DOCSLIB.ORG

Goals and Policies Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Goals and Policies Report GOALS AND POLICIES REPORT for the Inyo County General Plan Prepared for: Inyo County Prepared by: Jones & Stokes BRW Mintier & Associates Applied Development Economics Cover photographs: Background Inyo County Courthouse Top inset Aberdeen December 2001 Middle inset Shoshone Bottom inset West Bishop ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Inyo County General Plan was only possible with the support provided by the people of Inyo County. The County and its consulting team would like to provide a special thanks to the following individuals and groups who participated in the preparation of the Inyo County General Plan. Board of Supervisors Inyo County Staff Linda Arcularius 1st District René Mendez County Administrative Officer Julie Bear 2nd District Ervin Lent 3rd District Chuck Thistlethwaite Planning Director Carroll "Butch" Hambleton 4th District Dan Beets Associate Planner, Project Manager Michael Dorame 5th District Curtis Kellogg Associate Planner Andrew Remus Senior Planner Courtney Smith Assistant Planner Planning Commission Jeff Jewitt Public Works Director Gale Holbrook 1st District Ron Chegwidden Senior Engineer Katy Walton 2nd District Rex Allen 3rd District Bob Kennedy Environmental Health Director Bob Gracey 4th District Dan Lucas Sheriff Ray Sisson 5th District George Milovich County Agricultural Commissioner Advisory Committees Inyo County 2020 Forum Bishop Land and Water Advisory Committee A workshop hosted by the Sierra Business Council on March 20, 1999 Big Pine Land and Water Advisory Committee that brought together over 200 people from around Inyo County to Independence Land and Water Advisory Committee discuss the future of Inyo County. Lone Pine Land and Water Advisory Committee Southeast County Advisory Committee Others Inyo County would like to thank all those who participated in the Robert “Bob” Michener, former District 3rd Supervisor Advisory Committees. John Robinson, former 1st District Planning Commissioner Inyo County General Plan December 2001 Acknowledgements General Plan Consulting Team Jones & Stokes BRW Mintier & Associates Al Herson, AICP Project Principal Richard Rust, AICP General Plan Larry Mintier, AICP Principal Planner Ray Weiss Transportation Planning Project Manager & EIR Manager Dave Buehler Noise Specialist Rik Keller Land Use/Housing Deborah Jew Production Debra Lilly Planner Tim Messick Graphics Jay Pawlek CEQA Analysis Terry Rivasplata Alternatives Applied Development Economics Doug Svensson Economic Development Jim King Economic Development December 2001 Inyo County General Plan Table of Contents Introduction 1. General Plan Introduction ..................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Inyo County....................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 General Plans in California .............................................................................................1-2 1.3 Inyo County General Plan...............................................................................................1-3 General Plan Documents ...........................................................................................1-4 Elements Included in the Inyo County General Plan...................................................1-5 1.4 Public Participation ........................................................................................................1-9 1.5 Environmental Analysis.................................................................................................1-11 1.6 Using This General Plan ...............................................................................................1-11 Organization ...........................................................................................................1-11 Symbols in the General Plan ....................................................................................1-13 Guide to Inyo County Communities 2. Guide to Inyo County Communities................................................ 2-1 Aberdeen (14)........................................................................................................................2-3 Alabama Hills (17).................................................................................................................2-3 Alta Vista-Mustang Mesa (4)...................................................................................................2-4 Arcularius Ranch (2) ..............................................................................................................2-4 Aspendell (10) .......................................................................................................................2-5 Big Pine (13)..........................................................................................................................2-5 Birch Creek (14) ....................................................................................................................2-6 Bishop...................................................................................................................................2-7 Cartago (19)...........................................................................................................................2-7 Charleston View (29) .............................................................................................................2-8 Chicago Valley (28) ...............................................................................................................2-8 Chipmunk Canyon (10) .........................................................................................................2-9 Inyo County General Plan December 2001 Page i Inyo General Plan Coso Junction (22) .................................................................................................................2-9 Darwin (24).........................................................................................................................2-10 Death Valley Junction (27)...................................................................................................2-10 Death Valley National Park..................................................................................................2-11 Dixon Lane/Meadow Creek (6) ............................................................................................2-11 Dunmovin (22)....................................................................................................................2-12 Fish Slough (4).....................................................................................................................2-12 Fish Springs (14) ..................................................................................................................2-13 Foothill/Boulder Creek (18)..................................................................................................2-13 Furnace Creek (27) ..............................................................................................................2-14 Granite View (18) ................................................................................................................2-14 Haiwee (21).........................................................................................................................2-15 Homewood Canyon (25) .....................................................................................................2-15 Independence (15)...............................................................................................................2-16 Indian Ranch (25) ................................................................................................................2-17 Keeler (19)...........................................................................................................................2-17 Keough Hot Springs (12)......................................................................................................2-18 Laws (5)...............................................................................................................................2-18 Little Lake (23).....................................................................................................................2-19 Lone Pine (16 & 17).............................................................................................................2-20 Lone Pine Creek (18) ...........................................................................................................2-21 Olancha (20) .......................................................................................................................2-21 Panamint Springs (24)..........................................................................................................2-22 Pearsonville/Sterling Road (23) ............................................................................................2-23 Rocking K Ranch (5) ............................................................................................................2-23 Rovana (3) ...........................................................................................................................2-24 Sage Flat (12).......................................................................................................................2-24 Sandy Valley (29) ................................................................................................................2-25 Shoshone (28)......................................................................................................................2-25
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Instructionally Related Activities Report
    Instructionally Related Activities Report Linda O’Hirok, ESRM ESRM 463 Water Resources Management Owens Valley Field Trip, March 4-6, 2016 th And 5 Annual Water Symposium, April 25, 2016 DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIVITY; The students in ESRM 463 Water Resources Management participated in a three-day field trip (March 4-6, 2016) to the Owens Valley to explore the environmental and social impacts of the City of Los Angeles (LA DWP) extraction and transportation of water via the LA Aqueduct to that city. The trip included visiting Owens Lake, the Owens Valley Visitor Center, Lower Owens Restoration Project (LORP), LA DWP Owens River Diversion, Alabama Gates, Southern California Edison Rush Creek Power Plant, Mono Lake and Visitor Center, June Mountain, Rush Creek Restoration, and the Bishop Paiute Reservation Restoration Ponds and Visitor Center. In preparation for the field trip, students received lectures, read their textbook, and watched the film Cadillac Desert about the history of the City of Los Angeles, its explosive population growth in the late 1800’s, and need to secure reliable sources of water. The class also received a summary of the history of water exploitation in the Owens Valley and Field Guide. For example, in 1900, William Mulholland, Chief Engineer for the City of Los Angeles, identified the Owens River, which drains the Eastern Sierra Nevada Mountains, as a reliable source of water to support Los Angeles’ growing population. To secure the water rights, Los Angeles secretly purchased much of the land in the Owens Valley. In 1913, the City of Los Angeles completed the construction of the 223 mile, gravity-flow, Los Angeles Aqueduct that delivered Owens River water to Los Angeles.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    Index Abulfeda crater chain (Moon), 97 Aphrodite Terra (Venus), 142, 143, 144, 145, 146 Acheron Fossae (Mars), 165 Apohele asteroids, 353–354 Achilles asteroids, 351 Apollinaris Patera (Mars), 168 achondrite meteorites, 360 Apollo asteroids, 346, 353, 354, 361, 371 Acidalia Planitia (Mars), 164 Apollo program, 86, 96, 97, 101, 102, 108–109, 110, 361 Adams, John Couch, 298 Apollo 8, 96 Adonis, 371 Apollo 11, 94, 110 Adrastea, 238, 241 Apollo 12, 96, 110 Aegaeon, 263 Apollo 14, 93, 110 Africa, 63, 73, 143 Apollo 15, 100, 103, 104, 110 Akatsuki spacecraft (see Venus Climate Orbiter) Apollo 16, 59, 96, 102, 103, 110 Akna Montes (Venus), 142 Apollo 17, 95, 99, 100, 102, 103, 110 Alabama, 62 Apollodorus crater (Mercury), 127 Alba Patera (Mars), 167 Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package (ALSEP), 110 Aldrin, Edwin (Buzz), 94 Apophis, 354, 355 Alexandria, 69 Appalachian mountains (Earth), 74, 270 Alfvén, Hannes, 35 Aqua, 56 Alfvén waves, 35–36, 43, 49 Arabia Terra (Mars), 177, 191, 200 Algeria, 358 arachnoids (see Venus) ALH 84001, 201, 204–205 Archimedes crater (Moon), 93, 106 Allan Hills, 109, 201 Arctic, 62, 67, 84, 186, 229 Allende meteorite, 359, 360 Arden Corona (Miranda), 291 Allen Telescope Array, 409 Arecibo Observatory, 114, 144, 341, 379, 380, 408, 409 Alpha Regio (Venus), 144, 148, 149 Ares Vallis (Mars), 179, 180, 199 Alphonsus crater (Moon), 99, 102 Argentina, 408 Alps (Moon), 93 Argyre Basin (Mars), 161, 162, 163, 166, 186 Amalthea, 236–237, 238, 239, 241 Ariadaeus Rille (Moon), 100, 102 Amazonis Planitia (Mars), 161 COPYRIGHTED
    [Show full text]
  • Under Western Stars by Howard Kazanjian and Chris Enss
    Under Western Stars By Howard Kazanjian and Chris Enss King of the Cowboys Roy Rogers made his starring mo- tion picture debut in Republic Studio’s engaging western mu- sical “Under Western Stars.” Released in 1938, the charm- ing, affable Rogers portrayed the most colorful Congressman Congressional candidate Roy Rogers gets tossed into a water trough by his ever to walk up the steps of the horse to the amusement of locals gathered to hear him speak at a political rally. nation’s capital. Rogers’ character, Courtesy Library of Congress Collection. a fearless, two-gun cowboy and ranger from the western town of Sageville, is elected culties with Herbert Yates, head of Republic Studios, to office to try to win legislation favorable to dust bowl paved the way for Rogers to ride into the leading role residents. in “Under Western Stars.” Yates felt he alone was responsible for creating Autry’s success in films and Rogers represents a group of ranchers whose land wanted a portion of the revenue he made from the has dried up when a water company controlling the image he helped create. Yates demanded a percent- only dam decides to keep the coveted liquid from the age of any commercial, product endorsement, mer- hard working cattlemen. Spurred on by his secretary chandising, and personal appearance Autry made. and publicity manager, Frog Millhouse, played by Autry did not believe Yates was entitled to the money Smiley Burnette, Rogers campaigns for office. The he earned outside of the movies made for Republic portly Burnette provides much of the film’s comic re- Studios.
    [Show full text]
  • Eocene Origin of Owens Valley, California
    geosciences Article Eocene Origin of Owens Valley, California Francis J. Sousa College of Earth, Oceans, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA; [email protected] Received: 22 March 2019; Accepted: 26 April 2019; Published: 28 April 2019 Abstract: Bedrock (U-Th)/He data reveal an Eocene exhumation difference greater than four kilometers athwart Owens Valley, California near the Alabama Hills. This difference is localized at the eastern fault-bound edge of the valley between the Owens Valley Fault and the Inyo-White Mountains Fault. Time-temperature modeling of published data reveal a major phase of tectonic activity from 55 to 50 Ma that was of a magnitude equivalent to the total modern bedrock relief of Owens Valley. Exhumation was likely accommodated by one or both of the Owens Valley and Inyo-White Mountains faults, requiring an Eocene structural origin of Owens Valley 30 to 40 million years earlier than previously estimated. This analysis highlights the importance of constraining the initial and boundary conditions of geologic models and exemplifies that this task becomes increasingly difficult deeper in geologic time. Keywords: low-temperature thermochronology; western US tectonics; quantitative thermochronologic modeling 1. Introduction The accuracy of initial and boundary conditions is critical to the development of realistic models of geologic systems. These conditions are often controlled by pre-existing features such as geologic structures and elements of topographic relief. Features can develop under one tectono-climatic regime and persist on geologic time scales, often controlling later geologic evolution by imposing initial and boundary conditions through mechanisms such as the structural reactivation of faults and geomorphic inheritance of landscapes (e.g., [1,2]).
    [Show full text]
  • International Geology Review Unroofing History of Alabama And
    This article was downloaded by: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] On: 2 March 2010 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 918588849] Publisher Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37- 41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK International Geology Review Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t902953900 Unroofing history of Alabama and Poverty Hills basement blocks, Owens Valley, California, from apatite (U-Th)/He thermochronology Guleed A. H. Ali a; Peter W. Reiners a; Mihai N. Ducea a a Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA To cite this Article Ali, Guleed A. H., Reiners, Peter W. and Ducea, Mihai N.(2009) 'Unroofing history of Alabama and Poverty Hills basement blocks, Owens Valley, California, from apatite (U-Th)/He thermochronology', International Geology Review, 51: 9, 1034 — 1050 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00206810902965270 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00206810902965270 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources.
    [Show full text]
  • A Transect Across the Death Valley Extended Terrane, California Michael S
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 107, NO. B1, 2010, 10.1029/2001JB000239, 2002 Assessing vertical axis rotations in large-magnitude extensional settings: A transect across the Death Valley extended terrane, California Michael S. Petronis and John W. Geissman Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA Daniel K. Holm Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, USA Brian Wernicke and Edwin Schauble Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA Received 11 September 2000; revised 7 May 2001; accepted 14 July 2001; published 18 January 2002. [1] Models for Neogene crustal deformation in the central Death Valley extended terrane, southeastern California, differ markedly in their estimates of upper crustal extension versus shear translations. Documentation of vertical axis rotations of range-scale crustal blocks (or parts thereof) is critical when attempting to reconstruct this highly extended region. To better define the magnitude, aerial extent, and timing of vertical axis rotation that could mark shear translation of the crust in this area, paleomagnetic data were obtained from Tertiary igneous and remagnetized Paleozoic carbonate rocks along a roughly east-west traverse parallel to about 36°N latitude. Sites were established in 7 to 5 Ma volcanic sequences (Greenwater Canyon and Brown’s Peak) and the 10 Ma Chocolate Sundae Mountain granite in the Greenwater Range, 8.5 to 7.5 Ma and 5 to 4 Ma basalts on the east flank of the Black Mountains, the 10.6 Ma Little Chief stock and upper Miocene(?) basalts in the eastern Panamint Mountains, and Paleozoic Pogonip Group carbonate strata in the north central Panamint Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Asymmetric Terracing of Lunar Highland Craters: Influence of Pre-Impact Topography and Structure
    Proc. L~lnorPli~nel. Sci. Corrf. /Of11 (1979), p. 2597-2607 Printed in the United States of America Asymmetric terracing of lunar highland craters: Influence of pre-impact topography and structure Ann W. Gifford and Ted A. Maxwell Center for Earth and Planetary Studies, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institition, Washington, DC 20560 Abstract-The effects of variable pre-impact topography and substrate on slumping and terrace for- mation have been studied on a group of 30 craters in the lunar highlands. These craters are charac- terized by a distinct upper slump block and are all situated on the rim of a larger, older crater or a degraded rim segment. Wide, isolated terraces occur where the rim of the younger crater coincides with a rim segment of the older crater. The craters are all located in Nectarianlpre-Nectarian highland units, and range in age from Imbrian to Copernican. A proposed model for formation of slump blocks in these craters includes the existence of layers with different competence in an overturned rim of the pre-existing crater. Such layering could have resulted from overturning of more coherent layers during formation of the Nectarian and pre-Nec- tarian craters. A combination of material and topographic effects is therefore responsible for terrace formation. Similar terrain effects may be present on other planets and should be considered when interpreting crater statistics in relation to morphology. INTRODUCTION Slumping, terracing or wall failure is an important process in formation and mod- ification of lunar craters. The process of slumping has been investigated by both geometrical (Cintala et a1 ., 1977) and theoretical models (Melosh, 1977; Melosh and McKinnon, 1979); however, these studies are dependent on morphologic constraints imposed by the geologic setting of the craters.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy: Phase 1 Topical Report West Flank of Coso, CA
    SANDIA REPORT SAND2016-8930 Printed September 2016 ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED FOR DOE REVIEW, April 2016 Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy: Phase 1 Topical Report West Flank of Coso, CA Douglas Blankenship, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 Kelly Blake1, Wendy Calvin2, Steve DeOreo3, James E. Faulds4, Jonathan Glen5, Stephen Hickman5, Nick Hinz4, Ole Kaven5, Mike Lazaro1, Jesse McCulloch3, David Meade1, Mack Kennedy6, Geoff Phelps5, Andrew Sabin1, Martin Schoenball5, Drew Silar6, Ann Robertson-Tait7, Colin Williams5 1U.S. Navy Geothermal Program Office, China Lake, 93555 2Department of Geological Sciences and Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno 89557 3Coso Operating Company LLC, Coso Junction, 93542 4Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557 5U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California 6Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 7GeothermEx/Schlumberger Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-mission laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
    [Show full text]
  • December 1987 #73
    December 1987 #73 CHINA LAKE MOUNTAIN RESCUE GROUP P. 0. BOX 2037 RIDGECREST, CA 93555 SCHEDULEOFEVENTS DECEMBER 4-6 American Alpine Club Annual Meeting B. Rockwell DECEMBER 5-6 Kidd Mountain Derrickson DECEMBER 9 Stretcher Hut Night Renta DECEMBER 12 Stretcher Practice Renta DECEMBER 14 Meeting Green DECEMBER 16 Christmas Party J. Westbrook JANUARY 1-4 Mt. Whitney North Fork Hinman JANUARY 6 Sign Cutting Practice Training Committee JANUARY 9-10 Joshua Tree Martin JANUARY 11 Meeting Finco JANUARY 16-17 RedSlateMountain B. Rockwell JANUARY 20 Map and Compass Training Training Committee JANUARY 23 CRMRA (CLMRG Hosting) Stogsdill JANUARY 24 Ice Climbing Mason JANUARY 30-31 Bald Mountain (Ski & Snowshoe Trip) Adams z PEANUTS By Schulz WE DID IT! WE MADE I'M 50 EXCITED I IT T0 THE TOP! FEELLIKEYODELING! SEARCHANDRESCUEOPERATIONS 87-28 9/16/87 Recovery CLMRG field members were Huey, Hinman, Palisades Huey Mason, McDowell, Mitchell, R. Walker, Silverman, Rogers and Derrickson. Janet Westbrook I received a call from Sgt. Dan Lucas of the coordinated. Two Inyo Posse members also Inyo County Sheriffs Office (ICSO) at 2100 on participated. 15 September, asking for assistance with a body recovery. Ed Wallacer had reportedly fallen when his anchor came loose while 87-29 9/30/87 Search descending Starlight Peak. Palisades Finco Wallacer's partner, Al Johnson, reported that the At 1800 on Wednesday, 30 September, the two of them were climbing the northwest ridge of pager went off with a message from Sgt. Dan Starlight (the north summit of North Palisade) but Lucas of the ICSO. We were needed for a retreated at 1430 without making the peak.
    [Show full text]
  • SMC-Guide-To-Mt-Sill-1.Pdf
    Introduction The Swiss Arete Of Mount Sill -THEPALISADES Mount Sill is an impressive mountain, its cuboid mass looks large even from Highway 395. The original L Approach to Mount Sill 1 inhabitants of the Eastern Sierra called it “Ninamishi” or Guardian Of The Valley and it is clear why once O you have viewed it from the Owens Valley. Even close up, although its summit is lower than some of the N Glacier Trail E neighboring 14,000ft peaks, it still looks the tallest. The first technical climb up Mount Sill was the “Starr Route” climbed by ?????? in (first actual ascent), this the descent route if you are doing any of the P Sam Mack Second “modern’ routes on Mount Sill. Mount Meadow Third Lake Lake I Robinson 10,400ft 6 miles from N 12,967ft Glacier Lodge First ascent details... E trail turns to B The Swiss Arete up the north face of Mount Sill is a classic mountaineering challenge. You will enjoy a Mount Agassiz talus hopping I 13,893ft Sam Mack beautiful hike, a glacial experience, will have to cope with high-altitude and then you will be one with the Lake Temple 1. On the glacier trail beyond Sam Mack Crag S rocky ridge of the Palisades that contain seven of the fifteen 14,000ft peaks in California. Good rock and Meadow en route to Mount Sill. H moraine 12,999ft an exceptional summit experience with great views are the icing on the cake. O 12,165ft P 2 The approach from the trailhead is 10 miles (a round trip of 20 miles) with a total elevation gain of 6,353- Thunderbolt glacier lake O Glacier Mount feet, of which 1,000-foot is 4th and easy 5th class rock climbing with a obligatory moves of 5.6 and 5.7 at loose cliff Gayely W Mount MOVE QUICKLY the distinct crux.
    [Show full text]
  • Bishop Creek Progress Report 2: APPENDIX D - BISHOP CREEK GENERAL WILDLIFE TECHNICAL MEMO
    Bishop Creek Progress Report 2: APPENDIX D - BISHOP CREEK GENERAL WILDLIFE TECHNICAL MEMO Results of General Wildlife Surveys Bishop Creek Hydroelectric Power Project (FERC No. 1394) Relicensing Inyo County, California Prepared for Mr. Finlay Anderson Kleinschmidt Group 1500 NE Irving Street, Suite 550 Portland, Oregon 97232 T: 503.345.7956 Prepared by Psomas 3 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 200 Santa Ana, California 92707 T: 714.751.7373 March 2020 Bishop Creek Hydroelectric Power Project (FERC No. 1394) Relicensing TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Project Background ..................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................. 1 3.1 Project Facilities Use .......................................................................................... 3 3.1.1 Reservoirs ............................................................................................... 3 3.1.2 Dams and Diversions .............................................................................. 3 4.0 Methods ........................................................................................................................ 5 4.1 Literature Review ................................................................................................ 5 4.2 General Wildlife Field
    [Show full text]