DOCSLIB.ORG

Of Available Research on Military Impacts Optimal Allocation of Land for Training and Non-Training Uses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Of Available Research on Military Impacts Optimal Allocation of Land for Training and Non-Training Uses 10 - 12 - ERDC TR ERDC Index of Available Research on Military Impacts Optimal Allocation of Land for Training and Non-training Uses Marcus E. Ricci, Anne P. Dain-Owens, Alan B. Anderson, June 2012 Randolph A. Jones, Heidi R. Howard, Alex M. Effinger, and Jeffrey S. Fehmi Construction Engineering Construction Laboratory Research Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. ERDC TR-12-10 June 2012 Index of Available Research on Military Impacts Optimal Allocation of Land for Training and Non-training Uses Marcus E. Ricci, Anne P. Dain-Owens, Alan B. Anderson, and Heidi R. Howard Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) US Army Engineer Research and Development Center 2902 Newmark Dr. Champaign, IL 61822-1076 Randolph A. Jones and Alex M. Effinger Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory US Army Engineer Research and Development Center 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180 Jeffrey S. Fehmi University of Arizona School of Natural Resources PO Box 210043 Tucson, AZ 85721 Final Report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers Washington, DC 20314-1000 Under 3332J7 ERDC TR-12-10 ii Abstract The US Department of Defense (DOD) is the nation’s fifth-largest Federal land management agency. The DOD employs several programs to assess the impacts of military training on Army installation lands. These programs must in turn meet the Army’s environmental technology requirements. One Army User Requirement for Land Characterization calls for the development of methods applicable for use at the installation level that characterize suitability of lands for mission use, the impact of vehicle activity on installation resources, and the spatial distribution of maneuver training impacts. To support this effort, this work collected, summarized, and analyzed existing military training impact studies (including the topical and geographic foci of each publication). To extrapolate the applicability of conducted research to other, similar geographical areas, the publications were categorized by their relevance to five biomes, which are associated with military installations in specific US states. This way, the resulting research compilation offers a base to evaluate future impacts of military activities on installation lands, and to recommend the implementation of a more cost-effective, regional strategic approach for future land conservation research. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. DESTROY THIS REPORT WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED. DO NOT RETURN IT TO THE ORIGINATOR. ERDC TR-12-10 iii Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures and Tables............................................................................................................................ iv Preface ............................................................................................................................................................. v 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Approach ............................................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Scope ................................................................................................................................. 6 1.5 Mode of technology transfer ............................................................................................. 6 2 Articles: Journals, Conference Proceedings, Magazines, and Periodicals .............................. 7 2.1 States and military bases of articles ............................................................................... 7 2.2 Applicability of reviewed journals, conference proceedings, magazines, and periodicals to other geographical areas .......................................................................... 8 2.3 Research foci of articles ................................................................................................. 20 3 Technical Reports ............................................................................................................................... 36 3.1 States and military bases of reports .............................................................................. 36 3.2 Applicability of reviewed technical reports to other geographical areas ..................... 37 3.3 Research foci of reports.................................................................................................. 37 4 Theses and Dissertations .................................................................................................................. 66 4.1 States and military bases of manuscripts ..................................................................... 66 4.2 Applicability of reviewed theses and dissertations to other geographical areas ................................................................................................................................ 66 4.3 Research foci of manuscripts ......................................................................................... 71 5 Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................................. 76 5.1 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 76 5.2 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 77 Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... 79 Appendix A: Publications Reviewed ....................................................................................................... 82 Appendix B: Publications Not Reviewed ............................................................................................ 133 Report Documentation Page (SF 298) ................................................................................................ 144 ERDC TR-12-10 iv List of Figures and Tables Figures 1 The state name abbreviations used in this report ..................................................................... 5 2 Distribution of articles specifying one or more states ............................................................. 20 3 Distribution of reports specifying one or more states ............................................................. 50 4 Distribution of manuscripts specifying one or more states .................................................... 71 5 Distribution of all military impact publications specifying one or more states .................... 76 Tables 1 Articles by state with specified military installation and biome, and area of specialization .................................................................................................................................. 9 2 Articles by state with specified military installation ................................................................. 19 3 Articles by research focus with state and installation, and area of specialization .............. 23 4 Reports by state with specified military installation and biome, and area of specialization ................................................................................................................................ 40 5 Reports by state with specified military installation ................................................................ 49 6 Reports by research focus with state and installation, and area of specialization ............. 51 7 Manuscripts by state with specified military installation and biome, and area of specialization ................................................................................................................................ 68 8 Manuscripts by state with specified military installation ........................................................ 70 9 Manuscripts by research focus with specified state and installation, and area of specialization ................................................................................................................................ 73 ERDC TR-12-10 v Preface This study was conducted for Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for In- stallation Management (ACSIM), Environmental Division under Project A896, “Base Facility Environmental Quality”; Program “Model Incorpora- tion”; Work Unit 3332J7, “Optimal Allocation of Land for Training and Non-Training Uses.” The technical monitor was Alan Anderson, CEERD- CV-T. The work was performed by the Ecological Processes Branch (CN-N) of the Installations
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, California Contract: DACA05-97-D-0013, Task 0001 FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION
    CALIFORNIA HISTORIC MILITARY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY VOLUME II: THE HISTORY AND HISTORIC RESOURCES OF THE MILITARY IN CALIFORNIA, 1769-1989 by Stephen D. Mikesell Prepared for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, California Contract: DACA05-97-D-0013, Task 0001 FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION Prepared by: JRP JRP HISTORICAL CONSULTING SERVICES Davis, California 95616 March 2000 California llistoric Military Buildings and Stnictures Inventory, Volume II CONTENTS CONTENTS ..................................................................................................................................... i FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................. iv PREFACE .................................................................................................................................... viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1-1 2.0 COLONIAL ERA (1769-1846) .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Spanish-Mexican Era Buildings Owned by the Military ............................................... 2-8 2.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G1:Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
    Appendix G1 Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Prepared for November 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 26111 Antonio Parkway Rancho Santa Margarita, CA Draft CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Prepared for November 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 26111 Antonio Parkway Rancho Santa Margarita, CA Prepared By: ESA 626 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Project site location: Cadiz, Cadiz Summit, Cadiz Lake NW, Cadiz Lake NE, Calumet Mine, Chubbuck, Milligan, East of Milligan, Danby Lake, Sablon, and Arica Mountains (CA) USGS 7.5’ Topographic Maps T1S R19E, 20E; T1N R18E, 19E; T2N R17E, 18E; 3N R16E, 17E; 4N R15E, 16E; 5N R14E, 15E Principal Investigator: Monica Strauss, M.A. Report Authors: Madeleine Bray, M.A, Candace Ehringer, M.A., Brian S. Marks, Ph.D. Keywords: San Bernardino County, Cadiz, Milligan, Archer, Freda, Chubbuck, Ward, Siam, Saltmarsh, Sablon, Fishel, Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, Parker Cutoff, General George Patton Desert Training Center, Railroad Siding, Archaeological Survey 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 www.esassoc.com Oakland Olympia Orlando Palm Springs Petaluma Portland Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills 210324 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery,
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Arizona History Index, M
    Index to the Journal of Arizona History, M Arizona Historical Society, [email protected] 480-387-5355 NOTE: the index includes two citation formats. The format for Volumes 1-5 is: volume (issue): page number(s) The format for Volumes 6 -54 is: volume: page number(s) M McAdams, Cliff, book by, reviewed 26:242 McAdoo, Ellen W. 43:225 McAdoo, W. C. 18:194 McAdoo, William 36:52; 39:225; 43:225 McAhren, Ben 19:353 McAlister, M. J. 26:430 McAllester, David E., book coedited by, reviewed 20:144-46 McAllester, David P., book coedited by, reviewed 45:120 McAllister, James P. 49:4-6 McAllister, R. Burnell 43:51 McAllister, R. S. 43:47 McAllister, S. W. 8:171 n. 2 McAlpine, Tom 10:190 McAndrew, John “Boots”, photo of 36:288 McAnich, Fred, book reviewed by 49:74-75 books reviewed by 43:95-97 1 Index to the Journal of Arizona History, M Arizona Historical Society, [email protected] 480-387-5355 McArtan, Neill, develops Pastime Park 31:20-22 death of 31:36-37 photo of 31:21 McArthur, Arthur 10:20 McArthur, Charles H. 21:171-72, 178; 33:277 photos 21:177, 180 McArthur, Douglas 38:278 McArthur, Lorraine (daughter), photo of 34:428 McArthur, Lorraine (mother), photo of 34:428 McArthur, Louise, photo of 34:428 McArthur, Perry 43:349 McArthur, Warren, photo of 34:428 McArthur, Warren, Jr. 33:276 article by and about 21:171-88 photos 21:174-75, 177, 180, 187 McAuley, (Mother Superior) Mary Catherine 39:264, 265, 285 McAuley, Skeet, book by, reviewed 31:438 McAuliffe, Helen W.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.5 Cultural Resources
    4.5 – Cultural Resources 4.5 Cultural Resources This section identifies cultural and paleontological resources along the IC Project Alignment, identifies applicable significance thresholds, assesses the IC Project’s impacts to these resources and their significance, and recommends measures to avoid or substantially reduce any effects found to be potentially significant. Cultural resources are defined as any object or specific location of past human activity, occupation, or use that is identifiable through historical documentation, inventory, or oral evidence. Cultural resources can be separated into three categories: archaeological, building/structural, and traditional resources. Archaeological resources include prehistoric and historic remains of human activity. Prehistoric resources can be composed of lithic scatters, ceramic scatters, quarries, habitation sites, temporary camps/rock rings, ceremonial sites, and trails. Historic-era resources are typically those that are 50 years or older. Historic archaeological resources can consist of structural remains (e.g., concrete foundations), historic objects (e.g., bottles and cans), features (e.g., refuse deposits or scatters), and sites (e.g., resources that contain one or more of the aforementioned categories). Built environment resources range from historic buildings to canals, historic roads and trails, bridges, ditches, cemeteries, and electrical infrastructure, such as transmission lines, substations, and generating facilities. A traditional cultural resource is a resource associated with the cultural practices, traditions, beliefs, lifeways, arts, crafts, or social institutions of a living community. They are rooted in a traditional community’s history and are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community. See Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, for a discussion on cultural resources of potential importance to California Native American tribes.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Quartzite Final EISEIR Appendix D Regional
    DESERT QUARTZITE SOLAR PROJECT FINAL PLAN AMENDMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX D REGIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND APPLICABLE STATUTES, REGULATIONS, PLANS, AND STANDARDS DESERT QUARTZITE SOLAR PROJECT FINAL PLAN AMENDMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX D - REGIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND APPLICABLE STATUTES, REGULATIONS, PLANS, AND STANDARDS D.1 INTRODUCTION This appendix describes the regional and background information, and the Federal, state, and local statutes, regulations, plans, and standards that are applicable to each of the resources evaluated in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Desert Quartzite Solar Project (DQSP) California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan/Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Final PA/EIS/EIR). D.2 AIR RESOURCES D.2.1 Regional and Background Information Regional Climate The Project site is located in southeastern California, in the Colorado Desert. The climate in the Blythe area is categorized as a desert climate, with dry, hot summers and mild winters. The region is characterized by extreme fluctuations of daily temperatures, strong seasonal winds, and clear skies. January is the coldest month, with a mean low temperature of 41.7 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). July is the hottest month, with a mean high temperature of 108.4°F. Temperature and precipitation data were measured at Blythe from July 1948 through June 2016 (Western Regional Climate Center [WRCC] 2018a). The mean temperature for the Blythe station is 73.7°F, and the mean annual precipitation is 3.55 inches. More than half of the precipitation occurs between November and March. Although rainfall occurs primarily in the winter months, the region is periodically influenced by subtropical weather conditions, especially sudden monsoonal late summer storms.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Training Center Collection
    TITLE: United States Army Desert Training Center Collection DATE RANGE: 1938 - 2010 CALL NUMBER: Y-MS 20 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: 6 boxes (3 linear feet) PROVENANCE: Collection materials have been donated by an assortment of individuals associated with the center. COPYRIGHT: Unknown RESTRICTIONS: This collection is unrestricted. CREDIT LINE: United States Army Desert Training Center Collection, Y-MS 20, Arizona Historical Society-Rio Colorado Division, Yuma PROCESSED BY: Benjamin Findley, 2014 HISTORICAL NOTE: The Desert Training Center was established in 1942 to provide training in desert warfare for troops slated to be deployed to the African theatre of World War II. Major General George S. Patton Jr. was tasked with setting up the Center and was designated its first Commanding General. A large tract of land approximately 10,000 square miles was chosen along the California-Arizona border and the southern tip of Nevada. This area was chosen because it included variety of desert terrains and had no large population centers. Operations began in April, 1942. This allowed the U. S. Army to test standard army equipment against the harsh environment and to develop a desert tactical doctrine. The supply officers contended with maintaining supply routes without access to railroad lines. Many of the initial training exercises resulted in high casualty rates due to restrictions on water rations. In July, 1942 Patton was abruptly re-assigned to the North African Campaign leaving Major General Alvan Gillem in command. The success of the North African Campaign by late 1942 meant that the Army no longer needed troops trained for desert combat. The Army increased the size of the area to approximately 87,000 square miles and changed its name from the Desert Training Center to the California- Arizona Maneuver Area.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full Book
    Fighting for Hope Jefferson, Robert F. Published by Johns Hopkins University Press Jefferson, Robert F. Fighting for Hope: African American Troops of the 93rd Infantry Division in World War II and Postwar America. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008. Project MUSE. doi:10.1353/book.3504. https://muse.jhu.edu/. For additional information about this book https://muse.jhu.edu/book/3504 [ Access provided at 26 Sep 2021 09:46 GMT with no institutional affiliation ] This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Fighting for Hope war/society/culture Michael Fellman, Series Editor Fighting for Hope *** African American Troops of the 93rd Infantry Division in World War II and Postwar America robert f. jefferson The Johns Hopkins University Press Baltimore © 2008 The Johns Hopkins University Press All rights reserved. Published 2008 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper 246897531 The Johns Hopkins University Press 2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218-4363 www.press.jhu.edu Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jeªerson, Robert F., 1963– Fighting for hope : African American troops of the 93rd Infantry Division in World War II and postwar America / Robert F. Jeªerson. p. cm.—(War/society/culture) Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn-13: 978-0-8018-8828-1 (hbk. : alk. paper) isbn-10: 0-8018-8828-x (hbk. : alk. paper) 1. World War, 1939–1945—Participation, African American. 2. World War, 1939–1945—Campaigns—Oceania. 3. World War, 1939–1945—Veterans— United States—Social conditions. 4. United States. Army. Division, 93rd. 5. United States. Army—African American troops.
    [Show full text]
  • STAMPS of Arizona
    STAMPS of Arizona Number 4 in a Series • Created for free use in the public domain American Philatelic Society ©2008-2018 www.stamps.org Financial support for the development of these album pages provided by Mystic Stamp Company America’s Leading Stamp Dealer and proud of its support of the American Philatelic Society www.MysticStamp.com, 800-433-7811 Arizona Prehistory and History 1991 50c Bering Land Bridge airmail stamp (Scott C131) Asians followed migrating mammoths across the then-dry Bering Sea and into northwestern North America sometime between 16,000 BC and 10,000 BC. Their passage was blocked by a huge sheet of ice until an ice-free corridor opened from Alaska through northwestern Canada, allowing bands to fan out throughout the rest of the continent. Some scientists believe that small bands of women, men and children wandered across the deserts of southwestern Arizona and northwestern Mexico even 10,000 to 20,000 years earlier than these mammoth hunters. 1977 13c Pueblo Art 1986 22c Navajo Art - Textiles 2004 2c Navajo Necklace (Scott 1708) (Scott 2235-38) (Scott 3749) The Pueblo live in compact villag- Today, some 350,000 Navajo live in Turquoise beads were found in es of stone or adobe in northeastern Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, California, 2,200-year-old Hohokam excavations Arizona and northwestern New Mexico. and northern Mexico. The independent in southern Arizona, probably mined Approximately 6,500 Hopi Indians live Navajo Nation manages the Navajo res- from the Kingman or Morenci regions on and around three mesas in northeast- ervation in the Four Corners area, the of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Spiritual Geographies of Indigenous Sovereignty Connections of Caxcan with Tlachialoyantepec
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Spiritual Geographies of Indigenous Sovereignty Connections of Caxcan with Tlachialoyantepec and Chemehuevi with Mamapukaib A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by Daisy Ocampo December 2019 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Clifford E. Trafzer, Chairperson Dr. Rebecca Kugel Dr. Robert Perez Copyright by Daisy Ocampo 2019 The Dissertation of Daisy Ocampo is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements I wish to thank many people, tribes, and institutions for all their support, knowledge, and patience. Thank you firstly to my three committee-members: Cliff Trafzer, Rebecca ‘Monte’ Kugel, and Robert Perez. I must especially acknowledge Cliff Trafzer for providing me all of the guidance I needed every step of the way. On behalf of my family and Caxcan people from El Remolino, thank you for believing in this research project, in the power of our sacred places, and the value of our rich knowledge. I wish to express my gratitude to the California Center for the Native Nations, Rupert Costo for Native American Affairs and the gracious support from the Graduate Assistant in Areas of National Need (GAANN) Fellowship. This report also would not have been possible without the Native American Land Conservancy, 29 Palms Band of Mission Indians and the Mike Family. To Matt Leivas, who kindly offered me his knowledge through the rich oral histories he possesses while also taking the time to introduce me to the people of Chemehuevi Indian Reservation including his sister June Leivas, I extend many thanks to them all for we share the common bond of a mutual deep respect for our sacred sites.
    [Show full text]
  • A General Historic Properties Treatment Plan for Archaeological Investigations Associated with FCC Cell Tower Construction Projects on Private Lands in Arizona
    A General Historic Properties Treatment Plan for Archaeological Investigations Associated With FCC Cell Tower Construction Projects on Private Lands in Arizona Prepared for: Verizon Wireless Tempe, Arizona Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Tempe, Arizona Terracon Project No. 65157582 August 2018 ABSTRACT Report Title: A General Historic Properties Treatment Plan for Archaeological Investigations Associated with FCC Cell Tower Construction Projects on Private Lands in Arizona Report Date: August 2018 Agencies: Federal Communications Commission, Arizona State Historic Preservation Office Project Sponsor: Verizon Wireless (Verizon) Project Description: Verizon constructs and collocates telecommunications facilities in Arizona. Due to the involvement of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the projects, they are considered federal undertakings subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviews FCC-licensed undertakings pursuant to two nationwide programmatic agreements. Some of Verizon’s proposed undertakings may be found by the FCC and SHPO to have an adverse effect on historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The purpose of this General Historic Properties Treatment Plan (General HPTP) is to streamline the resolution of adverse effects to historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the NRHP by Verizon-sponsored undertakings on private lands in Arizona. This streamlined resolution will also include the preparation of a project-specific addendum to the General HPTP. The General HPTP does not apply to state, county, municipal, or Tribal lands including private lands within tribal reservation boundaries, or to lands under federal jurisdiction. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Closure of Jefferson Proving Ground, Indiana, and Realignment to Yuma
    ___ - CLOSURE OF JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND INDIANA AND REALIGNMENT TO YUMA PROVING GROUND ARIZONA li 'J.fI..,o. Pre.1. VOLUME 1 OF 2 *YE=. GI.".] Pre.1. TEXT G,...d Final ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT . I STATEMENT September 1991 - . CLOSURE OF JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND, INDIANA AND REALIGNMENT TO WMA PROVING GROUND, ARIZONA Prepared by: Reviewed by: Louisville District U.S. Amy U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Materiel Command yy\C .- David E. Peixotto William 8. McCrath Colonel, Corps of Engineers Major General, US. Army Commander Chief of Staff Recommended for Approval by: Department of the Army Office of the Chief of Staff William A. Stofft Mabr General, General Staff Director of Management Approved by: Office of the Secretary of the Amy & 6,D& Lewis D. Walker Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Amy (Environment, Safety and Occupational Health) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CLOSURE OF JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND, INDlANA AND REALlGNMENT TO Wh4A PROVING GROUND, ARIZONA LEAD AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S.Amy Materiel Command (AMC); TITLE OFTHE PROPOSED ACTION Closure of Jefferson Proving Ground, Indiana and Realignment to Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona AFFECTED JURISDICTION: Jefferson Proving Ground: Jefferson, Jennings and 1Zipk-y Counties, Indiana. Yuma Proving Ground: Yuma and La Paz Counties, Arizona PREPARED BY David E. Peixotto, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Commander, US. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District, P.O. Box 59, Louisville, KY 40201-0059 REVIEWED BY: William 8. McCrath, Major General, Chief of Staff, US. Army Matericl Command RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY Williim A. Stofft, Major General, General Staff, Director of Management, Office of the Chief of Staff, Department of the Army APPROVED BY Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Yuma Proving Grounds Collection
    TITLE: Yuma Proving Grounds Collection DATE RANGE: 1943 - 2012 CALL NUMBER: Y-MS 21 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: 11 boxes (10 linear feet) PROVENANCE: Various sources COPYRIGHT: Unknown RESTRICTIONS: This collection is unrestricted. CREDIT LINE: Yuma Proving Grounds Collection, Y-MS 21, Arizona Historical Society-Rio Colorado Division, Yuma PROCESSED BY: John Irwin and Benjamin Findley, 2014 HISTORICAL NOTE: Yuma Proving Grounds is a military testing area for new technologies. It began in 1943 as the Special Bridge Test Section to assist in the development of floating bridges by testing them in the swiftly flowing Colorado River. The bridge tests were also used to train engineering troops in using the finalized bridges in the European theatre of WWII. In 1944, due to lack of man power, the testing was carried out by volunteer Italian Prisoner of War troops. Near the end of the war testing was also done on placing roads across rice paddies in preparation for invading Japan. After the war ended it was decided to place a permanent test section, called the Yuma Test Branch, in the area with the intent of testing army equipment against desert conditions. The test section would also continue various river testing activities. However in 1949, damage to the Gila sluice basin brought a halt to the major tests in the area. Repairs were planned but were delayed for various reasons, and in October, 1949 the Yuma Test Branch was shut down. In 1951 the Army decided to create another testing area in Yuma and created the Yuma Test Station. The station was used by a variety of different Army branches for testing including the Ordnance, Signal, Quartermaster and Chemical Divisions.
    [Show full text]