22 MEMOIRS NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. [vol.xil 



this stream was examined late ia the" summer of 1901, destruction by floods was very evident. 

 Islands which I had seen the year before as good farms or covered with dense forest, were now 

 bare bowlder beds in the river, or only the wrecked remains of islands -with trees uprooted and 

 soil swept away. In places the driftwood, fence rails, household wreckage, and furniture covered 

 the ground several feet deep. In other places what had been fertile bottom land was buried 

 by abandoned sand bars; in still other places "scours" were formed where the rapidly flowing 

 current had cut deep into the black soil. In some places where nearly a foot of soil had been 

 washed from the fields, old Indian camp sites were exposed, as was shown by the biirnt soil, the 

 cracked bowlders, and fragments of pottery and camp refuse. 



All these demonstrations of the destructive power of the floods have an important bearing 

 upon the nature of the rapid water or shoal habitat of lo, because such influences are often 

 particularly vigorous upon shoals where the fall of the stream is marked. The destruction of 

 the forests upon these mountains, and the consequent increase in destructive floods is certainly 

 a condition unfavorable to the perpetuation of lo in these streams. 



The Nolichucky River was examined in 1900 to within about 15 miles of its headwaters. 

 This was in East Tennessee at Love, a small station about 3 miles up the river from Erwin. The 

 river in this vicinity contained many large bowlders. Large sand bars were also examined but 

 no traces of lo were found. A number of apparently favorable localities between here and 

 EmbrevUle were examined but with the same resvdts. The soil of this region was sandy, the 

 bedrock "freestone," the vegetation composed of pines, cedars, holly, ivy, and laurel. All of 

 these conditions show that this is not a limestone region. 



About 2 miles below Embreville (Roan Mountain sheet), at Deadericks Island, is a fine shoal 

 with large bowlders, shallow water, and apparently ideal condition for lo. These shoals were 

 carefully searched both in 1900 and 1901 but no traces of the sheUs were found, although the 

 water was perfectly clear. During October, 1900, the shoal at the mouth of Cherokee Creek 

 was examined but no lo were found. The water was very clear and the bowlders in swift and 

 eddy waters, furnished apparently an ideal habitat for them. 



For many years the Deadericks had maintained a sawmill on their island, and an active 

 logging business was carried on. The battering of the shoals by the logs would be a condition 

 decidedly unfavorable for lo shells. 



The only information which I have been able to find of the occirrrence of lo shells in this 

 particular part of the river is from Mr. H. M. Deaderick, an intelligent resident who had in his 

 collection of Indian relics two lo shells, lot 182. These he thought came from the Nolichucky 

 at this point. These were the only shells in the collection. Both of these are of the smooth lo 

 shell type and have the appearance of Rogersville shells from the Holston River. 



Particular attention should also be called to the fact that the eastern boundary of the 

 limestones on the Nolichucky is at about this locality, and that this is probably the limiting 

 factor in this stream. 



Group 19. Lot 119. Conkling, Tenn. Dead shells from an Indian camp between Gra- 

 ham's house and the wagon bridge. September 5, 1901. 



This lot of shells is the farthest upstream record for the Nolichucky River. Greenville 

 sheet. About 75 miles above the mouth of the river. These are the form unakensis; a large 

 series of specimens. 



Lot 118. Broylesville, Tenn. Indian camp on the river bank. Dead shells. September 

 3, 1901. Also unakensis; 53 specimens. About 8 miles downstream from Conkling. There 

 is an island in the river at this point and the gravels about it were carefully examined, but no 

 lo shells were found. 



It might well be questioned if such dead shells really came from the Nohchucky; and 

 might be contended that they are not a fair index of shells from the vicinity. On the other 

 hand the shells from the headwaters of the Nolichucky River can readily be told from those 

 found in any other stream and are perfectly characteristic. This is an example of the general 

 rule, that the shells found at the old Indian camps are a fair index of the local lo fauna. 



