_AABOAQ brinn_l_Page_09thm.jpg
bf327214b1c172573d0dfacd6b38409b
934ae580adaa2e0c6430164c1174bdbe18f4f36b
94287 F20101203_AABNTS brinn_l_Page_07.jpg
68a1a5f80f3c1496e3c3ec1faf0221bd
6a2a971074c7b9a8c4f8742c7871d6a4b34c699f
F20101203_AABNYQ brinn_l_Page_28.tif
3090ab3ceecfe95ad737a77a8a7fdae5
0e59c7051007de769ac91eaca4aef2d0255155e1
7345 F20101203_AABOAR brinn_l_Page_16thm.jpg
ac249df4a24e69dc6f704cbaf788dae9
57be5f8a92c980fed7b5963137175f4a82cd7058
42643 F20101203_AABNTT brinn_l_Page_08.jpg
d0f18dc7c4cf7a12fe6bb48248b8ce73
603ed41dedfeaa3a6f599bf78da220f849e37cd5
F20101203_AABNYR brinn_l_Page_29.tif
d493839bef7522c52cef1d23c18be725
5f129b92d4e232d4158b823594c5862a497b5f74
24881 F20101203_AABOAS brinn_l_Page_55.QC.jpg
a81905ed1772b647eb57ff0c6c9aedde
4d491ae79957d930cf2c8a492ba55b3a1767dfe7
73558 F20101203_AABNTU brinn_l_Page_10.jpg
28ad44a9fbdfdf25a208a9cd27397959
916eda3345b5938d9c0bdd844a344e6b8ee0e1d4
F20101203_AABNYS brinn_l_Page_30.tif
723a499d59878516509745d8f43a11ca
78c990158f7a3bfa75a021bbe65b2f5cb39a7970
8433 F20101203_AABOAT brinn_l_Page_15.QC.jpg
77a2c2419f7accacdab1aae28a99f5e6
a618859e659a006a1de3814b06387d2c1c6d9b6d
39014 F20101203_AABNTV brinn_l_Page_11.jpg
eb2a858389ed61200da923df132f3e34
39abf338d49d7707897cd812efb84aab5bcc1f05
F20101203_AABNYT brinn_l_Page_31.tif
dbe609330404e74bc2299656e9d03de2
c759d0d4127a59c0e8dfd7a5fcc302c17bd86a0f
76386 F20101203_AABNTW brinn_l_Page_12.jpg
e7193b1e40568f579a7537179f401edd
98493d93e25f3f97dac4c53225afbb04077ec741
19394 F20101203_AABOAU brinn_l_Page_46.QC.jpg
08a2fff5e061752b10989bd734d7fb46
4f929153419e79fc65468565d4d860ae3a4ee01c
76636 F20101203_AABNTX brinn_l_Page_13.jpg
5c70e904270e95ee6c20dc9199a85f03
e623ad3ac5d235cf148c580b15df4d28270f7edc
F20101203_AABNYU brinn_l_Page_32.tif
249111f987d3948bf0c27cb0aedf6b95
1eb4e597c5d492c2ad06ead07fcd947ae471f530
4088 F20101203_AABOAV brinn_l_Page_27thm.jpg
68174fa0a9c92e5cce065c1d80696478
94da7a00d6b9f1def7aecb97b1717017a67c9a8c
75750 F20101203_AABNTY brinn_l_Page_14.jpg
2aa5e47f56b7e3a18dfdb335f32d0949
40b4f570d1405a2f8146fce60cbe4659fdaec2ef
F20101203_AABNYV brinn_l_Page_33.tif
4bf8e7425da822d6cd6aa9fb5e982249
8cfdabdf639958b5dcfde67b954e37f97d11cd00
7026 F20101203_AABOAW brinn_l_Page_64thm.jpg
72d1e627aa4943c37f753537293f0ddf
b7ef64f874c79d550556549a514069e5a0579abe
85186 F20101203_AABNTZ brinn_l_Page_17.jpg
0992288b4a242e2ba895df1affb32a10
70aef1cb1aa3505e4e7a2a69c65ccab443c16015
F20101203_AABNYW brinn_l_Page_34.tif
05159ada9d0de645fb1e3f86b138476a
9cecc1548c6798695ca7bb35716bcf824c3029e4
3043 F20101203_AABOAX brinn_l_Page_44thm.jpg
96b563d4afbe10ac6da3531fa8bf4728
4b2aa8901494c3082fd1512e7def045d9f2ad81b
F20101203_AABNYX brinn_l_Page_35.tif
0cb75e54c5093fde269ba96f62c28bb0
c420200eafbfce6642ae543a1d6eff1b4a6d3eb8
9925 F20101203_AABOAY brinn_l_Page_45.QC.jpg
42d87c7858e4e727db7873a489a656a7
bfb96e07b337e4384ca56fbf14e5622a87326661
55115 F20101203_AABNWA brinn_l_Page_11.jp2
adfa47b45dc0eee9cb4a2a0506a54efe
944c5ecaa21ac2190bd87c26d4fe41066c657a9e
F20101203_AABNYY brinn_l_Page_36.tif
9b8b4af56411142701f9468c0d36aaf3
d9cdd7e4dc0dba8159282114d47aa0dbc72ff61f
6313 F20101203_AABOAZ brinn_l_Page_10thm.jpg
d20431d4335f4b7d956a8f8bcce9a81e
d53a668c9778cbcfa3beb3de7cdf938e4cc3a5b9
116100 F20101203_AABNWB brinn_l_Page_12.jp2
06f68b16b1215febc1d703d383b6818f
57350805fa83b2b409401b42997b22cb15e5625b
F20101203_AABNYZ brinn_l_Page_37.tif
e7138a82757b66711dae572256efdd94
ee5820c1f1e022b107c30ebc10f60e6bae02ef22
114878 F20101203_AABNWC brinn_l_Page_14.jp2
8e3c4256e74d021acefea4f2f769dfa4
e395a0776bdcd43f03640dab651f22b95490407c
81052 F20101203_AABNRF brinn_l_Page_41.jpg
81b4815a61b9858e2257b34239068db8
e42421f98bd8db5fc05528d7aced8124879ebf42
25328 F20101203_AABODA brinn_l_Page_19.QC.jpg
2b6c775c220e0f54256b224503ae7349
6a62b7e24e5272e2a835861cef1dbf9a2b0c8222
31932 F20101203_AABNWD brinn_l_Page_15.jp2
63e7dfa0fb945d61e481e5cd4e06d4f4
e2619398f31288fd413ea2e9feb4fe626a0a7e9f
26125 F20101203_AABNRG brinn_l_Page_53.QC.jpg
af8cd83b219a7cf4c8a6db2986d147c3
48c01097cd731cbc0c774d9202f67436d6475c7e
25240 F20101203_AABODB brinn_l_Page_62.QC.jpg
d9f8582174934c795a880ef32e6d4f57
1871bce2fa81cdc42ce367877c0315b3208209c2
1051917 F20101203_AABNWE brinn_l_Page_16.jp2
c4707dd3954be99e23f4ffd5dc6d2956
e4fca1aaa14b373d0cfc8777ae1329c8dd7539fc
80378 F20101203_AABNRH brinn_l_Page_35.jpg
165bb50ea28158a99e07fc6ffbde94bf
f9c26c90aa12a583e8055414ef4f78af97d0c69d
16527 F20101203_AABODC brinn_l_Page_48.QC.jpg
bd2f2b7dc6dcfa6f7248c1f5c7e03b7d
1ecb6059ca880d804e4a8f325819c4062b90732e
1051944 F20101203_AABNWF brinn_l_Page_17.jp2
c16757c84dd92337f6ebb63769cf0dd5
96f5d19754001cc4fa27b802025e4d852db9236f
F20101203_AABNRI brinn_l_Page_21.tif
5d141d3e1f857d916fe2411e828c1c0f
6723ae853e23fd2a915a436054acb390cd461db8
7003 F20101203_AABODD brinn_l_Page_40thm.jpg
1e9a5a34a27dcd90c35228048a0c6604
ed762978dd1a83b246b7bda951a62d95d00ac3cd
108604 F20101203_AABNWG brinn_l_Page_18.jp2
8af121c9aee50d632378d51bdb404d6d
2ace7cc6e91d436dca50e69cead1133af9e7e45c
42612 F20101203_AABNRJ brinn_l_Page_09.jpg
a2f6f88e3909c6ddfdc91cc0d528c6f2
0c3adb7f5faa120fe6a756f5a78d74994929361e
14246 F20101203_AABODE brinn_l_Page_43.QC.jpg
f18b7b3a21d9f2687b41c9b4692f9bc7
0a2a05d2793c3337e8867be5a0a473daaa633cae
115832 F20101203_AABNWH brinn_l_Page_19.jp2
0cbe2e64ec65763efc836c364a14ab73
a7b7e51a7c4657b5ba4732ae54e0f8faa79c8697
7070 F20101203_AABNRK brinn_l_Page_67thm.jpg
ff41d5a31e01e3b59a23279f09acc33d
3a4b9f67cea1340dd8dbd7ebead04c8b37746797
3204 F20101203_AABODF brinn_l_Page_45thm.jpg
3d906a96f87e5b302c181cf32c69abe6
1226103b7d27ac839bd73f1bd635638d12a775f2
115264 F20101203_AABNWI brinn_l_Page_20.jp2
5af6ec9c35410f04bef4a06cdaef57a1
7f9a7b23b2fb2d1f2afd08d0e9c76a88f9c2e406
25265604 F20101203_AABNRL brinn_l_Page_45.tif
4479cdaac1d0dcb72b1eeaef1f1e7e42
426ac193c46cafc5b6cd08f1f14affe8dc5b5271
4382 F20101203_AABODG brinn_l_Page_25thm.jpg
4e4909387f512898641d24b40ff4cdc2
e542cd86e5e3b9c124efd6415c88527919092e6d
121773 F20101203_AABNWJ brinn_l_Page_21.jp2
94532d80f033112f032b73e627c8ee51
d83007ee36d28702007c31e7693d1d986fdb5de2
F20101203_AABNRM brinn_l_Page_53.tif
ed173c19bcd554872792044f49a2ae26
6a3b792d65298d647af849c403ccb82c36815a1a
26642 F20101203_AABODH brinn_l_Page_07.QC.jpg
ab04fca375fdf6584cddded965f8b4b5
b62c2f567378c7e21c45ddcaf118e619045e4896
112171 F20101203_AABNWK brinn_l_Page_22.jp2
3b71b04fa9d712969d83af8682f8d729
5d3ce3f6c3e2b003e365f92f36cc49935c169318
25231 F20101203_AABODI brinn_l_Page_20.QC.jpg
78fe2e0185071862207559aec3633751
ef2f0265d856e2d15ad31354d6c23f577c254748
28969 F20101203_AABNWL brinn_l_Page_23.jp2
ae3965c39acbcb2380e26fe684422e94
51aae18eb52184cd641af17a19b7000df5c54135
F20101203_AABNRN brinn_l_Page_06.tif
ff9eda8d7f2c7101f7f89ecd816ff3e3
8f3c62cd5707c1393f43d20b24127809abddaae6
2523 F20101203_AABODJ brinn_l_Page_15thm.jpg
73f9a069e665004b73d449c564f8ff9e
9078ad419d5a556622234c6aecf7665ab5d5d138
1004812 F20101203_AABNWM brinn_l_Page_24.jp2
4b5f2f7390078a69cd4b0fba1e4261b9
83cc546a8a92d12e4a194ff51c8adc634397bc6e
23572 F20101203_AABNRO brinn_l_Page_28.jpg
fa76bef7ba6179bbabd2472aaebbf64b
277eb9798d6f30f7f1d2bd88e0dcaafc23b8cf96
23297 F20101203_AABODK brinn_l_Page_05.QC.jpg
66bfb4bc9404254fa8f3a7b7ec64bdd0
c9b95762d018cb33acfe7b8c7eee42866da351ac
1051898 F20101203_AABNWN brinn_l_Page_25.jp2
0a0e93d621ef143b1cb034bbf37b25ac
37513dc47d6f0c53994d91a058e9c5a58e2f3e98
30125 F20101203_AABNRP brinn_l_Page_44.jpg
9291e900c474411105e3d622c1904ef1
7fd9a6e877d00708480fc6a23ab7dc1893f163af
3279 F20101203_AABODL brinn_l_Page_03.QC.jpg
4bd3e846070f6667da940cdad417751e
c4c09f916249388b3f0b4da7f657b1cf67f1dede
557334 F20101203_AABNWO brinn_l_Page_26.jp2
e5d5ad218e9a5bf564573f9e639a1363
3b10c7d33e0c7a254074019311f1ab534a34aa90
F20101203_AABNRQ brinn_l_Page_68.tif
cb229319730a7727714e121de2c9c683
082fb19becb1dbcd1d21828bee753d5245ad525f
27705 F20101203_AABODM brinn_l_Page_16.QC.jpg
1ede1f95d4c6b2a75b98c5330f2dc444
6ac09fa32f62f4beaf04768e17ab1968272e8d87
33898 F20101203_AABNWP brinn_l_Page_29.jp2
5b341e8257f8913acb0bf7c33d92849c
c5b1a967c211a7b6a1f9393ca3306084d21327e6
F20101203_AABNRR brinn_l_Page_02.tif
a655ef1c908b5eee3d8937c43a6ac83d
0311917c26ad61c8aaabb9865238b024e6ae882d
24403 F20101203_AABODN brinn_l_Page_18.QC.jpg
282e0d22303258884e88223b74a19d8d
415d1fe86b5888a9aa7201435308f7cb87fe1f23
84074 F20101203_AABNWQ brinn_l_Page_30.jp2
0e56dfb15e399d2ecf9928ef7f92c01a
26d9018e8c8617c795cc768c7a054fcdff3a5748
117230 F20101203_AABNRS brinn_l_Page_13.jp2
e2b59894601bf8ff6c12733ef85136eb
3f8003f634e6afb251453a042235d5aa66e1344e
6712 F20101203_AABODO brinn_l_Page_14thm.jpg
6198a9af19ce6e454951407633cfdd3b
ea3a3fbe719f7b6feae45c8f92e7d0f5f816aa64
50413 F20101203_AABNWR brinn_l_Page_32.jp2
6e6e192bcbdd94f8f9d4527b4bdca7a6
d65cc12f19cc95b5039459ca5faa2bf40bb9fed9
40060 F20101203_AABNRT brinn_l_Page_31.jp2
dab30cefa29377e840d62f029b962cb3
ecc5d1afa7ecd3a1bc0da6e2f966269cc8ae001a
14843 F20101203_AABODP brinn_l_Page_27.QC.jpg
d6c83293c2aaad22bfb8452a0f3eb6b1
13bcf6182cf11066bd30e1455fd46a7ef86608d3
110921 F20101203_AABNRU brinn_l_Page_38.jp2
a5eb4e358e3e7ba239aa947cb21509a8
c7b97e299c8d8ee1a3936bf03d7c947c61739bd2
117478 F20101203_AABNWS brinn_l_Page_33.jp2
9e5f28f3c8a6e581005ddf9a9c3404ac
edc7b216c9118537cf9b46a2a29009ee6d0bef8c
97273 F20101203_AABNRV brinn_l_Page_49.jp2
8680fe3c68c2fd2530c60944de78b11d
84f3a5804399804682a082f2df283e2cd19779e7
10687 F20101203_AABODQ brinn_l_Page_31.QC.jpg
fb5c9807c54cdeb8406d47df96742072
915ae91ab92487cd4ca77d45961dba317e437b0f
113819 F20101203_AABNWT brinn_l_Page_34.jp2
3e35a71d88c20443119e3325659d746f
0ceeb9b1c14522d467b45c75604da0fe828a7233
25176 F20101203_AABNRW brinn_l_Page_15.jpg
f8a1bd2ba5958851b5cba0df9c21867f
7b5cdbfa1dc8c47ca3c4a7d5466af8f836118dde
4437 F20101203_AABODR brinn_l_Page_48thm.jpg
00f29d017fb0a7f4e38cbd019ac5ed54
dbb3c12ad6017b280558071b71d2eed0fb369fcf
116561 F20101203_AABNWU brinn_l_Page_36.jp2
b03332df92804d4bf43d51205f11fbfe
7e97ee0ed67545ec76a8e21ae8acd4bea1644a78
19662 F20101203_AABNRX brinn_l_Page_30.QC.jpg
0e1a8bd70a8d255fbe9f83c7a29bd029
c9b5ca20f293360c47b34a2a1cba9a0c8070e83f
25364 F20101203_AABODS brinn_l_Page_13.QC.jpg
476edf69ac23eb8c4ecd495a6bce4404
d65fe56078825ecd037800af89cb64586f484738
112033 F20101203_AABNWV brinn_l_Page_37.jp2
a47cad3ed41ec5bbb96dd6f65ef54d88
22b56b6c0c16bdcf47de09c5f9f9190205234496
48201 F20101203_AABNRY brinn_l_Page_52.jp2
ac66bbb346ef8d99c4466e831a3c0f52
ef63c1a690df9fca12f237b83f4ec75f7c0659e9
F20101203_AABODT brinn_l_Page_53thm.jpg
9ddfbf8982ab76957383d2274d49567c
601818e72f2d4f03af90019ca375b96b46a230cc
114724 F20101203_AABNWW brinn_l_Page_39.jp2
0c435155dd9d4578495f86269df6190b
4705f35c56a3a1c20507fe7507c767fc9a5add2f
6800 F20101203_AABNRZ brinn_l_Page_63.QC.jpg
1c2961120bc97b7db204ba593d7e1656
b9ca4209be8f1d4dbe9a0e62f5855c3ef20fcb1e
6465 F20101203_AABODU brinn_l_Page_56thm.jpg
51261b0ea47e80eb7eb4894bff4802b1
05a1d2e60db8e3ca658f8ffafa4902f7efcd1d5f
122325 F20101203_AABNWX brinn_l_Page_41.jp2
de5ce508cbbb74e2d38f6b06a8d3baca
687bdf9cc7fbc158f071f191c14f93a950f298f6
7164 F20101203_AABODV brinn_l_Page_35thm.jpg
af20bc971bb4fe0cd0946d1fbe345d20
0bd67b1a44e7a65769bd47ded4bc799309cee3f2
119573 F20101203_AABNWY brinn_l_Page_42.jp2
ff96dd80021f1e8778383d3da4462701
07abda00511da4335f43793ce220a835c4664d6f
3340 F20101203_AABODW brinn_l_Page_26thm.jpg
e1600ffb99e07bffdbf1c8f027ac6628
21b668c2dcf93bdeddc7395c8ed47ab8999bca35
72935 F20101203_AABNUA brinn_l_Page_18.jpg
7556e03725320a2999a8ed171deff8ad
643043aaddcbf5bac423b8b9d180fb57894fabd7
1051986 F20101203_AABNWZ brinn_l_Page_43.jp2
e4fe49b09df1cff98a6fbc14bd265930
90ae4b92c7290752344afb81d920a14ebc71d7af
6732 F20101203_AABODX brinn_l_Page_32.QC.jpg
f2f220f9de73cff26996c15d0e46abf6
73a45fb657c6c793d3a4a421bdc34e6acb3dd25a
75604 F20101203_AABNUB brinn_l_Page_19.jpg
ad43079d54f1165bd05f865fc432bf0e
d1166ce32eb641e2a871f2ff8dcb327f07fdbdcc
12908 F20101203_AABODY brinn_l_Page_24.QC.jpg
343674c8ba300f54338d27bd6af23630
281f28ea475ed5672c777a4d3a6f5852cb2b570d
76076 F20101203_AABNUC brinn_l_Page_20.jpg
fa1e660002ffe0b03fffc7c3b798178b
618095d56ba09ba89a569cdfd56bb8d899da8fec
F20101203_AABNZA brinn_l_Page_38.tif
bc0e5817cdc5a7eb9345033a186e465a
f489d8b5d28b2c8060e7c28919ffa1d95e7ac590
2067 F20101203_AABOBA brinn_l_Page_06thm.jpg
8d2ad0c369dc1070a5bf11d785071c17
25e70b4d2eae2f47bcc255ef8e62902496324501
13861 F20101203_AABODZ brinn_l_Page_04.QC.jpg
940ebc1114d93110e0b29330895dc820
66e7b8bd9dcfe0ae3cfd69acb11ff0aad689598f
80138 F20101203_AABNUD brinn_l_Page_21.jpg
daba707387ac4daf5ca0dfe7c890f0cb
941949d8d40aed889dfc7b9cb8c6fbfacd042759
F20101203_AABNZB brinn_l_Page_39.tif
395288a113c25d37691b2aac0a394258
a3227731c59a6744aa346f88cd00035a37d5d452
16773 F20101203_AABOBB brinn_l_Page_70.QC.jpg
24735ea2d3dbd0eb7b5a40f2d3a07298
3c881575df9b454f654f79fe5855d06eb3ef4901
72987 F20101203_AABNUE brinn_l_Page_22.jpg
8eb58d58eb6c1acd0ceabadfd311c356
630125731753c78c16893df5141295150be24c67
F20101203_AABNZC brinn_l_Page_40.tif
0be41c336220ba6932f45dbabd0d7229
b3caf19f32302f979a828041e675e710d122cd0e
F20101203_AABOBC brinn_l_Page_12.QC.jpg
c46a2c83aa60f63b1e37211fd84c4fcc
8a81b816facb1fe9c5c712a9a5af240bbe3e819f
22804 F20101203_AABNUF brinn_l_Page_23.jpg
3a8649cfb39663ea16f367428cc0ffa3
d378b33110dc52c04e3d0a3601485ba8b2841116
F20101203_AABNZD brinn_l_Page_41.tif
67afa93f3a2e71d47bd67a54ee258b69
f9c671b9c978faedecc15ab7513b9761896b0b09
6711 F20101203_AABOBD brinn_l_Page_13thm.jpg
ea47b3bf6734a468e305333c881ed84b
5b1f6fe79e52b18d6e62a567cb9f17d2cb8a1c67
40542 F20101203_AABNUG brinn_l_Page_24.jpg
3437288a9f5f29b5e57ec343ede55eb4
00dc72f7cc8c896df2fd07e3cd696aea7e41d0ce
F20101203_AABNZE brinn_l_Page_42.tif
6aa1b961a26c6b3cbceb72a4058265ae
20230489124116e7343c27069db5e93280ff5198
3818 F20101203_AABOBE brinn_l_Page_11thm.jpg
92860a1c4e0a11c8e15466c5e30daf57
9e8ecdcfbc3892ad5a3160fab51123b99447c5f7
35173 F20101203_AABNUH brinn_l_Page_26.jpg
6a3ce9288f490a15df7cdbe5f086d5ac
9ad9c568b4364ced778cae177467f5e26d2c0acc
F20101203_AABNZF brinn_l_Page_43.tif
9621f53976c6b37620f0162b1663cbc9
898f011c940cc8516fccc4a5a0dc87b4c3e5f1fa
3673 F20101203_AABOBF brinn_l_Page_61thm.jpg
dbe3bf14b144e98bae2f7b14e0354c61
0644d1900c2258d9df42b0a39b73b41c8dc4311d
52499 F20101203_AABNUI brinn_l_Page_27.jpg
e459ad3ae93220c21b0ba8a338d993c1
f95ee1f9ac5bcfd71df08a56f6ffd5057efdb543
F20101203_AABNZG brinn_l_Page_44.tif
4ae180c4e3a692c499cd5414aaab05ef
b00246ca9f2ebdda8b7af34fe8d1635b2a1fa02d
23813 F20101203_AABOBG brinn_l_Page_56.QC.jpg
6674c3960a3067d40bc5db9ecf95f054
cfb30c27a5148d81f2a5b1b9b94ecf2e77abaf8a
17724 F20101203_AABNUJ brinn_l_Page_29.jpg
a57f16a19e00f15c967dac364911cb1f
20e74829b599689f7c1d0fae522228a6768f41aa
F20101203_AABNZH brinn_l_Page_46.tif
e24b617b8072fe8257780411b7425e34
cb54ba10350ba48ea78313cc28b779109aa1e3e4
3991 F20101203_AABOBH brinn_l_Page_04thm.jpg
b851be4416c370cfe455ee941ce9aeed
41e4034a7e547a136510f4c737e9b6739a62f86f
63327 F20101203_AABNUK brinn_l_Page_30.jpg
77c4b3ab1521e568c9c1bbdb612510f9
bf2338c3a5108dd9759b3969e7ed7a8498183f91
F20101203_AABNZI brinn_l_Page_47.tif
e700f4b3f2021fb77a13ccc26640b280
1f2fd9eb776830514e008d0cb0e3c3b34aab991a
6680 F20101203_AABOBI brinn_l_Page_37thm.jpg
c8ab335c2b402e3d6ac6a06220cdf648
06f27ca68960227517893cf7cf8702e44ac19e0f
33375 F20101203_AABNUL brinn_l_Page_31.jpg
37a44a7ddf6c18518dec47c523794a8b
ccb9fb2c2f05b4d273a3ae1b66f860516118eea4
F20101203_AABNZJ brinn_l_Page_48.tif
3f6fcec1c50bca3ca708b2cda83c63b8
be86942df1e4b047ddcb955b6dbd49b5c98577f4
26420 F20101203_AABOBJ brinn_l_Page_41.QC.jpg
12006f8c18698da7d670218b38138b24
70e16623de0df45f9f3913746cc907bdad48b180
23159 F20101203_AABNUM brinn_l_Page_32.jpg
506285f3138d930d09e941c1760e3c6d
8370939b8e31ebfa3e416fc996837f6378f3e712