Mineral Resources and Mineral Resource Potential of the Kelso
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Information to Users
Sexual segregation in desert-dwelling mountain sheep Item Type Thesis Authors Bleich, Vernon Charles Download date 02/10/2021 22:18:29 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/9364 INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. -
Eclamx
ECLAMX ION Managing Water in the West ~\~ Nalional Environmental Policy Actt 9\' ~l! FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT a\' <!J\ No. 10-SCAO-002-FONSI Upper Mojave River Groundwater Regional Recharge and Recovery Project and Oro Grande Groundwater Recharge Project San Bernardino County, California The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is providing American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to the Mojave Water Agency (MWA) to implement two components of their Integrated Regional Water Management Plan in San Bernardino County, California. The projects will install groundwater wells, pipelines, reservoir storage tanks, a pump station, and a chlorination facility for aquifer storage and recovery using California State Water Project supplies and the Mojave River groundwater basin. Financial assistance agreements have been prepared for the Oro Grande Groundwater Recharge Project (Oro Grande Project) and for the first phase of the Upper Mojave River Groundwater Regional Recharge and Recovery Project (R3 Project). Additional phases of the R3 Project may be funded in the future. Based on our review of the attached Environmental Assessment (EA) and other supporting documents including an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2005041103, prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), we have determined that the proposed action does not constitute a major Federal action which would significantly affect the quality of the human environment within the meaning of Section 102(2) (C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Accordingly, preparation of an environmental impact statement on the proposed action is not required. l~t~jQ~j~·- Recommended: uc4: ' Date: Doug McPherson, Environmental Protection Specialist I 91?(~ Date: 11-~" 0 Reviewed By: 2 '7 Dennis Wolfe, :AJOea Engineer Approved: _~~~~\-¥-!~~ Date: I~'" 9- 07 U.S. -
A Watershed Management Approach to Assessment of Water Quality And
A Watershed Management Approach to Assessment Of Water Quality and Development of Revised Water Quality Standards for the Ground Waters of the Mojave River Floodplain Christopher R. Maxwell Christopher R. Maxwell is an Associate Geologist with SECOR International Incorporated. Mr. Maxwell has a B.S. degree in Geology from California State Polytechnic University at Pomona. He previously worked for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for ten years, where his duties included management of watershed activities for the Mojave Watershed. His professional experience includes regulatory involvement in activities related to landfills, mines, dairies, underground storage tanks, sewage treatment plants, military installations and ground water recharge projects. Mr. Maxwell has other publications with topics including natural attenuation, bioremediation and site investigation and remediation. Abstract The Mojave River watershed is located in the arid high-desert region of Southern California in San Bernardino County. In the 1970s and 1980s the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) established numerical water quality objectives (WQOs) for several locations in the watershed. Because the Mojave River flows underground for much of its 120 miles, some of the numerical WQOs apply to both surface waters and ground waters. In 1996 the RWQCB assembled a watershed management team of local stakeholders for the Mojave Watershed. A primary goal identified by the stakeholders was to assess the current state of water quality for the Mojave River system. A possible long-term goal is the development of total maximum daily loads as required by the Clean Water Act (CWA). The Mojave River is listed as a water quality limited segment in accordance with Section 303(d) of the CWA. -
Mojave National Preserve California
A fact sheet from 2017 Dougall Photography/iStockphoto Mojave’s $131.8 million maintenance backlog includes repairs to historic buildings such as the Kelso Depot. Shane McMurphy/iStockphoto Mojave National Preserve California Overview Two hours from the hustle and bustle of Las Vegas and 100 miles from the nearest lodging lies California’s Mojave National Preserve. The Las Vegas Review-Journal dubbed this vast desert in San Bernardino County the “perfect escape for those seeking serenity.” The preserve spans 1.6 million acres, making it the third-largest National Park Service (NPS) unit in the contiguous United States. Mojave is ecologically and geologically diverse, with towering sand dunes, dun-colored mesas, and volcanic formations providing habitat for its abundant plants and wildlife. In addition to the densest forest of Joshua trees in the world, visitors can see bighorn sheep, bobcats, golden eagles, and breathtaking displays of seasonal wildflowers. The preserve also has a rich cultural heritage. Lands first inhabited by the Chemehuevi and Mojave tribes attracted gold miners in the late 19th century and were later crossed by several railroad lines. Visitors can learn more about this history through exhibits at the visitor center and by exploring archaeological sites, abandoned mines, and preserved homesteads and other buildings. The ghost town of Kelso, which once served as a Union Pacific Railroad depot and mining outpost, is one of the park’s most popular destinations. Unfortunately, Mojave faces over $131 million in deferred maintenance. Maintenance challenges Nearly all of Mojave’s needed repairs are for its road network. Severe deterioration of some sections of pavement has prompted the NPS to warn visitors of dangerous potholes. -
Location Hydraulic Study Report
Mojave River Bridge at Yucca Loma Road Town of Apple Valley and City of Victorville San Bernardino County, California Location Hydraulic Study Report Prepared for: Prepared by: and February 2009 Location Hydraulic Study Report Mojave River Bridge at Yucca Loma Road Town of Apple Valley and City of Victorville, San Bernardino County, California Table of Contents Executive Summary........................................................................................................... iv Acronyms........................................................................................................................... vi 1 General Description............................................................................................ 1 1.1 Project Description...............................................................................................1 1.1.1 No-Build Alternative......................................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Build Alternative ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Need for Project ...................................................................................................5 1.3 Project History.....................................................................................................5 1.4 Creek, Stream, and River Crossings ....................................................................5 1.4.1 Geographic Location ........................................................................................ -
The Desert Serrano of the Mojave River
The Desert Serrano of the Mojave River Mark Q. Sutton and David D. Earle Abstract century, although he noted the possible survival of The Desert Serrano of the Mojave River, little documented by “perhaps a few individuals merged among other twentieth century ethnographers, are investigated here to help un- groups” (Kroeber 1925:614). In fact, while occupation derstand their relationship with the larger and better known Moun- tain Serrano sociopolitical entity and to illuminate their unique of the Mojave River region by territorially based clan adaptation to the Mojave River and surrounding areas. In this effort communities of the Desert Serrano had ceased before new interpretations of recent and older data sets are employed. 1850, there were survivors of this group who had Kroeber proposed linguistic and cultural relationships between the been born in the desert still living at the close of the inhabitants of the Mojave River, whom he called the Vanyumé, and the Mountain Serrano living along the southern edge of the Mojave nineteenth century, as was later reported by Kroeber Desert, but the nature of those relationships was unclear. New (1959:299; also see Earle 2005:24–26). evidence on the political geography and social organization of this riverine group clarifies that they and the Mountain Serrano belonged to the same ethnic group, although the adaptation of the Desert For these reasons we attempt an “ethnography” of the Serrano was focused on riverine and desert resources. Unlike the Desert Serrano living along the Mojave River so that Mountain Serrano, the Desert Serrano participated in the exchange their place in the cultural milieu of southern Califor- system between California and the Southwest that passed through the territory of the Mojave on the Colorado River and cooperated nia can be better understood and appreciated. -
Wilderness Study Areas
I ___- .-ll..l .“..l..““l.--..- I. _.^.___” _^.__.._._ - ._____.-.-.. ------ FEDERAL LAND M.ANAGEMENT Status and Uses of Wilderness Study Areas I 150156 RESTRICTED--Not to be released outside the General Accounting Wice unless specifically approved by the Office of Congressional Relations. ssBO4’8 RELEASED ---- ---. - (;Ao/li:( ‘I:I)-!L~-l~~lL - United States General Accounting OfTice GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-262989 September 23,1993 The Honorable Bruce F. Vento Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Committee on Natural Resources House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: Concerned about alleged degradation of areas being considered for possible inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (wilderness study areas), you requested that we provide you with information on the types and effects of activities in these study areas. As agreed with your office, we gathered information on areas managed by two agencies: the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLN) and the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. Specifically, this report provides information on (1) legislative guidance and the agency policies governing wilderness study area management, (2) the various activities and uses occurring in the agencies’ study areas, (3) the ways these activities and uses affect the areas, and (4) agency actions to monitor and restrict these uses and to repair damage resulting from them. Appendixes I and II provide data on the number, acreage, and locations of wilderness study areas managed by BLM and the Forest Service, as well as data on the types of uses occurring in the areas. -
Sustainable Transit Feasibility Study for the Mojave National Preserve
2009 Sustainable Transit Feasibility Study for the Mojave National Preserve Project Team: Joseph Chow, P.E.* Ankoor Bhagat Sarah Hernandez Advisor: Dr. Michael McNally Institute of Transportation Studies Sponsored by National Parks University of California,i | PIrvine a g e Conservation Association Irvine, CA *Corresponding investigator: [email protected] Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Study Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 2 EXISTING SCENARIO ................................................................................................................. 4 Study Area ................................................................................................................................... 4 Emissions Inventory .................................................................................................................... 6 Visitor Demographics ................................................................................................................. 7 Intra-Preserve Shuttle Service ................................................................................................... 12 DEMAND ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... -
The California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 As Amended
the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as amended U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Desert District Riverside, California the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as Amended IN REPLY REFER TO United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT STATE OFFICE Federal Office Building 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 Dear Reader: Thank you.You and many other interested citizens like you have made this California Desert Conservation Area Plan. It was conceived of your interests and concerns, born into law through your elected representatives, molded by your direct personal involvement, matured and refined through public conflict, interaction, and compromise, and completed as a result of your review, comment and advice. It is a good plan. You have reason to be proud. Perhaps, as individuals, we may say, “This is not exactly the plan I would like,” but together we can say, “This is a plan we can agree on, it is fair, and it is possible.” This is the most important part of all, because this Plan is only a beginning. A plan is a piece of paper-what counts is what happens on the ground. The California Desert Plan encompasses a tremendous area and many different resources and uses. The decisions in the Plan are major and important, but they are only general guides to site—specific actions. The job ahead of us now involves three tasks: —Site-specific plans, such as grazing allotment management plans or vehicle route designation; —On-the-ground actions, such as granting mineral leases, developing water sources for wildlife, building fences for livestock pastures or for protecting petroglyphs; and —Keeping people informed of and involved in putting the Plan to work on the ground, and in changing the Plan to meet future needs. -
Desert Bighorn Sheep Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 6 Desert Bighorn Sheep Status Report November 2013 to October 2016 A summary of desert bighorn sheep population monitoring and management by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Authors: Paige Prentice, Ashley Evans, Danielle Glass, Richard Ianniello, and Tom Stephenson Inland Deserts Region California Department of Fish and Wildlife Desert Bighorn Status Report 2013-2016 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Inland Deserts Region 787 N. Main Street Ste. 220 Bishop, CA 93514 www.wildlife.ca.gov This document was finalized on September 6, 2018 Page 2 of 40 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Desert Bighorn Status Report 2013-2016 Table of Contents Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4 I. Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................ 6 A. Data Collection Methods .................................................................................................................. 7 1. Capture Methods .......................................................................................................................... 7 2. Survey Methods ............................................................................................................................ 8 B. Results and Discussion .................................................................................................................... 10 1. Capture Data .............................................................................................................................. -
2008 Trough to Trough
Trough to trough The Colorado River and the Salton Sea Robert E. Reynolds, editor The Salton Sea, 1906 Trough to trough—the field trip guide Robert E. Reynolds, George T. Jefferson, and David K. Lynch Proceedings of the 2008 Desert Symposium Robert E. Reynolds, compiler California State University, Desert Studies Consortium and LSA Associates, Inc. April 2008 Front cover: Cibola Wash. R.E. Reynolds photograph. Back cover: the Bouse Guys on the hunt for ancient lakes. From left: Keith Howard, USGS emeritus; Robert Reynolds, LSA Associates; Phil Pearthree, Arizona Geological Survey; and Daniel Malmon, USGS. Photo courtesy Keith Howard. 2 2008 Desert Symposium Table of Contents Trough to trough: the 2009 Desert Symposium Field Trip ....................................................................................5 Robert E. Reynolds The vegetation of the Mojave and Colorado deserts .....................................................................................................................31 Leah Gardner Southern California vanadate occurrences and vanadium minerals .....................................................................................39 Paul M. Adams The Iron Hat (Ironclad) ore deposits, Marble Mountains, San Bernardino County, California ..................................44 Bruce W. Bridenbecker Possible Bouse Formation in the Bristol Lake basin, California ................................................................................................48 Robert E. Reynolds, David M. Miller, and Jordon Bright Review -
Mojave National Preserve Management Plan for Developed Water Sources
to Las Vegas to Las Vegas Kin Primm gsto E n S W E H G T G a I sh N G N A M Wilderness H R A L Y N R A I (! (!A A N Clark Mountain )" H #T R D N (! (! G # G (! U (! N R U U IO ") N A 95 O (! Y E Yates Well P O S (! A x N C C I L c M (! F IC G e U H IVANPAH R L l K A E Mojave National Preserve s IL L i R R U o # 15 O A (! LAKE (! C A r A Water Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment D M L (dry) c D C i n ash M 164 O e LL W HI n Searchlight R WK o MOHA at o Nipton W he a Mojave National Preserve boundary W d )" P # Nipton Road I Salton # ### 164 U M ## # National Park Service wilderness E I T Sea G N h E s N E R Y a A A W # R L (! E s L S Spring ng A H V ri C IL ES L L p M N A S 127 ll L L )" CIMA ROAD # Ivanpah Road I u L Small game guzzler B A )" (! A E V # )" V Y S T " Big game guzzler T # ## A N (! S # M (! L )" # (!(! # Halloran Springs #Morning U N # L (! I # ## (! # Well H E # Star Mine # O h ##(!# A ## s ## W (! )" A Y (! # T a H i # M (! CASTLE ## P l sh (!# Paved road lo a N W # A w W MOUNTAINS N Willow e U )" # P NATIONAL t SILVER A u Spring O i 15 N MONUMENT LAKE # V (! P Unpaved 2-wheel drive road I A (!# # # M (dry) (! # )" Morning Star Mine Road V (! I (! E Cal Nev Ari # L Kessler Unpaved 4-wheel drive road #(!# T # #### Spring K (!## S CIMA R (! (!# Mine Ro (! (! # rt a # A (! ! O # a d Mojave Road 4-wheel drive road #(!#(! ( Y C h DOME (! !( H # s Deer ( (! W (! a E (!(! Spring #(! N (! )" )" P W# (! Keystone Desert wash (! I NEVADA Baker Kelbaker Rd nk (! (! CALIFORNIA a (! (! U T (!(! # (! (! Spring ck