DOCSLIB.ORG

California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Regional Profile of the Central Coast Study Region (Pigeon Point to Point Conception, CA)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Regional Profile of the Central Coast Study Region (Pigeon Point to Point Conception, CA) California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Regional Profile of the Central Coast Study Region (Pigeon Point to Point Conception, CA) September 19, 2005 (v.3.0) MLPA Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group Central Coast Regional Profile September 19, 2005 (v.3.0) INSIDE COVER MEMO: This Final Regional Profile of the Central Coast Study Region (Pigeon Point to Point Conception, CA) provides information to support the implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act in this region. In addition to this document, the Regional Profile includes spatial data layers posted on the MLPA Internet Mapping Service (IMS) site (http://maps.msi.ucsb.edu/mlpa) and maps posted on the MLPA website (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/mlpa/draftdocuments.html). A draft of the Regional Profile was provided to the Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group on June 1, 2005; a draft final version was provided to them on August 1, 2005. Verbal and written comments were received from the stakeholders and addressed to the extent possible in this final version. This final profile was reviewed by members of the MLPA Science Advisory Team. The MLPA Initiative and CDFG staff are compiling and developing additional data layers and conducting GIS analyses. All of the spatial data layers will eventually be posted on the MLPA IMS site. In addition, new research contracts have been initiated to collect additional data. These include: • An assessment of patterns of non-consumptive use in the Central California Coast (C. LaFranchi and M. Tamanaha; results provided in Appendix VI) • A refinement of selected commercial fishing data through interviews to apportion historic effort to microblocks (Ecotrust; results pending and will be provided as Appendix VII) Cover Photo Credits: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Department of Commerce OAR/National Undersea Research Program (NURP) i MLPA Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group Central Coast Regional Profile September 19, 2005 (v.3.0) Contents Executive Summary................................................................................................................................ vii 1.0 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................1 2.0 Description of the Study Region .........................................................................................................3 3.0 Ecological Setting ...............................................................................................................................5 3.1 Ecosystems and Habitats ...............................................................................................................5 3.1.1 Depth Categories .....................................................................................................................9 3.1.2 Intertidal Zones ......................................................................................................................10 3.1.3 Estuaries ................................................................................................................................13 3.1.4 Seagrass Beds.......................................................................................................................14 3.1.5 Kelp Forests...........................................................................................................................15 3.1.6 Sandy/Soft Bottoms ...............................................................................................................16 3.1.7 Rocky Reefs...........................................................................................................................18 3.1.8 Underwater Pinnacles............................................................................................................19 3.1.9 Submarine Canyons ..............................................................................................................19 3.1.10 Oceanographic Habitats ......................................................................................................20 3.2 Important Regional Species..........................................................................................................23 3.2.1 Species likely to benefit from MPAs.......................................................................................23 3.2.2 Depleted and Overfished Species .........................................................................................24 3.2.3 Special Status Species ..........................................................................................................27 3.3 Areas of Biodiversity Significance.................................................................................................30 4.0 Land-Sea Interactions.......................................................................................................................32 4.1 Ecological linkages .......................................................................................................................33 4.2 Coastal Watersheds and Land Use in Study Region....................................................................34 4.3 Coastal Water Quality ...................................................................................................................35 4.3.1 Impaired Water Bodies in the Central Coast Study Region ...................................................37 4.3.2 Beach Closures......................................................................................................................39 4.4 How Land use and Watershed Modification Effect Rivers and Coastal Waters............................41 4.4.1 Local Geology Can Impact Water Quality..............................................................................41 4.4.2 Nonpoint Sources ..................................................................................................................42 4.4.3 Point Sources.........................................................................................................................43 4.5 Current Projects Along Central Coast Addressing Coastal-Watershed Linkages.........................44 4.5.1 Water Quality Protection Program, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary......................44 4.5.2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Projects...................................................................44 4.5.3 Other Water Quality and Monitoring Programs......................................................................46 4.6 Effects of Coastal-Watershed Interactions on MPAs or Potential MPAs ......................................48 5.0 Socioeconomic Setting .....................................................................................................................49 5.1 Coastal Counties...........................................................................................................................50 5.1.1 Monterey County....................................................................................................................50 5.1.2 San Luis Obispo County ........................................................................................................51 5.1.3 San Mateo County .................................................................................................................52 5.1.4 Santa Barbara County ...........................................................................................................52 5.1.5 Santa Cruz County.................................................................................................................53 5.2 Population Projections ..................................................................................................................54 5.3 Coastal Tourism............................................................................................................................55 5.4 Commercial Fisheries ...................................................................................................................58 5.5 Aquaculture and Kelp Harvesting .................................................................................................67 5.5.1 Synopsis of Kelp Harvest Regulations...................................................................................68 5.5.2 Recreational Kelp Harvest .....................................................................................................68 5.5.3 Other Aquaculture..................................................................................................................69 ii MLPA Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group Central Coast Regional Profile September 19, 2005 (v.3.0) 5.6 Recreational Fisheries ..................................................................................................................69 5.6.1 Species harvested jointly by commercial and recreational fisheries within Central Coast study region ..............................................................................................................................................75 5.7 Scientific Collecting.......................................................................................................................78 5.8 Non-consumptive Uses.................................................................................................................80 5.8.1 Recreational Beach Use ........................................................................................................81
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Larval Development of Scyra Acutifrons (Crustacea: Decapoda: Epialtidae)
    Animal Cells and Systems Vol. 14, No. 4, December 2010, 333Á341 Larval development of Scyra acutifrons (Crustacea: Decapoda: Epialtidae) with a key from the northern Pacific Seong Mi Oh and Hyun Sook Ko* Department of Biological Science, Silla University, Busan 617-736, Korea (Received 23 June 2010; received in revised form 28 July 2010; accepted 2 August 2010) The larvae of Scyra acutifrons are described and illustrated for the first time. The larval stage consists of two zoeal and a megalopal stages. The zoea of S. acutifrons is compared with those of other known species of the Epialtidae from the northern Pacific. The zoea of Scyra acutifrons can be easily distinguished from that of S. compressipes by having a longer rostral carapace spine and an endopod of maxillule with three setae. It is found that the genus Scyra (Pisinae) shows a great similarity to Pisoides bidentatus (Pisinae) and the genus Pugettia (Epialtinae) in the family Epialtidae; especially, S. acutidens coincides well with two Pugettia species (Pugettia incisa and P. gracilis) in the characteristics of the zoeal mouthpart appendages. To facilitate the study of plankton-collected material, a provisional key to the known zoeae of the Epialtidae from the northern Pacific is provided. Keywords: Epialtidae; larva; Scyra acutifrons; Pugettia; zoeal morphology; key; northern Pacific Introduction individually at a water temperature of 15918 and The majoid family Epialtidae contains four subfami- salinity of 29.790.6. Each of the individually reared lies; Epialtinae, Pisinae, Pliosomatinae, and Tychinae zoeae was held in a plastic well containing 5Á6ml of (see Ng et al. 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • UCSC Special Collections and Archives MS 6 Morley Baer
    UCSC Special Collections and Archives MS 6 Morley Baer Photographs - Job Number Index Description Job Number Date Thompson Lawn 1350 1946 August Peter Thatcher 1467 undated Villa Moderne, Taylor and Vial - Carmel 1645-1951 1948 Telephone Building 1843 1949 Abrego House 1866 undated Abrasive Tools - Bob Gilmore 2014, 2015 1950 Inn at Del Monte, J.C. Warnecke. Mark Thomas 2579 1955 Adachi Florists 2834 1957 Becks - interiors 2874 1961 Nicholas Ten Broek 2878 1961 Portraits 1573 circa 1945-1960 Portraits 1517 circa 1945-1960 Portraits 1573 circa 1945-1960 Portraits 1581 circa 1945-1960 Portraits 1873 circa 1945-1960 Portraits unnumbered circa 1945-1960 [Naval Radio Training School, Monterey] unnumbered circa 1945-1950 [Men in Hardhats - Sign reads, "Hitler Asked for It! Free Labor is Building the Reply"] unnumbered circa 1945-1950 CZ [Crown Zellerbach] Building - Sonoma 81510 1959 May C.Z. - SOM 81552 1959 September C.Z. - SOM 81561 1959 September Crown Zellerbach Bldg. 81680 1960 California and Chicago: landscapes and urban scenes unnumbered circa 1945-1960 Spain 85343 1957-1958 Fleurville, France 85344 1957 Berardi fountain & water clock, Rome 85347 1980 Conciliazione fountain, Rome 84154 1980 Ferraioli fountain, Rome 84158 1980 La Galea fountain, in Vatican, Rome 84160 1980 Leone de Vaticano fountain (RR station), Rome 84163 1980 Mascherone in Vaticano fountain, Rome 84167 1980 Pantheon fountain, Rome 84179 1980 1 UCSC Special Collections and Archives MS 6 Morley Baer Photographs - Job Number Index Quatre Fountain, Rome 84186 1980 Torlonai
    [Show full text]
  • By Marc Sani
    RIDING SAN FRAN TO SOCAL — AGAIN BY MARC SANI id-afternoon on Friday at the and Lambie’s 14th year as its lead wrench. along with an assistant, worked late into Hyatt Hotel two blocks from San The 44-year-old Lambie remained the night to back up that guarantee. M Francisco’s famous Fisherman’s calm and matter-of-fact, assuring Wharf, and the most popular man on- each rider their bike would be ready A BUCKET LIST TREK site was Jamaica Lambie. At work in Saturday morning before setting out a small downstairs conference room, for Santa Cruz some 85 miles south. I’ve made this trek four times over he was assembling more than 30 bikes “The day before is always hectic,” said the last half-dozen years, and the shipped to the hotel — one day before Lambie. “A big part is dealing with best of the best is along the Central the start of the California Coast Classic. riders who shipped their bikes. They’re Coast. To be blunt, even here there A sense of organized chaos hung really anxious to find out if there was are sections I love and some I dread. in the air as bikes were unpacked and any damage,” he said. And there always Although challenging, it’s a route any checked for damage under the fearful is — mostly bent or broken derailer reasonably fit cyclist can handle. A eyes of their owners. And a steady hangars. “Shipping a bike is just about dollop of common sense and some stream of cyclists wandered through the most dangerous thing you can solid planning will deliver a first-class with questions and hopes for a last- do with a bike before a major ride,” adventure for young and old.
    [Show full text]
  • OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES an Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals
    OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES An Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals By Paul Rudy, Jr. Lynn Hay Rudy Oregon Institute of Marine Biology University of Oregon Charleston, Oregon 97420 Contract No. 79-111 Project Officer Jay F. Watson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portland, Oregon 97232 Performed for National Coastal Ecosystems Team Office of Biological Services Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Table of Contents Introduction CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aequorea aequorea ................................................................ 6 Obelia longissima .................................................................. 8 Polyorchis penicillatus 10 Tubularia crocea ................................................................. 12 Anthozoa Anthopleura artemisia ................................. 14 Anthopleura elegantissima .................................................. 16 Haliplanella luciae .................................................................. 18 Nematostella vectensis ......................................................... 20 Metridium senile .................................................................... 22 NEMERTEA Amphiporus imparispinosus ................................................ 24 Carinoma mutabilis ................................................................ 26 Cerebratulus californiensis .................................................. 28 Lineus ruber .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Historically Famous Lighthouses
    HISTORICALLY FAMOUS LIGHTHOUSES CG-232 CONTENTS Foreword ALASKA Cape Sarichef Lighthouse, Unimak Island Cape Spencer Lighthouse Scotch Cap Lighthouse, Unimak Island CALIFORNIA Farallon Lighthouse Mile Rocks Lighthouse Pigeon Point Lighthouse St. George Reef Lighthouse Trinidad Head Lighthouse CONNECTICUT New London Harbor Lighthouse DELAWARE Cape Henlopen Lighthouse Fenwick Island Lighthouse FLORIDA American Shoal Lighthouse Cape Florida Lighthouse Cape San Blas Lighthouse GEORGIA Tybee Lighthouse, Tybee Island, Savannah River HAWAII Kilauea Point Lighthouse Makapuu Point Lighthouse. LOUISIANA Timbalier Lighthouse MAINE Boon Island Lighthouse Cape Elizabeth Lighthouse Dice Head Lighthouse Portland Head Lighthouse Saddleback Ledge Lighthouse MASSACHUSETTS Boston Lighthouse, Little Brewster Island Brant Point Lighthouse Buzzards Bay Lighthouse Cape Ann Lighthouse, Thatcher’s Island. Dumpling Rock Lighthouse, New Bedford Harbor Eastern Point Lighthouse Minots Ledge Lighthouse Nantucket (Great Point) Lighthouse Newburyport Harbor Lighthouse, Plum Island. Plymouth (Gurnet) Lighthouse MICHIGAN Little Sable Lighthouse Spectacle Reef Lighthouse Standard Rock Lighthouse, Lake Superior MINNESOTA Split Rock Lighthouse NEW HAMPSHIRE Isle of Shoals Lighthouse Portsmouth Harbor Lighthouse NEW JERSEY Navesink Lighthouse Sandy Hook Lighthouse NEW YORK Crown Point Memorial, Lake Champlain Portland Harbor (Barcelona) Lighthouse, Lake Erie Race Rock Lighthouse NORTH CAROLINA Cape Fear Lighthouse "Bald Head Light’ Cape Hatteras Lighthouse Cape Lookout Lighthouse. Ocracoke Lighthouse.. OREGON Tillamook Rock Lighthouse... RHODE ISLAND Beavertail Lighthouse. Prudence Island Lighthouse SOUTH CAROLINA Charleston Lighthouse, Morris Island TEXAS Point Isabel Lighthouse VIRGINIA Cape Charles Lighthouse Cape Henry Lighthouse WASHINGTON Cape Flattery Lighthouse Foreword Under the supervision of the United States Coast Guard, there is only one manned lighthouses in the entire nation. There are hundreds of other lights of varied description that are operated automatically.
    [Show full text]
  • (Brachyura, Majoidea) in Nearshore Kelp Habitats in Alaska, U.S.A
    TEMPORAL TRENDS OF TWO SPIDER CRABS (BRACHYURA, MAJOIDEA) IN NEARSHORE KELP HABITATS IN ALASKA, U.S.A. BY BENJAMIN DALY1,3) and BRENDA KONAR2,4) 1) University of Alaska Fairbanks, School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, 201 Railway Ave, Seward, Alaska 99664, U.S.A. 2) University of Alaska Fairbanks, School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, P.O. Box 757220, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775, U.S.A. ABSTRACT Pugettia gracilis and Oregonia gracilis are among the most abundant crab species in Alaskan kelp beds and were surveyed in two different kelp habitats in Kachemak Bay, Alaska, U.S.A., from June 2005 to September 2006, in order to better understand their temporal distribution. Habitats included kelp beds with understory species only and kelp beds with both understory and canopy species, which were surveyed monthly using SCUBA to quantify crab abundance and kelp density. Substrate complexity (rugosity and dominant substrate size) was assessed for each site at the beginning of the study. Pugettia gracilis abundance was highest in late summer and in habitats containing canopy kelp species, while O. gracilis had highest abundance in understory habitats in late summer. Large- scale migrations are likely not the cause of seasonal variation in abundances. Microhabitat resource utilization may account for any differences in temporal variation between P. gracilis and O. gracilis. Pugettia gracilis may rely more heavily on structural complexity from algal cover for refuge with abundances correlating with seasonal changes in kelp structure. Oregonia gracilis mayrelyonkelp more for decoration and less for protection provided by complex structure. Kelp associated crab species have seasonal variation in habitat use that may be correlated with kelp density.
    [Show full text]
  • President's Brunch See Page 4 Upcoming Tours Sunday February 24 - Pigeon Point Lighthouse - Pescadero, CA Saturday March 17 - St
    The Choke Rod preserving and restoring the Model A Ford since 1956 Volume 63, Issue 2 MAFCA 2018 Certifi cate of Merit February 2019 San Francisco Bay Area Chapter Model A Ford Club of America Photo by Cynthia Torres President's Brunch see page 4 Upcoming Tours Sunday February 24 - Pigeon Point Lighthouse - Pescadero, CA Saturday March 17 - St. Patrick's Day Parade - San Francisco Friday - Sunday April 12-14 - Overnighter to the Gold Country Sunday April 21 - Easter Parade - San Francisco The Choke Rod page 2 Volume 63, Issue 2 www.sfmodelaclub.org February 2019 Offi cial Publication of the San Francisco Bay Area Chapter President’s Message MAFCA We are off to a good start. My time as the perpetual OFFICERS president was confi rmed at the Presidio Social PRESIDENT Club during the President's Brunch. I am the El Mero Chingon Jafe or if you are Italian it is the Barry Kinney Capo di Tutti Capi. There is a reason I am the VICE PRESIDENTS undisputed leader, the President for Life. I just Tom Escher wanted to clear things up for all of you who might Gunard Mahl think of taking my place next year. Greg Martinez John Bettencourt, Joan Peterson, and Walter Caplan are three of the most capable people I know, are leading a tour down the Pacifi c SECRETARY Coast Highway in February to the Pigeon Point Light Station State Joan Peterson Historic Park followed by lunch at Duarte's Tavern in Pescadero. TREASURER The date is Sunday February 24. Look for details in this issue of the Jeanine Mahl Choke Rod.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Intertidal Study and User Survey, Point Pinos, California
    Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary A Comparative Intertidal Study and User Survey, Point Pinos, California July 31, 2003 Submitted to: Mr. Dennis Long, Executive Director Monterey Bay Sanctuary Foundation 299 Foam Street Monterey, CA 93940 Prepared and Submitted by: Environmental 225 Prado Rd., Suite D, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.0310, FAX: 805.541.0421 Preface In April 2000, the City of Pacific Grove contracted with the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Foundation (MBSF) to serve as the neutral fiscal sponsor for a project to study the impacts of human activities on the rocky intertidal shore and tidepools at Point Pinos. The City created a Point Pinos Tidepool Task Force Subcommittee on Research to develop and oversee the research project and interface with the MBSF. The Subcommittee members were appointed from numerous interested parties with differing views on potential impacts resulting from visitor use. The Subcommittee was responsible for: developing a Request for Proposals (RFP), distributing the RFP to solicit research proposals, and selecting a contractor based on proposed methods and qualifications. The Subcommittee was also responsible for approving the final and more detailed study plan submitted by the selected contractor, reviewing quarterly progress reports, and approving the final report on the project. The RFP, designed to address four primary questions concerning patterns of visitor use, activities, impacts, and past changes at Point Pinos, was circulated to the coastal and marine science communities for solicitation of proposals. Throughout the entire process of proposal review and contractor selection, including project implementation, the Subcommittee required that rigorous science be incorporated into the project plans.
    [Show full text]
  • San Mateo Coastside California: Shipwrecks and the Portuguese
    San Mateo Coastside California: Shipwrecks and the Portuguese By Lee Foster Author’s Note: This article “San Mateo Coastside California: Shipwrecks and the Portuguese” is a chapter in my new book/ebook Northern California History Travel Adventures: 35 Suggested Trips. The subject is also covered in my book/ebook Northern California Travel: The Best Options. That book is available in English as a book/ebook and also as an ebook in Chinese. Several of my books on California can be seen on my Amazon Author Page. In Brief Coastal San Mateo, south of San Francisco on Highway 1, is a joy to drive. It presents lighthouses and historic shipwrecks. The coastside also offers ethnic history (such as the arrival of Portuguese farmers). The area is dotted with small towns, and appealing beaches, some with tidepools. The Historic Story The San Mateo Coast between the Montara and Pigeon Point lighthouses offers a bucolic seaside drive. Along the way you will find sandy beaches, cabbage-family farmlands, and small coastal towns. Be sure to spend time in Half Moon Bay and Pescadero. In the busy summer travel season, morning fogs tend to burn off by noon. Because of that, you should plan this trip.as a late morning/early afternoon outing in summer. The Pigeon Point Lighthouse on the San Mateo Coast of California The road is relatively straight. That is to say, if you compare it to the roller-coaster rides found along the Mendocino/Sonoma coast north of San Francisco or in Big Sur, south of Monterey. Pick up Highway 1 on the southwest side of San Francisco and drive south.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) Records, MS 3980
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c86t0k0p Online items available Finding aid to the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) records, MS 3980 Finding aid prepared by Marie Silva California Historical Society 678 Mission Street San Francisco, CA, 94105-4014 (415) 357-1848 [email protected] 2012 Finding aid to the Historic MS 3980 1 American Buildings Survey (HABS) records, MS 3980 Title: Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) records Date (inclusive): circa 1790-2012 Date (bulk): 1933-1965 Collection Identifier: MS 3980 Creator: Historic American Buildings Survey Extent: 63 boxes and 1 oversize box(30 linear feet) Contributing Institution: California Historical Society 678 Mission Street San Francisco, CA, 94105-4014 (415) 357-1848 [email protected] URL: http://www.californiahistoricalsociety.org/ Physical Location: Collection is stored onsite. Language of Materials: Collection materials are in English. Abstract: Collection comprises duplicate and original records of the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), dated between circa 1790 and 2011, with most records dating between 1933 and 1965. The bulk of the collection consists of duplicate HABS documentation for historic buildings and places in California and the National Park Service's Western Region, although the collection also includes fragmentary records for non-Western states, Panama, and Mexico. Buildings of historical merit, both “antique” (pre-1860) and newer, are recorded. Copies of official HABS documentation include photographic prints, negatives, photographic pages, inventory work sheets, photograph-data book reports, measured drawings, and other materials, prepared and submitted by the program’s surveyors. These materials are supplemented by administrative files, correspondence, survey notes, sketches, field notebooks, essays, ephemera, newspaper clippings, and other published materials.
    [Show full text]
  • W • 32°38'47.76”N 117°8'52.44”
    public access 32°32’4”N 117°7’22”W • 32°38’47.76”N 117°8’52.44”W • 33°6’14”N 117°19’10”W • 33°22’45”N 117°34’21”W • 33°45’25.07”N 118°14’53.26”W • 33°45’31.13”N 118°20’45.04”W • 33°53’38”N 118°25’0”W • 33°55’17”N 118°24’22”W • 34°23’57”N 119°30’59”W • 34°27’38”N 120°1’27”W • 34°29’24.65”N 120°13’44.56”W • 34°58’1.2”N 120°39’0”W • 35°8’54”N 120°38’53”W • 35°20’50.42”N 120°49’33.31”W • 35°35’1”N 121°7’18”W • 36°18’22.68”N 121°54’5.76”W • 36°22’16.9”N 121°54’6.05”W • 36°31’1.56”N 121°56’33.36”W • 36°58’20”N 121°54’50”W • 36°33’59”N 121°56’48”W • 36°35’5.42”N 121°57’54.36”W • 37°0’42”N 122°11’27”W • 37°10’54”N 122°23’38”W • 37°41’48”N 122°29’57”W • 37°45’34”N 122°30’39”W • 37°46’48”N 122°30’49”W • 37°47’0”N 122°28’0”W • 37°49’30”N 122°19’03”W • 37°49’40”N 122°30’22”W • 37°54’2”N 122°38’40”W • 37°54’34”N 122°41’11”W • 38°3’59.73”N 122°53’3.98”W • 38°18’39.6”N 123°3’57.6”W • 38°22’8.39”N 123°4’25.28”W • 38°23’34.8”N 123°5’40.92”W • 39°13’25”N 123°46’7”W • 39°16’30”N 123°46’0”W • 39°25’48”N 123°25’48”W • 39°29’36”N 123°47’37”W • 39°33’10”N 123°46’1”W • 39°49’57”N 123°51’7”W • 39°55’12”N 123°56’24”W • 40°1’50”N 124°4’23”W • 40°39’29”N 124°12’59”W • 40°45’13.53”N 124°12’54.73”W 41°18’0”N 124°0’0”W • 41°45’21”N 124°12’6”W • 41°52’0”N 124°12’0”W • 41°59’33”N 124°12’36”W Public Access David Horvitz & Ed Steck In late December of 2010 and early Janu- Some articles already had images, in which ary of 2011, I drove the entire California I added mine to them.
    [Show full text]
  • Lighthouse Bibliography.Pdf
    Title Author Date 10 Lights: The Lighthouses of the Keweenaw Peninsula Keweenaw County Historical Society n.d. 100 Years of British Glass Making Chance Brothers 1924 137 Steps: The Story of St Mary's Lighthouse Whitley Bay North Tyneside Council 1999 1911 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1911 1912 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1912 1913 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1913 1914 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1914 1915 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1915 1916 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1916 1917 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1917 1918 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1918 1919 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1919 1920 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1920 1921 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1921 1922 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1922 1923 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1923 1924 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1924 1925 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1925 1926 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1926 1927 Report of the Commissioner of Lighthouses Department of Commerce 1927 1928 Report of the Commissioner of
    [Show full text]