DOCSLIB.ORG

Soil Survey of Angeles National Forest Area, California (1987)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Soil Survey of Angeles National Forest Area, California (1987) How To Use This Soil Survey General Soil Map The general soil map, which is the small scale map preceding the detailed soil maps, shows the survey area divided into groups of associated soils called general soil map units. This map is useful in planning the use and management of large areas. To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the map, identify the name of the map unit in the area on the map legend, then refer to the section General Soil Map Units for a general description of the soils in your area. Detailed Soil Maps The detailed soil maps follow the general soil map. These maps can be useful in planning the use and management of small areas. Kokc mo To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the index to Map Sheets, MAP SHEET which precedes the soil maps. Note the number of the map sheet, and turn to that sheet. INDEX TO MAP SHEETS Locate your area of interest on the map 150 sheet. Note the map unit 217 symbols that are in that area. Turn to the Index to Map Units (see Con- NOTE: Map unit symbols in a soil tents), which lists the map survey may consist only of numbers or units by symbol and letters, or they may be a combination name and shows the of numbers and letters. page where each map MAP SHEET unit is described. The Summary of Tables shows which table has data on a specific land use for each detailed soil map unit. See Contents for sections of this publication that may address your specific needs. Angeles National Forest Area, California This is a publication of the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region and is a joint effort and the University of California (Agricultural Experiment Station) and the Soil Conservation Service. As a part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, the fieldwork and technical quality control for this survey were the responsibility of the Forest Service. The correlation of the soils was done by the Soil Conservation Service in consultation with the Forest Service. The Soil Conservation Service has leadership for the federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. In line with Department of Agriculture policies, benefits of this program are available to all, regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, marital status, handicap, or age. Major fieldwork for this soil survey was performed in the period 1975-80. Soil names and descriptions were approved in 1981. Unless otherwise indicated, statements in this publication refer to conditions in the survey area in 1980. This survey was made cooperatively by the Forest Service and the Soil Conservation Service. The soil survey area consists of these parts of the Angeles National Forest in Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Soil maps in this survey may be copied without permission. Enlargement of these maps, however, could cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping. If enlarged, maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a larger scale. Cover: View eastward along Angeles Crest Highway and parallel to San Gabriel fault zone, to Red Box Station in saddle. Contents Index to map units ...........................................................iv Map unit descriptions and Summary of tables .......................................................................v management interpretations .................................. 17 Foreword .............................................................................vi Use and management of the soils ................................. 89 General nature of the survey area ..............................1 Watershed ..................................................................... 89 History and development ............................................1 Range production ........................................................ 89 Vegetation .......................................................................2 Wildlife habitat ............................................................ 89 Geomorphology ............................................................2 Recreation ..................................................................... 90 Climate ...........................................................................3 Forestry ......................................................................... 90 How this survey was made ............................................4 Classification of the soils ............................................... 92 Taxonomic unit descriptions ...................................... 97 General soil map units ....................................................5 Formation of the soils ..................................................149 General soil map ............................................................................ 9 Soil properties ................................................................151 Detailed soil map units ............................................. 10 References ........................................................................155 Definitions and criteria .................................................. 11 Glossary ............................................................................157 Taxonomic Unit Descriptions Bakeoven family ......................................................................98 Olete family ..............................................................................124 Balder family .............................................................................99 Osito family ..............................................................................126 Baywood family .....................................................................100 Pacifico family .........................................................................127 Calcixerollic Xerochrepts .....................................................101 Pismo family ............................................................................128 Calleguas family .....................................................................102 Preston family ..........................................................................129 Caperton family ......................................................................103 San Andreas family .................................................................130 Capistrano family ...................................................................104 Shortcut family ........................................................................131 Chilao family ...........................................................................105 Springdale family ....................................................................132 Etsel family ..............................................................................106 Stonyford family ......................................................................133 Exchequer family ...................................................................107 Stukel family ............................................................................134 Green Bluff family .................................................................108 Supan family ............................................................................135 Hanford family .......................................................................109 Sur family .................................................................................136 Haploxeralfs ............................................................................110 Tollhouse family ......................................................................137 Haploxerolls ............................................................................111 Hohmann family ....................................................................112 Trigo family ..............................................................................138 Kilburn family ........................................................................114 Tujunga family ........................................................................139 Knutsen family .......................................................................115 Typic Haploxeralfs ..................................................................140 Lithic Haploxeralfs ................................................................116 Typic Xerochrepts ..............................................................................141 Lithic Xerorthents ..................................................................117 Typic Xerorthents ...............................................................................142 Lodo family .............................................................................118 Vertic Xerochrepts .............................................................................143 Millsholm family ...................................................................119 Vista family ..........................................................................................144 Modesto family ......................................................................120 Waterman family ..........................................................................145 Modjeska family ....................................................................121 Winthrop family .................................................................................146 Mollic Haploxeralfs ...............................................................122 Wrenthem family ..........................................................................147
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mineral Resources of the Devil Canyon-Bear Canyon Primitive Area, California
    Mineral Resources of the Devil Canyon-Bear Canyon Primitive Area, California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1230-G Mineral Resources of the Devil Canyon-Bear Canyon Primitive Area, California By DWIGHT F. CROWDER STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1230-G An evaluation of the mineral potential of the area UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1967 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 55 cents (paper cover) STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS The Wilderness Act (Public Law 88-577, Sept. 3, 1964) and the Conference Report on Senate bill 4, 88th Congress, direct the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to make mineral surveys of wilderness and primitive areas. Areas officially desig­ nated as "wilderness," "wild," or "canoe," when the act was passed, were incorporated into the National Wilderness Preservation System. Areas classed as "primitive" were not included in the Wilderness Sys­ tem, but the act provided that each primitive area should be studied for its suitability for incorporation into the Wilderness System. The mineral surveys constitute one aspect of the suitability studies. This bulletin reports the results of a mineral survey in the Devil Canyon-Bear Canyon primitive area, California. The area discussed in the report corresponds to the area under consideration for wilderness status. It is not identical with the Devil Canyon-Bear Canyon Primitive Area as defined because modifications of the boundary have been proposed for the area to be con­ sidered for wilderness status.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2016 to 09/30/2016 Angeles National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2016 to 09/30/2016 Angeles National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Angeles National Forest, Forestwide (excluding Projects occurring in more than one Forest) R5 - Pacific Southwest Region Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog - Wildlife, Fish, Rare plants In Progress: Expected:01/2017 05/2017 Nathan Sill Translocation into Bear Creek, Scoping Start 11/07/2014 626-574-5328 within the San Gabriel [email protected] Wilderness Area. Description: This project will involve moving frogs or tadpoles from existing populations into Bear Creek. This effort is designed CE to establish another population within the historic range of the species in order to aid in its recovery. *UPDATED* Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=46095 Location: UNIT - Angeles National Forest All Units. STATE - California. COUNTY - Los Angeles. LEGAL - Not Applicable. This project will occur within the Bear Creek drainage within the San Gabriel Wilderness of the San Gabriel River Ranger District. San Gabriel Mountains National - Land management planning In Progress: Expected:01/2017 02/2017 Justin Seastrand Monument Plan and Land Scoping Start 06/19/2015 626-574-5278 Management Plan Amendment Est. Comment Period Public [email protected] EA Notice 07/2016 *UPDATED* Description: The Angeles National Forest (ANF) is proposing to develop a management plan for the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument as required by Presidential Proclamation. This plan will be adopted as an amendment to the existing ANF Land Management Plan Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=46964 Location: UNIT - Angeles National Forest All Units.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Collections
    A. andersonii A. Gray SANTA CRUZ MANZANITA San Mateo Along Skyline Blvd. between Gulch Road and la Honda Rd. (A. regismontana?) Santa Cruz Along Empire Grade, about 2 miles north of its intersection with Alba Grade. Lat. N. 37° 07', Long. 122° 10' W. Altitude about 2550 feet. Santa Cruz Aong grade (summit) 0.8 mi nw Alba Road junction (2600 ft elev. above and nw of Ben Lomond (town)) - Empire Grade Santa Cruz Near Summit of Opal Creek Rd., Big Basin Redwood State Park. Santa Cruz Near intersection of Empire Grade and Alba Grade. ben Lomond Mountain. Santa Cruz Along China Grade, 0.2 miles NW of its intersection with the Big Basin-Saratoga Summit Rd. Santa Cruz Nisene Marks State Park, Aptos Creek watershed; under PG&E high-voltage transmission line on eastern rim of the creek canyon Santa Cruz Along Redwood Drive 1.5 miles up (north of) from Monte Toyon Santa Cruz Miller's Ranch, summit between Gilroy and Watsonville. Santa Cruz At junction of Alba Road and Empire Road Ben Lomond Ridge summit Santa Cruz Sandy ridges near Bonny Doon - Santa Cruz Mountains Santa Cruz 3 miles NW of Santa Cruz, on upper UC Santa Cruz campus, Marshall Fields Santa Cruz Mt. Madonna Road along summit of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Between Lands End and Manzanitas School. Lat. N. 37° 02', Long. 121° 45' W; elev. 2000 feet Monterey Moro Road, Prunedale (A. pajaroensis?) A. auriculata Eastw. MT. DIABLO MANZANITA Contra Costa Between two major cuts of Cowell Cement Company (w face of ridge) - Mount Diablo, Lime Ridge Contra Costa Immediately south of Nortonville; 37°57'N, 121°53'W Contra Costa Top Pine Canyon Ridge (s-facing slope between the two forks) - Mount Diablo, Emmons Canyon (off Stone Valley) Contra Costa Near fire trail which runs s from large spur (on meridian) heading into Sycamore Canyon - Mount Diablo, Inner Black Hills Contra Costa Off Summit Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Littlerock Reservoir Sediment Removal Project Final EIS/EIR
    Littlerock Reservoir Sediment Removal Project C. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Implementation of Alternative 1 would result in the same impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special- status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW, Forest Service, or USFWS species as described for the Project. Sensitive plants (Impact BIO-12) or invertebrates (Impact BIO-13) were not found in the disturbance area and would be subject to the same direct and indirect impacts as the Project. Implementation of Alternative 1 may result in a minor reduction in road kill to butterflies should they occur from fewer truck trips. Implementation of Alternative 1 would result in the same impacts to southwestern pond turtles (Impact BIO-14), two-striped garter snakes (Impact BIO-15), coast range newts (Impact BIO-16), and sensitive amphibian and reptile species (Impact BIO-17) as described for the Project. Reduced water levels required to construct in July could reduce habitat for these species in the Reservoir; however, fluctuating water levels at the reservoir occur during below-normal rain years. Implementation of Alternative 1 would result in the same impacts to burrowing owls (Impact BIO-18), special status nesting birds (Impact BIO-19), special status bats (Impact BIO-20), and other special-status mammals (Impact BIO-21, Impact BIO-22, and Impact BIO-23) or greater as described for the Project. The commencement of work on July 1 would increase the likelihood of disturbing active breeding birds or disrupt mammal denning or pupping should they occur. Implementation of the same SPCs for the Project would reduce impacts to biological resources identified under Criterion BIO 3 from Alternative 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Sheet Summary
    Factual Report Camp 16 Incident Burnover And Fatal Vehicle Accident August 30, 2009 CA-LAC-09196997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Review of Team Process………………………………….……… 1 Team Roster……………………………………………….……… 3 Overview of Accident …………………………………………… 4 Sequence of Events………………………………………………. 6 Findings…………………………………………………………... 18 Witness List………………………………………………………. 24 Causal and Contributing Factors…………………………………. 27 Attachments Blue Sheet………………………………………………………… 31 Green Sheet……………………………………………………….. 35 Fire Behavior …………………………………………………….. 40 Topographic Fire Behavior Map…………………………………. 70 Orthostatic Fire Behavior Map…………………………………… 71 California Highway Patrol Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team Report………….. 73 Training Review Summary………………………………………. 77 LACoFD Personnel………………………………………. 78 CDCR Inmate Fire Fighters……………………………… 82 Safety Review Summary…………………………………………. 88 Scene Maps Topographic Map………………………………………… 93 Aerial with Road Map……………………………………. 94 Google Earth Elevated View Map……………………….. 95 Google Earth Depressed View Map……………………… 96 Times Burned Map……………………………………….. 97 Fire History Map…………………………………………. 98 Aerial Facility Map……………………………………….. 99 Aerial Vehicle Placement Map…………………………… 100 Report Photos……………………………………………………... 103 Large Scale Site Survey Diagram………………………………… 123 Small Scale Site Survey Diagram………………………………… 124 Glossary and Acronyms………………………………………….. 125 Foreword Fire Captain Ted Hall, Superintendent 16, and Fire Fighter Specialist Arnie Quinones, Foreman Crew 16-3, are two brother firefighters we shall never forget.
    [Show full text]
  • Petrologic Comparison of Cataclastic Rocks from Shallow and Deeper Crustal Levels Within the San Andreas Fault System of Southern California
    Petrologic Comparison of Cataclastic Rocks From Shallow and Deeper Crustal Levels Within the San Andreas Fault System of Southern California J. Lawford Anderson Robert H. Osborne Department of Geological Sciences University of Southern California USGS CONTRACT NO. 14-08-0001-17732 Supported by the EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM OPEN-FILE NO. 80-987 U.S. Geological Survey OPEN FILE REPORT This report was prepared under contract to the U.S. Geological Survey and has not been reviewed for conformity with USGS editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Opinions and conclusions expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the USGS. Any use of trade names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the USGS. I. INTRODUCTION Studies leading to earthquake prediction and control require not only a knowledge of the causes and mechanics of earthquakes, but also an understanding of the physical, compositional, and me­ chanical properties of the geologic system in which they occur. Presently, little has been written about the nature of cataclastic rocks within fault zones except that it is generally markedly dif­ ferent from rocks on either side of the fault; that it may be fault gouge, fault breccia, cataclasite, or mylonite; 1 and that it ori­ ginates from mechanical crushing of rocks and from varying degrees of secondary chemical and mineralogical alterations by fluids mov­ ing through the fault zone (Higgins, 1971). The authors have recently completed a study of cataclastic rocks along the present trace of the San Andreas (Anderson, et al, in press) and the findings are summarized below in the section "Cataclastic Rocks within the San Andreas Fault Zone of Southern California." Our present effort has been directed at the San Gabriel Fault (Figure 1 and Plate 1) which as a deeply eroded precursor to the present San Andreas may provide intrafault mate­ rial representative of deeper crustal levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Littlerock Reservoir Sediment Removal Project Final EIS/EIR
    Littlerock Reservoir Sediment Removal Project C. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES C.9 Recreation and Land Use This section describes the impacts to land use and public recreation associated with the construction and operation of the proposed action and alternatives. The EIS/EIR considers existing and proposed land uses in addition to sensitive land uses that have the potential to be affected by the Project. Sensitive land uses include the following land use types: residences, schools, hospitals, daycare centers, retirement homes, and cemeteries. Recreational resources are also defined as sensitive land uses, as they are susceptible to disturbances (e.g., noise, traffic, dust, etc.) that could decrease or eliminate the value of the recreational experience. In general, recreational facilities (parks, open space, playgrounds, play fields, etc.), recrea- tional activities (bicycling, hiking, boating, etc.), and recreationists are considered to be sensitive receptors for purposes of this impact assessment. C.9.1 Affected Environment The proposed sediment removal at Littlerock Reservoir would be located within the Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers Ranger District of the Angeles National Forest (ANF). Truck routes for construction equipment and sediment removal would traverse federal and local jurisdictions that include National Forest System (NFS) lands, unincorporated Los Angeles County, and City of Palmdale, as shown in Figure C.9-1 (Jurisdictional Boundaries). The extent of the area to be analyzed for land use impacts is considered the Land Use Study Area [see Figure C.9-2 (Angeles National Forest Land Use Zones) and Figure C.9-3 (Land Use Designations)]. While other issue areas in this EIS/EIR may identify a Study Area with a different radius, the Land Use Study Area has been defined by the following: Land and recreation uses immediately adjacent to construction activities at Littlerock Reservoir; Land and recreation uses located along the sediment removal truck routes; and Land and recreation uses adjacent to the proposed sediment disposal sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan
    Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California Prepared for City of Pasadena Department of Water and Power 100 North Garfield Avenue, Room N306 Pasadena, California 91109 Contact: Elisa Ventura, P.E. T: (626) 744-4465 Prepared by Psomas 225 South Lake Avenue, Suite 1000 Pasadena, California 91101 Contact: Marc Blain, Senior Project Manager/Biologist T: (626) 351-2000 F: (626) 351-2030 August 2019 Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location ..................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Regulations ................................................................... 3 2.1 Hahamongna Watershed Park Master Plan .......................................................... 3 2.2 Arroyo Seco Watershed Management and Restoration Plan ................................ 3 2.3 Angeles National Forest Land Management Plan ................................................. 3 2.4 USDA-FS Weed Management Strategy ................................................................ 4 2.5 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan ...................................................... 4 2.6 One Arroyo Report ................................................................................................ 5 2.7 Arroyos & Foothills Conservancy .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Final Redacted Station Botany Assessment
    BOTANY TECHNICAL SPECIALIST’S REPORT BURNED AREA EMERGENCY REHABILITATION for STATION FIRE Resource: Botany Fire Name: Station Fire – National Forest System Lands Month/Year: 09/2009 Author Name: Janet Nickerman, Joanna Clines, Jan Beyers with assistance from Kerry Myers, Tommy Stoughton and Krissy Day. Author Duty Station: Angeles, Sierra National Forest, PSW Research Station and the San Bernardino National Forest. Thickleaf yerba santa resprouting after a fire. (photo by Stoughton) I. SUMMARY The Station Fire started on August 26, 2009 and burned 161,188 acres. It is the largest fire in the recorded history of Los Angeles County. Until now, the largest fire was 75,000 acres. There are approximately 37 cities that surround the fire perimeter. The fire area is extremely steep, inaccessible and it supports some important and unique habitats. There is occupied and potential habitat for one federal endangered plant species and eleven Forest Service Sensitive plant species. Thirty seven plant communities were burned or impacted by suppression activities. Some of these habitats and species are at risk to further losses. For example, disturbances/degradation from post­fire impacts of sediment and ash delivery will result in loss of water quality, scouring of riparian systems and loss of wildlife habitat at natural springs and spring developments due to sediment delivery and erosion. In addition, vegetation community Page 1 of 24 recovery is at risk for delayed recovery due to invasive species and illegal Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) activity. Summary of Initial Concerns o Invasive species spread (see Specialist Report for Noxious Weeds and Non­native invasive plant species).
    [Show full text]
  • Public Release Station Fire 2500-8
    Station Fire BAER September 23, 2009 USDA-FOREST SERVICE FS-2500-8 Date of Report: September 23, 2009 BURNED-AREA REPORT (Reference FSH 2509.13) PART I - TYPE OF REQUEST A. Type of Report [X] 1. Funding request for estimated emergency stabilization funds [ ] 2. Accomplishment Report [ ] 3. No Treatment Recommendation B. Type of Action [X] 1. Initial Request (Best estimate of funds needed to complete eligible stabilization measures) [ ] 2. Interim Report [ ] Updating the initial funding request based on more accurate site data or design analysis [ ] Status of accomplishments to date [ ] 3. Final Report (Following completion of work) PART II - BURNED-AREA DESCRIPTION A. Fire Name: Station Fire B. Fire Number: CA-ANF-3622 C. State: CA D. County: Los Angeles E. Region: 5 F. Forest: Angeles G. District: Los Angeles River, San Gabriel River, Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers H. Fire Incident Job Code: P5E5VL I. Date Fire Started: August 26, 2009 J. Date Fire Contained: TBD (pending winter rains) K. Suppression Cost: $86,967,661 as of 09/23/09 L. Fire Suppression Damages Repaired with Suppression Funds 1. Fireline waterbarred (miles): 110 total miles of dozer line (46 on FS land) 2. Fireline seeded (miles): None to date 3. Other (identify): None M. Watershed Number: M. Watershed Number: HUC 6: 180701050201 (Pacoima Wash), 180701050103 (Lower Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701050102 (Middle Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701050101 (Upper Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701050202 (Verdugo Wash), 1807010503992 (Arroyo Seco), 180701050402 (Eaton Wash), 180701050102 (Middle Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701060101 (Upper West Fork San Gabriel River), 180701060102 (Middle West Fork San Gabriel River), 180701020101 (Aliso Canyon), 180902060406 (Little Rock Reservoir), 180902060402 (Little Rock Creek), 180701020102 (Soledad Canyon-Arrastre Canyon), 180701020103 (Lower Soledad Canyon) N.
    [Show full text]
  • Tehachapi Renewable FEIS Volume III Appendix B2 Biological Evaluation.Pdf
    Appendix B.2 Biological Evaluation TRTP BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION 2010 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1 CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION .............................................................................................. 15 Forest Land and Resources Management Plan (LRMP) ......................................................................... 15 Program Strategies and Tactics ...................................................................................................... 16 Applicable Land Management Plan Standards .............................................................................. 17 Forest Service Manual 2081.03 .............................................................................................................. 19 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (1940) ........................................................................................ 20 Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (2007) ........................................................................................... 20 California Spotted Owl Conservation Strategy ....................................................................................... 20 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................... 22 Segment 11: Mesa – Vincent (via Gould) 500/220 kV T/L ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Outings-2015.Pdf
    2/11/2018 Sierra Club Activities Saturday, January 03, 2015 to Sunday, January 04, 2015 0452-Angeles Chp Hundred Peaks Outing CANCELLED RESCHEDULED TO APR 18 - 19 - I: Pahrump Point (5,740'), Stewart Point (5,265') Mat Kelliher 818-667-2490 [email protected] Bill Simpson 323-683-0959 [email protected] I: Pahrump Point (5,740'), Stewart Point (5,265') - Start out the New Year with a fun weekend of rocky peakbagging near Death Valley NP high above the Chicago Valley north-northeast of Shoshone, CA. We'll move at a slow pace each day; however, each peak will require a strenuous effort, and although the routes will be restricted to Class 2 scrambling, comfort on steep and loose, rocky and thorny cross-country terrain is required. Saturday morning we'll get an early start and head into the "Nopah Range" Wilderness Area located along the eastern range bordering Chicago Valley; first we'll warm up by trudging across a broad alluvial fan, then we'll make our way up through a sometimes tight and rocky canyon before getting up onto a steep and loose, rocky and thorny ridgeline that will bring us up onto the narrow and rocky summit ridge, which we'll ascend to the summit of Pahrump Point. After thoroughly enjoying the reportedly exquisite views up there, we'll return the way we came in for a day's total of 8 RT mi with 3,400' gain. We'll make camp where we're parked and will celebrate the weekend under a nearly full moon sky with a traditional DPS Potluck Happy Hour.
    [Show full text]