DOCSLIB.ORG

Download Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download Document FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT Klamath Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 2082) Recreation Resources PacifiCorp Portland, Oregon Version: February 2004 Copyright © 2004 by PacifiCorp Reproduction in whole or in part without the written consent of PacifiCorp is prohibited. Recreation Resources FTR.DOC CONTENTS Section Page PREFACE..............................................................................................................................xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..........................................................xiii GLOSSARY........................................................................................................................xxv 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1-1 1.1 SCOPE OF WORK.............................................................................................1-1 1.2 OVERVIEW OF RECREATION RESOURCES...............................................1-1 2.0 RECREATION FLOW ANALYSIS...........................................................................2-1 2.1 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE ......................................................................2-1 2.2 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................2-1 2.3 RELICENSING RELEVANCE AND USE IN DECISIONMAKING..............2-2 2.4 METHODS AND GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE .......................................................2-2 2.4.1 Phase I Methods and Geographic Scope..............................................2-2 2.4.2 Phase II Methods and Geographic Scope ............................................2-8 2.5 RELATIONSHIP TO REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PLANS ....2-15 2.6 TECHNICAL WORK GROUP COLLABORATION .....................................2-15 2.7 STUDY OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS ................................................2-16 2.7.1 Study Area .........................................................................................2-16 2.7.2 Options for Whitewater Economic Valuation..................................2-113 2.8 DISCUSSION.................................................................................................2-113 2.8.1 Characterization of Existing Conditions..........................................2-113 2.8.2 Characterization of Future Conditions.............................................2-118 3.0 RECREATION VISITOR SURVEYS........................................................................3-1 3.1 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE ......................................................................3-1 3.2 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................3-1 3.3 RELICENSING RELEVANCE AND USE IN DECISIONMAKING..............3-1 3.4 METHODS AND GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE .......................................................3-1 3.4.1 Recreation Visitor Survey....................................................................3-3 3.4.2 Estimation of Annual Recreation Use in the Study Area ....................3-4 3.4.3 Projection of Future Recreation Use and Demand ..............................3-6 3.5 RELATIONSHIP TO REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PLANS ......3-7 3.6 TECHNICAL WORK GROUP COLLABORATION .......................................3-7 3.7 STUDY OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS ..................................................3-7 3.7.1 Recreation Visitor Survey....................................................................3-7 3.7.2 Estimation of Annual Recreation Use in the Study Area ..................3-36 3.7.3 Projection of Future Recreation Use..................................................3-49 3.8 DISCUSSION...................................................................................................3-58 3.8.1 Characterization of Existing Conditions............................................3-58 3.8.2 Characterization of Future Conditions...............................................3-61 4.0 REGIONAL RECREATION ANALYSIS .................................................................4-1 4.1 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE ......................................................................4-1 © February 2004 PacifiCorp Recreation Resources FTR.DOC Recreation Resources FTR Page iii PacifiCorp Klamath Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 2082 4.2 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................4-1 4.3 RELICENSING RELEVANCE AND USE IN DECISIONMAKING..............4-1 4.4 METHODS AND GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE .......................................................4-2 4.4.1 Collect and Analyze Regional Data.....................................................4-3 4.4.2 Describe the Results of the Regional Analysis....................................4-4 4.5 RELATIONSHIP TO REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PLANS ......4-5 4.6 TECHNICAL WORK GROUP COLLABORATION .......................................4-5 4.7 STUDY OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS ..................................................4-5 4.7.1 Regional Recreation Supply ................................................................4-5 4.7.2 Regional Recreation Demand ............................................................4-63 4.8 DISCUSSION...................................................................................................4-70 4.8.1 Characterization of Existing Conditions............................................4-70 4.8.2 Characterization of Future Activities and Demand ...........................4-76 5.0 RECREATION NEEDS ANALYSIS..........................................................................5-1 5.1 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE ......................................................................5-1 5.2 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................5-1 5.3 RELICENSING RELEVANCE AND USE IN DECISIONMAKING..............5-1 5.4 METHODS AND GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE .......................................................5-2 5.4.1 Recreation Supply Analysis.................................................................5-2 5.4.2 Recreation Demand Analysis...............................................................5-5 5.4.3 Recreation Capacity Analysis..............................................................5-5 5.4.4 Recreation Needs Analysis ..................................................................5-8 5.5 RELATIONSHIP TO REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PLANS ....5-10 5.6 TECHNICAL WORK GROUP COLLABORATION .....................................5-11 5.7 STUDY OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS ................................................5-11 5.7.1 Recreation Supply Analysis...............................................................5-11 5.7.2 Recreation Demand Analysis.............................................................5-33 5.7.3 Recreation Capacity Analysis............................................................5-50 5.7.4 Recreation Needs Analysis ..............................................................5-106 5.8 DISCUSSION.................................................................................................5-166 5.8.1 Characterization of Existing Conditions..........................................5-166 5.8.2 Characterization of Future Conditions.............................................5-185 6.0 RECREATION RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN ...........................................6-1 6.1 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE ......................................................................6-1 6.2 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................6-1 6.3 RELICENSING RELEVANCE AND USE IN DECISIONMAKING..............6-1 6.4 METHODS AND GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE .......................................................6-2 6.4.1 Develop Draft RRMP Programs ..........................................................6-2 6.4.2 Prepare the Draft RRMP Document ....................................................6-4 6.5 RELATIONSHIP TO REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PLANS ......6-4 6.6 TECHNICAL WORK GROUP COLLABORATION .......................................6-5 7.0 INFORMATION SOURCES.......................................................................................7-1 © February 2004 PacifiCorp Recreation Resources FTR Page iv Recreation Resources FTR.DOC PacifiCorp Klamath Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 2082 Appendices 2A List and Profile of Phase I Interviewees 2B Phase I Interview Format 2C Additional Information for BLM Planning on the Hell’s Corner Reach 2D List of Phase II Interviewees 2E Phase II Controlled Flow Survey Instruments 2F Recreation Flow Study Photographs 2G Additional Information from the Middle Klamath Phase I Effort 2H Additional Results from J.C. Boyle Bypass Reach Controlled Flow Study 2I Additional Results from Hell’s Corner Reach Controlled Flow Study 3A Recreation Survey Questionnaire, Interview, and Count Forms 3B FERC Form 80 4A Question Form for Regional Recreation Providers/Managers 5A Recreation Site Inventory and Condition Forms 5B Developed Recreation Site Photographs 5C Developed Recreation Site Plans 5D Dispersed Recreation Site and Use Area Photographs 5E Completed Inventory and Condition Forms for Developed and Dispersed Recreation Sites and Use Areas 6A Annotated Outline of Draft Recreation Resource Management Plan Tables 2.4-1 Phase I reconnaissance summary..................................................................................2-5 2.4-2 Recreation-controlled flow study reaches, dates, times,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT
    The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning College of Urban and Public Affairs Portland State University Fall, 2012 Table of Contents I. Introduction and Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 2 II. History of Long Trails and Regional Trail Networks ..................................................................................................... 6 III. Long Trails in Northwestern Oregon...............................................................................................................................20 IV. The Demand for Long Trails-based Recreation ...........................................................................................................36 V. Long Trails and Community Economic Development .............................................................................................52 VI. Long Trails Implementation ...............................................................................................................................................76 I. Introduction and Acknowledgements The Oregon Department of Forestry and the Oregon Parks Team 3: The Demand for trails-base recreation; analysis and Department are currently engaged in a joint assessment of a new critique of SCORP and similar surveys; trails in the context of trail extending from Garibaldi, on the Oregon coast, to the crest other recreational opportunities;
    [Show full text]
  • TO: Jeff Nettleton, Area Manager, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 6600 Washburn Way Klamath Falls, OR 97603-9365 Gene R. Souza
    TO: Jeff Nettleton, Area Manager, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 6600 Washburn Way Klamath Falls, OR 97603-9365 Gene R. Souza, Klamath Irrigation District 6640 KID Lane Klamath Falls, OR 97603 John Sample, PacifiCorp 823 NE Multnomah Street, Suite 2000 Portland, OR 97232 Cc: Michael Gheleta Nathan Reitmann FROM: Thomas M. Byler, Director Oregon Water Resources Department DATE: April 16, 2020 NOTIFICATION OF DISPUTE AND INVESTIGATION IN AID OF DISTRIBUTION You are hereby NOTIFIED of a petition by the Klamath Irrigation District (“KID”) for an order from the Oregon Water Resources Department (“Department” or “OWRD”) to immediately take exclusive charge of the Upper Klamath Lake (“UKL”) reservoir to “ensure that stored water is not released out of UKL reservoir through the Link River Dam except to meet the needs of secondary water right holders calling upon the source until the irrigation season ends on October 31, 2020.” You are hereby NOTIFIED that a dispute exists as provided in Oregon Revised Statutes (“ORS”) 540.210. Jeff Nettleton, USBOR Gene R. Souza, KID John, Sample, Pacificorp April 16, 2020 Page 2 NOW THEREFORE, the Department commences this investigation in aid of distribution and division of water according to the relative and respective rights of the various users from the UKL. AUTHORITIES A. Distribution of Water from Irrigation Ditches and Reservoirs “Whenever any water users from any ditch or reservoir either among themselves or with the owner thereof, are unable to agree relative to the distribution or division of water through
    [Show full text]
  • Parasites of Largemouth Bass (Micropterus Salmoides)
    PARASITES OF LARGEMOUTH BASS (MICROPTERUS SALMOIDES) IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA By Daniel J. Troxel A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree Masters of Science Natural Resources, Fisheries November, 2010 ABSTRACT Parasites of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) in northern California Daniel J. Troxel A total of fifty largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) were collected from Clear Lake, Lake Berryessa, Lake Sonoma, Trinity Lake and the Sacramento – San Joaquin River Delta. All fish were infected with at least one parasite, with the exception of one juvenile fish from Trinity Lake in which no parasites were found. The following parasites were observed in largemouth bass: Actinocleiudus unguis, Clavunculus bursatus, Clinostomum complanatum, Proteocephalus pearsei, Contracaecum sp., Hysterothylacium (?) sp., Spinitectus carolini, Camallanus sp., Neoechinorhynchus cylindratus, Myzobdella lugubris, Batracobdella phalera, Ergasilus centrarchidarum, and Argulus flavescens. In addition to these identified parasites, I also found an unidentified leech and Proteocephalus sp. plerocercoids, which could not be identified to species. All of these parasites have been previously reported infecting largemouth bass. Clinostomum complanatum, Contracaecum sp. and Myzobdella lugubris, have been previously reported in California; but these are the first known reports from largemouth bass in California. Actinocleidus unguis was the only parasite found that has previously been reported to infect largemouth bass in California. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first and foremost like to acknowledge my parents, without their support over the past two years this project would not have been possible. I would like to thank Dr. Gary Hendrickson for his contributions in the laboratory during the long process of identifying parasites.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity River Temperature Issues: Historical Analysis and Future Outlook
    Trinity River Temperature Issues: Historical Analysis and Future Outlook • Tom Stokely, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations and California Water Impact Network • 530-926-9727 • [email protected] 1952: Congressman Clair Engle promises local control, Trinity County Board of Supervisors endorse the Trinity River Division TRINITY RIVER: DO NO HARM! 1955 TRINITY RIVER The Trinity River Basin ACT (PL 84-386): Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act of 1984 “Provided, That the (PL 98-541): “the Secretary is Secretary shall formulate and authorized and implement a fish and wildlife directed to adopt management program for the Trinity River Basin designed appropriate to restore the fish and wildlife measures to insure populations in such basin to the levels approximating the preservation and those which existed propagation of fish immediately before the start and wildlife” of the construction.” SWRCB WATER RIGHT ORDER 90-05 (1990) “Permittee shall not operate its Trinity River Division for water temperature control on the Sacramento River in such a manner as to adversely affect salmonid spawning and egg incubation in the Trinity River. Adverse effects shall be deemed to occur when average daily water temperature exceeds 56OF at the Douglas City Bridge between September 15 and October 1, or at the confluence of the North Fork Trinity River between October 1 and December 31 due to factors which are (a) controllable by permittee and (b) are a result of modification of Trinity River operations for temperature control on the Sacramento River.” 1992 NORTH COAST BASIN PLAN TEMPERATURE OBJECTIVES 1991-1992: Trinity Temperature Objectives approved by NCRWQB, SWRCB and USEPA as Clean Water Act Standards Daily Average Not to Period River Reach Exceed 60° F July 1-Sept.14th Lewiston Dam to Douglas City Bridge 56° F Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • Whiskeytown Nugget Summer 2003
    National Park Service Park News U.S. Department of the Interior Whiskeytown National Recreation Area The official newspaper of Whiskeytown National Recreation Area The Whiskeytown Nugget Summer 2003 Hot and Cool…Free Kayak Tours on Whiskeytown Lake A Message From . BEAT THE HEAT THIS SUMMER WITH A COOL KAYAK TRIP on Whiskeytown Lake. Free ranger-guided kayak tours depart To Participate in Whiskeytown’s Jim Milestone, Park Superintendent from Oak Bottom twice daily this summer, providing a great escape Kayak Program: Forty years ago, and the opportunity 10,000 people to spot park wildlife • You must know how to swim from Northern while cruising over California anxiously • You must weigh less than 275 pounds the clear blue waters waited for • You must be at least six years old of Whiskeytown President John F. • If you are six to twelve years old, you must ride with a parent or Kennedy’s Lake. Park rangers guardian. helicopter to come and volunteer kayak • Call (530) 242-3455 to reserve a space up to one week in into view and land on the new assistants provide advance. Whiskeytown Dam. As President Kennedy information about stepped off the helicopter the crowd burst local history, current events, plants and animals in the park, not to into applause and cheer. President Kennedy mention boat-in access to some great swimming locations away was on his national Conservation Tour, from crowded beaches and campgrounds. Two-hour tours will visiting parks and major conservation projects, including new dams and wildlife depart at 10:00 am and VIP Profile refuges.
    [Show full text]
  • Shasta Lake Unit
    Fishing The waters of Shasta Lake provide often congested on summer weekends. Packers Bay, Coee Creek excellent shing opportunities. Popular spots Antlers, and Hirz Bay are recommended alternatives during United States Department of Vicinity Map are located where the major rivers and periods of heavy use. Low water ramps are located at Agriculture Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity National Recreation Area streams empty into the lake. Fishing is Jones Valley, Sugarloaf, and Centimudi. Additional prohibited at boat ramps. launching facilities may be available at commercial Trinity Center marinas. Fees are required at all boat launching facilities. Scale: in miles Shasta Unit 0 5 10 Campground and Camping 3 Shasta Caverns Tour The caverns began forming over 250 8GO Information Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity 12 million years ago in the massive limestone of the Gray Rocks Trinity Unit There is a broad spectrum of camping facilities, ranging Trinity Gilman Road visible from Interstate 5. Shasta Caverns are located o the National Recreation Area Lake Lakehead Fenders from the primitive to the luxurious. At the upper end of Ferry Road Shasta Caverns / O’Brien exit #695. The caverns are privately the scale, there are 9 marinas and a number of resorts owned and tours are oered year round. For schedules and oering rental cabins, motel accommodations, and RV Shasta Unit information call (530) 238-2341. I-5 parks and campgrounds with electric hook-ups, swimming 106 pools, and showers. Additional information on Forest 105 O Highway Vehicles The Chappie-Shasta O Highway Vehicle Area is located just below the west side of Shasta Dam and is Service facilities and services oered at private resorts is Shasta Lake available at the Shasta Lake Ranger Station or on the web managed by the Bureau of Land Management.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis
    United States Department of Agriculture Upper Trinity River Forest Service Watershed Analysis Shasta-Trinity National Forest March 2005 Including Watershed Analysis for: Main Trinity River Watershed Coffee Creek Watershed East Fork Trinity River Watershed Stuart Fork Watershed Trinity Reservoir Watershed Granite Peak and the Trinity Alps, looking north into the Upper Trinity River Watershed. 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, and 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 compliant 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 or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis Upper Trinity River Watershed Analysis Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Characterization of the Watershed ............................................................. 3 The Trinity River Sub-Basin......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Temperature Curtain Improves Salmon Habitat
    Presented by the Fabricated Geomembrane Institute Photo: Bob Gee Gee Bob Photo: Temperature Curtain Improves Salmon Habitat By Bob Gee, Bureau of Reclamation, Greg Morris, Bureau of Reclamation & Stanford Slifer, Watersaver CO. A temperature curtain reaching depths of 100 feet in rafts and roofing. “The holes were caused by recently replaced curtains originally installed in the curtain rubbing against chains linking buoys both the upper and lower reaches of Whiskeytown holding the top of the curtain to anchors on the Reservoir in the early 1990’s. Located at the lake bottom,” Gee said. Whiskeytown Reservoir approximately 10 miles west of the city of Redding, in Shasta County Cali- "It just had deteriorated," said Brian Person, man- fornia, the purpose of the replacement curtain is ager for the bureau's Northern California Area Of- to lower the temperature of the Sacramento River fice at Shasta Dam. "So it was time for a replace- for fish spawning which would restore the Chinook ment." The old curtain was removed in the fall of salmon runs to this part of the Sacramento River. 2010 and the new curtain was installed and made operational in June 2011. Due to the deterioration of the temperature cur- tain at the mouth of the Spring Creek Power Erick Ammon, Inc. was chosen by the California Plant, plans were made for a complete replace- Bureau of Reclamation to do the job. Nestled ment. According to Bob Gee, a mechanical engi- among the hills and valleys of California’s Klamath neer for the bureau's Northern California Area Of- Mountains, the Whiskeytown Lake curtain serves fice, the old curtain, installed in 1993 had a lot of as a barrier to keep warm water from the Carr holes in it.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Allocation in the Klamath Reclamation Project (Oregon State
    Oregon State University Extension Service Special Report 1037 December 2002 Water Allocation in the Klamath Reclamation Project, 2001: An Assessment of Natural Resource, Economic, Social, and Institutional Issues with a Focus on the Upper Klamath Basin William S. Braunworth, Jr. Assistant Extension Agriculture Program Leader Oregon State University Teresa Welch Publications Editor Oregon State University Ron Hathaway Extension agriculture faculty, Klamath County Oregon State University Authors William Boggess, department head, Department of William K. Jaeger, associate professor of agricul- Agricultural and Resource Economics, Oregon tural and resource economics and Extension State University agricultural and resource policy specialist, Oregon State University William S. Braunworth, Jr., assistant Extension agricultural program leader, Oregon State Robert L. Jarvis, professor of fisheries and University wildlife, Oregon State University Susan Burke, researcher, Department of Agricul- Denise Lach, codirector, Center for Water and tural and Resource Economics, Oregon State Environmental Sustainability, Oregon State University University Harry L. Carlson, superintendent/farm advisor, Kerry Locke, Extension agriculture faculty, University of California Intermountain Research Klamath County, Oregon State University and Extension Center Jeff Manning, graduate student, Department of Patty Case, Extension family and community Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University development faculty, Klamath County, Oregon Reed Marbut, Oregon Water Resources
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Demography and Habitat Use of Western Pond Turtles in Northern California: the Effects of Damming and Related Alterations
    Comparative Demography and Habitat Use of Western Pond Turtles in Northern California: The Effects of Damming and Related Alterations by Devin Andrews Reese B.A. (Harvard University) 1986 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology in the GRADUATE DIVISION of the UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA at BERKELEY Committee in charge: Professor Harry W. Greene, Chair Professor Mary E. Power Professor Reginald Barrett 1996 The dissertation of Devin Andrews Reese is approved by: University of California at Berkeley 1996 Comparative Demography and Habitat Use of Western Pond Turtles in Northern California: The Effects of Damming and Related Alterations Copyright © 1996 by Devin Andrews Reese 1 Abstract Comparative Demography and Habitat Use of Western Pond Turtles in Northern California: The Effects of Damming and Related Alterations by Devin Andrews Reese Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology University of California at Berkeley Professor Harry W. Greene, Chair Despite their tenure in California for more than two million years, a period including extreme changes in the landscape, western pond turtles (Clemmys marmorata) are now declining. Survival and viability of populations are impacted by a range of factors, including damming, residential development, agricultural practices, introduced predators, and direct harvest. Some of the few remaining large populations occur in the Klamath River hydrographic basin. From 1991-1995, I examined demography and habitat associations of western pond turtles on a dammed tributary (mainstem Trinity River) and an undammed tributary (south fork Trinity) using mark-recapture techniques and radiotelemetry. In addition, radiotracking of turtles in a set of agricultural ponds in Santa Rosa provided an assessment of movements in a fragmented aquatic landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • LAND-USE CONFLICT at SHASTA DAM, CALIFORNIA a Thesis
    THE ROLE OF CRITICAL CARTOGRAPHY IN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: LAND-USE CONFLICT AT SHASTA DAM, CALIFORNIA A thesis submitted to the faculty of San Francisco State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Arts In Geography by Anne Kathryn McTavish San Francisco, California January, 2010 Copyright by Anne Kathryn McTavish 2010 CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL I certify that I have read The Role of Critical Cartography in Environmental Justice: Land-use Conflict at Shasta Dam, California by Anne Kathryn McTavish, and that in my opinion this work meets the criteria for approving a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree: Master of Arts in Geography at San Francisco State University. ____________________________________________________ Nancy Lee Wilkinson Professor of Geography ____________________________________________________ Jerry Davis Professor of Geography THE ROLE OF CRITICAL CARTOGRAPHY IN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: LAND-USE CONFLICT AT SHASTA DAM, CALIFORNIA Anne Kathryn McTavish San Francisco State University 2010 The United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) is conducting a feasibility study to increase the height of Shasta Dam. The Winnemem Wintu Indian Tribe contend that any increase in the storage capacity of Shasta Lake would inundate their remaining cultural and historic sites, tribal lands, and current homestead, an act they describe as “cultural genocide.” Critical Cartography plays a valuable role evaluating the Winnemem Wintu claim, revealing how the tribe’s claim to land was mapped, then unmapped, over the past two-hundred years. I certify that the Abstract is a correct representation of the content of this thesis. ___________________________________________ ________________ Chair, Thesis Committee Date ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have been amazed, delighted, appalled, and humbled as I learned about the rights, issues, and status of the Winnemem Wintu.
    [Show full text]
  • Longley Meadows Fish Habitat Enhancement Project
    United States Department of Agriculture Bonneville Power Administration Forest Service Department of Energy Longley Meadows Fish Habitat Enhancement Project Environmental Assessment La Grande Ranger District, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, Union County, Oregon October 2019 For More Information Contact: Bill Gamble, District Ranger La Grande Ranger District 3502 Highway 30 La Grande, OR 97850 Phone: 541-962-8582 Fax: 541-962-8580 Email: [email protected] In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]