DOCSLIB.ORG

Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information 2015, Wilderness, Hume Lake RD, Sequoia NF Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information (trailhead names are in bold type) By: Jeff Duneman, Wilderness Ranger Hume Lake Ranger District, Sequoia National Forest Last updated: August 3rd, 2015 *NOTES: “How long will it take?! Is it a hard hike?!” Difficulty and time required depends on you, the hiker, and your condition. An experienced, strong hiker will cover 3-4 miles (or more!) an hour carrying a full pack, without stopping. Someone who doesn’t hike much (or walk much, for that matter) will cover 1-2 miles (or less!) an hour, without a big pack, with frequent stops. Know your abilities! Always carry water, always check weather conditions, always tell people where you are going, and always familiarize yourself with the area (real maps recommended, not GPS). Pay attention to your surroundings, and enjoy your wilderness! *LEAVE NO TRACE: Please take a look at the seven Leave No Trace wilderness ethics before you head out to the trail – https://lnt.org/learn/7-principles *Never leave trash or toilet paper behind! Pack it all in, pack it all out. *When campfires are allowed (check with the forest service on current fire status), always completely drown your campfire so that it is completely out! Jennie Lakes Wilderness (JLW) 1) Big Meadows Trail (#?)/Weaver Lake Trail (#30E09) Big Meadows trailhead up to Weaver Lake: At about 3.5 miles one-way, this is one of the easiest and most popular hikes in the JLW. The trail winds through Lodgepole Pines near the trailhead, climbs slowly (with a nice view into Kings Canyon) into Red and White Firs, with another slight ascent once you are getting closer to the lake. A few minutes past the first junction (with the “Leave No Trace” sign) with Fox Meadow, pay attention to the next junction between this trail and the Jennie Lake trail heading south, and make sure to follow the path east to Weaver Lake. The trail sign at this junction was recently stolen so pay attention! (currently there is a only laminated paper sign directing you to the lakes) The trail has been cleared of all downed trees and the tread and most of the water bars are in good condition. Once up at the lake, please camp only in established campsites and do not build any new fire rings! There are over 15 sites located all around the lake, most on the north and west sides. Please do not camp on the east side of the lake and try to camp at least 100-200’ off of the lakeshore. Trout fishing is generally very good at the lake. 2015, Wilderness, Hume Lake RD, Sequoia NF 2) Big Meadow Trail(#?)/Jennie Lake Trail (#29E05) Big Meadow trailhead up to Jennie Lake: Beginning the same as the hike up to Weaver Lake, this very popular trail turns south/southeast at the junction with the Weaver Lake Trail. It is about 6.5 miles to Jennie Lake cutting slowly around Shell Mountain and then up and down either side of Poop Out Pass. It is a bit of a climb up to the pass but once there it flattens out for a bit, before descending on the other side. A final small ascent and descent leads past some great views into the northern section of the JLW and Kings Canyon as you get close to the lake. There are primarily Lodgepole Pines and White and Red Fir trees along the trail, with some Jeffrey Pines on the way as well as Mountain Pines higher up. The trail has been cleared and there are only a couple of very old downed trees remain along the route, but all have well- worn user trails around them. There are some rock and water bar issues coming up and down either side of Poop Out Pass with some rocky wash out on small sections of the trail, but in general the tread and most of the water bars are also in very good condition. Once up at the lake, please camp only in established campsites and do not build any new fire rings! There are about 20 sites located all around the lake, most on the north and west sides. Please try to camp at least 100-200’ off of the lakeshore. Trout fishing is also generally very good at the lake. 3) Rowell Meadow Trail (#30E08) Rowell Meadow trailhead up to Rowell Meadow: Another relatively easy hike, it is about 2.5 miles up to the meadow and the old snow survey cabin. Please drive slowly as you pass the Horse Corral camp on the way in; the trailhead is about 2 miles up a decent dirt road. Once on the trail there is a ½ mile ascent up a rocky section to the Wilderness Boundary sign, and this provides some excellent views west and south into the heart of the Jennie Lakes Wilderness. From the wilderness boundary, the trail flattens out most of the way to the meadow and is a smooth hike. Just before the meadow, watch for the new trail sign at the junction that directs you south towards JO Pass and the Weaver Lake Trail junction. The old cabin is just east beyond the trail junction. The Rowell Trail itself winds through mostly White and Red Fir trees with a few Jeffrey Pines on the rocky slope, and then turns into thick Lodgepole Pine groves near the meadow. The trail has been cleared of all downed trees. The rocky section of the trail has some minor rock and water bar issues, and is heavily used by stock, so be careful of loose rocks. In general the tread and trail condition is also very good here. On the east side of the meadow, there is a trail junction for four different trails, two of which head into Kings Canyon NP. One sign points out three of the trails, and across the path there is a signpost (missing the sign) pointing the way up to Marvin Pass and Mitchell Peak to the north. Please check the signs and your map and make sure to take the correct path. If camping near the meadow, look for one of the three established campsites near the wooden bridge and please do not build new fire rings. Note: in dry seasons and late in the Summer, there is very little water near the meadow. The closest reliable water sources are a) about ½ mile south up the JO Pass Trail, and b) about a ½ mile north up the trail towards Marvin Pass. 4) JO Pass Trail (#30E11) Rowell Meadow junction up to JO Pass: This trail leads you into the heart of the Jennie Lakes Wilderness, linking you to the Weaver Lake Trail, Jennie Lake, and south into Sequoia NP towards Lodgepole. It is about 4 2015, Wilderness, Hume Lake RD, Sequoia NF quick miles from the junction up to the pass. There is some slight up and down along the trail, with a little climb before you reach the junction with the Weaver Lake Trail, and then again as you approach JO Pass you ascend a clear, rocky section. Watch for the trail sign at the junction which leads west towards Weaver Lake. Once you continue past the Weaver Lake Trail junction heading south, just to the east off the trail you can cut over to the “Profile View” (see your map) for a great view over the boundary and down into the Park. From the Rowell Meadow area, the trail winds through a thick Lodgepole Pine forest and then starts ascending up towards JO Pass, where it becomes White and Red Fir, with Mountain Pines appearing higher up. Once on the clear rocky section, to the west you get a nice view of Jennie Peak in the distance. There are only a couple of very old, very large downed trees on the trail, but all with good user trails around them. There are also some minor rock and water bar issues with some washout on small sections of the trail up and down the rocky sections towards JO Pass, but in general the tread and trail is in good condition. If you want to camp at JO Pass, there are several good campsites established by the creek below the pass, as well as above it near the small pond. Please do not build any new fire rings. Just to the south and west of the JO Pass Trail junction there are some great views into Sequoia National Park. 4) Weaver Lake Trail (#30E09) Weaver Lake over to JO Pass junction: Finally cleared of most of the dozens of downed trees that were here for several years, this trail is in the best shape it’s been in quite a while. There are a couple of very old trees (near the junction with JO Pass Trail), but with good user trails around them. It’s about 4.5 up and down miles from Weaver Lake heading east to the junction with the JO Pass Trail. Past Weaver Lake, the trail remains relatively flat until you descend into the valley where you will cross several streams (a great water source late in the Summer) that all become Boulder Creek. After the streams you begin a somewhat steep ascent on a rocky section up towards the JO Pass Trail junction with some spectacular views north, south and west into the JLW. Past the rocky face, heading up towards the JO Pass trail junction, the trail can be a little difficult to follow, so pay attention.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 1 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences
    United States Department of Giant Sequoia Agriculture Forest Service National Monument Giant Sequoia National Monument Draft Environmental Impact Statement August 2010 Volume 1 The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Chapter 4 - Environmental Consequences Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 1 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Volume 1 Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement 2 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Chapter 4 includes the environmental effects analysis. It is organized by resource area, in the same manner as Chapter 3. Effects are displayed for separate resource areas in terms of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects associated with the six alternatives considered in detail. Effects can be neutral, beneficial, or adverse. This chapter also discusses the unavoidable adverse effects, the relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources. Environmental consequences form the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of the alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Interagency Wilderness Fire Management1
    The Biswell Symposium: Fire Issues and Solutions in Urban Interface and Wildland Ecosystems Concurrent Session I Interagency Wilderness Fire Management1 Jim Desmond2 Abstract: Wilderness fire managers are often confronted with that encompasses more than one million continuous acres in natural fire ignitions that start and/or burn near an adjoining agency’s the Sierra Nevada. wilderness area boundary. Management strategies for prescribed In the Central Sierra Nevada, National Forest wilderness natural fires (PNF) are often developed using the adjoining agency’s areas and National Parks adjoin along common boundaries. wilderness boundary as the maximum allowable perimeter (control These boundaries were established for a variety of line) for the PNF. When this occurs, fire’s natural role in the administrative reasons and may or may not make sense wilderness ecosystem may be restricted. The difficulty of burning near another agency’s jurisdictional boundary can be overcome by when managing a prescribed natural fire. In this area, the strong planning, close communications, and timely coordination National Park Service currently operates with approved Fire between the two affected agencies. Communications and coordi- Management Plans allowing for PNF in wilderness areas. nation can be achieved only through developing and maintaining a The Forest Service is in the plan development stage. In this strong working relationship with the fire manager of the adjoining current situation, park fire managers have to manage natural agency. Keys to good interagency coordination are (1) investing ignitions according to current agency procedures and time, (2) understanding the policies and procedures of the adjoin- restrictions if the natural ignition is close to the park/forest ing agency, (3) developing and maintaining open communications, boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • Monarch Wilderness Sequoia National Forest Giant Sequoia National Monument Hume Lake Ranger District
    United States Department of Agriculture Monarch Wilderness Sequoia National Forest Giant Sequoia National Monument Hume Lake Ranger District About: Trails: The Monarch Wilderness is located in the northeast corner Three main trailheads provide access to the Monarch of the Hume Lake Ranger District. Beautiful and dramatic, Wilderness and several of the trails also connect to Kings this extremely rugged 45,000 acres of wilder ness rises from Canyon National Park backcountry. Visitors can enjoy 2,000 feet elevation at the South Fork of the Kings River to overnight stays or a day hike into a less populated, more over 11,000 feet at Hogback Peak and provides amazing secluded wilderness and find outstanding opportunities for views of the Kings River canyon. The vegetation ranges solitude. Due to the ever-changing rugged terrain, most from chaparral to sub-alpine. There are mountain meadows, trails are not maintained and hikers may come across large lakes and spectacular geological formations. obstacles such as down trees and rockslides. For more information, contact the district office or the Wilderness The Monarch Wilderness spans two National Forests and is Ranger. divided by Hwy 180 Scenic Byway. The Hume Lake ranger District of Sequoia National Forest and the Giant Sequoia Central Monarch: National Monument manages the central and southern The one main access to the central portion of the portions while the northern portion is managed by the Sierra Wilderness is through Deer Cove Trailhead. Be aware National Forest. that these trails are not regularly maintained. The trail climbs 3,000 feet elevation in about four miles.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Assessment of Whitebark Pine in the Sierra Nevada
    FIELD ASSESSMENT OF WHITEBARK PINE IN THE SIERRA NEVADA Sara Taylor, Daniel Hastings, and Julie Evens Purpose of field work: 1. Verify distribution of whitebark pine in its southern extent (pure and mixed stands) 2. Assess the health and status of whitebark pine 3. Ground truth polygons designated by CALVEG as whitebark pine Regional Dominant 4. Conduct rapid assessment or reconnaissance surveys California National Forest Overview Areas surveyed: July 2013 Sequoia National Forest Areas surveyed: August 2013 Eldorado National Forest Areas surveyed: September 2013 Stanislaus National Forest Field Protocol and Forms: • Modified CNPS/CDFW Vegetation Rapid Assessment protocol Additions to CNPS/CDFW Rapid Assessment protocol: CNDDB • Individuals/stand • Phenology • Overall viability (health/status) Marc Meyer • Level of beetle attack • % absolute dead cover • % of whitebark cones CNPS • Impacts and % mortality from rust and beetle Field Protocol and Forms: • CNPS/CDFW Field Reconnaissance (recon) protocol is a simplified Rapid Assessment (RA) protocol 3 reasons to conduct a recon: 1. WBP stand is largely diseased/infested 2. CALVEG polygon was incorrect 3. WBP stand was close to other RA Results: Sequoia National Forest • Whitebark pine was not found during survey in Golden Trout Wilderness • Calveg polygons assessed (36 total) were mostly foxtail pine (Pinus balfouriana) • Highest survey conducted was at 11,129 ft at the SEKI and NF border Results: Eldorado National Forest (N to S) Desolation Wilderness: • 3 rapid assessments and 8 recons were conducted • 9,061 to 9,225 ft in elevation • Lower elevation stands were more impacted from MPB Mokelumne Wilderness: • 5 rapid assessments and 10 recons were conducted • 8,673 to 9,566 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 7 - National Wilderness Areas by State
    Table 7 - National Wilderness Areas by State * Unit is in two or more States ** Acres estimated pending final boundary determination + Special Area that is part of a proclaimed National Forest State National Wilderness Area NFS Other Total Unit Name Acreage Acreage Acreage Alabama Cheaha Wilderness Talladega National Forest 7,400 0 7,400 Dugger Mountain Wilderness** Talladega National Forest 9,048 0 9,048 Sipsey Wilderness William B. Bankhead National Forest 25,770 83 25,853 Alabama Totals 42,218 83 42,301 Alaska Chuck River Wilderness 74,876 520 75,396 Coronation Island Wilderness Tongass National Forest 19,118 0 19,118 Endicott River Wilderness Tongass National Forest 98,396 0 98,396 Karta River Wilderness Tongass National Forest 39,917 7 39,924 Kootznoowoo Wilderness Tongass National Forest 979,079 21,741 1,000,820 FS-administered, outside NFS bdy 0 654 654 Kuiu Wilderness Tongass National Forest 60,183 15 60,198 Maurille Islands Wilderness Tongass National Forest 4,814 0 4,814 Misty Fiords National Monument Wilderness Tongass National Forest 2,144,010 235 2,144,245 FS-administered, outside NFS bdy 0 15 15 Petersburg Creek-Duncan Salt Chuck Wilderness Tongass National Forest 46,758 0 46,758 Pleasant/Lemusurier/Inian Islands Wilderness Tongass National Forest 23,083 41 23,124 FS-administered, outside NFS bdy 0 15 15 Russell Fjord Wilderness Tongass National Forest 348,626 63 348,689 South Baranof Wilderness Tongass National Forest 315,833 0 315,833 South Etolin Wilderness Tongass National Forest 82,593 834 83,427 Refresh Date: 10/14/2017
    [Show full text]
  • Key Issues in the Sequoia & Sierra Revised Draft Forest
    KEY ISSUES IN THE SEQUOIA & SIERRA REVISED DRAFT FOREST PLANS The revised draft Sequoia and Sierra Forest Plans are analyzed in the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement (RDEIS) as the Preferred Alternative B. Conservation groups urge the public to support Alternative C with the changes noted below. Alternative C recommends far more wilderness protection, proposes more acres of forest restored through prescribed and managed fire, and more riparian and meadow restoration than Alternative B. Wilderness Recommendations What’s Good: The RDEIS identifies more than 800,000 acres of wilderness-quality lands across the two forests. The conservation-oriented Alternative C recommends over 452,000 acres of new wilderness. The new Alternative E also creates a Backcountry Management Area designation for roadless lands not recommended as wilderness. However, the Forest Service’s preferred Alternative B only adds a paltry 4,900 acres of new wilderness on the Sequoia NF and recommends no new wilderness on the Sierra NF despite hundreds of thousands of eligible acres. Significant Improvements Needed: The Forest Service should adopt Alternative C or strengthen Alternative B to include more recommended wilderness areas on both forests, with an emphasis on low-elevation areas not typically protected by the wilderness system (see below for specific areas). Both plans should also apply Alternative E’s Backcountry Management Area designation to protect roadless areas not recommended for wilderness protection. Sequoia National Forest: Recommended wilderness areas should include the Golden Trout Wilderness Addition, Stormy Canyon, Oat Mountain, Cannell Peak, and the Domeland Wilderness West Addition, using boundaries developed by conservation groups to reduce conflicts with motorized and mountain bike trails (as displayed in Alternative E).
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 98-425 An
    PUBLIC LAW 98-425-SEPT. 28, 1984 98 STAT. 1619 Public Law 98-425 98th Congress An Act Sept. 28, 1984 Entitled the "California Wilderness Act of 1984". [H.R. 1437] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this title may California Wilderness Act be cited as the "California Wilderness Act of 1984". of 1984. National TITLE I Wilderness Preservation System. DESIGNATION OF WILDERNESS National Forest System. SEC. 101. (a) In furtherance of the purposes of the Wilderness Act, National parks, the following lands, as generally depicted on maps, appropriately monuments, etc. referenced, dated July 1980 (except as otherwise dated) are hereby 16 USC 1131 designated as wilderness, and therefore, as components of the Na­ note. tional Wilderness Preservation System- (1)scertain lands in the Lassen National Forest, California,s which comprise approximately one thousand eight hundred acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled "Caribou Wilder­ ness Additions-Proposed", and which are hereby incorporated in, and which shall be deemed to be a part of the Caribou Wilderness as designated by Public Law 88-577; 16 USC 1131 (2)s certain lands in the Stanislaus and Toiyabe Nationals note. 16 USC 1132 Forests, California, which comprise approximately one hundred note. sixty thousand acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled "Carson-Iceberg Wilderness-Proposed", dated July 1984, and which shall be known as the Carson-Iceberg Wilderness: Pro­ vided, however, That the designation of the Carson-Iceberg Wil­ derness shall not preclude continued motorized access to those previously existing facilities which are directly related to per­ mitted livestock grazing activities in the Wolf Creek Drainage on the Toiyabe National Forest in the same manner and degree in which such access was occurring as of the date of enactment of this title; (3)scertain lands in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Cali­ 16 USC 1132 fornia, which comprise approximately seven thousand three note.
    [Show full text]
  • August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest
    August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest Service, Region 5 Sent via: [email protected] Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans To the Forest Plan Revision Team: These comments on the Draft Forest Plans and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans are submitted on behalf of the organizations noted below. Collectively, we have been engaged in the forest plan revision process for these three national forests since initiated in 2012. Many of our organizations also have a long history of engagement in forest planning beginning with the first plans adopted in the late 1980s to early 1990s for national forests in the Sierra Nevada. We have embraced the new Planning Rule and taken seriously its invitation to provide feedback early in the process and throughout the development of the revised plans. We remain committed to working with your agency to develop revised forest plans that protect sensitive resources, provide for ecological integrity, and provide high quality recreational experiences. Our detailed review of the draft plans and DEIS indicate that there are significant gaps in assessment, development of plan components and evaluation of environmental consequences that preclude a meaningful analysis of the effects of the draft plans and alternatives on the environment. We ask that you revise the draft plans and revise or supplement the DEIS and circulate these documents for a 90-day comment period. Please contact Susan Britting (530-295-8210; [email protected]) if you have questions about these comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Recommendations
    U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region June 2016 Wilderness Recommendations Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Forest Plans for the Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests As part of revising the Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests land management plans (forest plans), the Forest Service is identifying and evaluating lands that may be suitable for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. This is a requirement of the 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR 219.7(c)(2)(v)). We are not designating any wilderness areas through this process; only Congress can take that action. The wilderness recommendation process has three steps, inventory, evaluation and analysis. This process is documented in Appendix B in the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for these forest plan revisions. We are following the 2012 Planning Rule Directives, Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.12 Chapter 70, which uses criteria based on the Wilderness Act of 1964. Appendix B describes the outcome of the inventory and evaluation, the areas included in one or more alternative in the draft EIS, and rationale for those areas that were not selected for analysis in the draft EIS. Based on the analysis in the environmental impact statement and public input received, the Forest Supervisor for each of the three national forests will make a decision on specific areas to recommend for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. The decision will be included in the Record of Decision for the plan as a preliminary administrative recommendation. Forest plan components will provide direction for managing areas recommended for wilderness designation. Wilderness Recommendation Process There are four steps in the wilderness recommendation process: inventory, evaluation, analysis and recommendation.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, Bulk 1945-1980
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt3z09r9hn No online items Finding Aid to the George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Finding Aid written by Janice Otani Funding for processing this collection was provided by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives program. The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ © 2007 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Finding Aid to the George BANC MSS 79/95 c 1 Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Finding Aid to the George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Collection Number: BANC MSS 79/95 c The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CaliforniaFunding for processing this collection was provided by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives program. Finding Aid Written By: Janice Otani Date Completed: April 2011 © 2011 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Collection Summary Collection Title: George Marshall papers Date (inclusive): 1836-1993, Date (bulk): bulk 1945-1980 Collection Number: BANC MSS 79/95 c Creators : Marshall, George, 1904-2000 Extent: Number of containers: 56 cartons, 3 oversize folders, 1 tubeLinear feet: 72 linear ft Repository: The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ Abstract: The George Marshall Papers(1836-1993) consists of Marshall's professional materials accumulated during his lifelong career as a leading conservationist.
    [Show full text]
  • The Natural Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) Groves of the Sierra Nevada, California-An Updated Annotated List
    The Natural Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) Groves of the Sierra Nevada, California-An Updated Annotated List Dwight Willard1 Abstract: Giant sequoias naturally occur in the Sierra Nevada, California, names.) In contrast, many groves became known by single, in 65 groves, described in an annotated list. The grove list significantly accepted names by the early 20th century. Sequoia National differs from prior published giant sequoia grove lists, primarily as a result of more consistent application of objective criteria of geographic isolation Park groves were comprehensively and systematically listed and minimum giant sequoia group size in grove identification. The grove by the 1930's. However, comprehensive grove lists for the list also reflects significant gains in knowledge of giant sequoia natural entire Sierra Nevada were unsystematic prior to 1969. distributions during recent years. The first comprehensive and more systematic grove list for the entire Sierra Nevada was in Rundel (1969, 1972). Giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) naturally Rundel's list was more closely based on geographic distinction occurs in the Sierra Nevada, California, primarily in isolated than any prior list, and it reflected his scientific study of concentrations traditionally known as groves. Sequoia actual sequoia distribution. Rundel's list is the basis for the locations are most easily described by reference to named familiar post-1972 descriptions that giant sequoias occur groves, though a relatively few giant sequoias occur apart in "75 groves." His grove list used historical tradition as from recognized groves, in the same localities. the basis for some grove identifications, and he did not Significant additional giant sequoia location research consistently apply an identification criterion of minimum since the early 1970's makes the following updated annotated sequoia group size.
    [Show full text]