DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Meeting Material

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Meeting Material Richardson Lovewell Washington State County Surface Ownership and BIA- Wildlife Lovewell Fishing Lake And Falls City Reservoir Wildlife Area St. Francis Keith Area Brown State Wildlife Sebelius Lake Norton Phillips Brown State Fishing Lake And Area Cheyenne (Norton Lake) Wildlife Area Smith County Washington Marshall Wildlife Area County Lovewell Nemaha Fishing Lake County State ¤£77 County Wildlife administered Tribal and Allotted 36 Rawlins State Park Fishing Lake Sabetha ¤£ Decatur Norton Area County Republic County Norton County Marysville ¤£75 36 36 Brown County ¤£ £36 County ¤£ Washington Phillipsburg ¤ Jewell County Nemaha County Doniphan County St. Subsurface Minerals Estate £283 County Joseph ¤ Atchison State Kirwin National Glen Elder Jamestown Tuttle Fishing Lake Wildlife Refuge Reservoir Sherman (Waconda Lake) Wildlife Area Creek Atchison State Fishing Webster Lake 83 State Glen Elder Lake And Wildlife Area County ¤£ Sheridan Nicodemus Tuttle Pottawatomie State Thomas County Park Webster Lake Wildlife Area Concordia State National Creek State Fishing Lake No. Atchison Parks 159 BIA-managed tribal and allotted subsurface Fishing Lake Historic Site Rooks County 1 And Wildlife ¤£ Fort Colby Cloud County Atchison Leavenworth Goodland 24 Beloit Clay County Holton 70 ¤£ Sheridan Osborne Riley County §¨¦ 24 County Glen Elder ¤£ Jackson 73 County Graham County Rooks State County ¤£ minerals estate State Park Mitchell Clay Center Pottawatomie County Sherman State Fishing Lake And ¤£59 Leavenworth Wildlife Area County County Fishing Lake And Greater Wildlife Area Ottawa State Milford Lake 281 Fishing Lake And Milford Flint Jefferson Sheridan ¤£ Perry Lake Wildlife Area State Fort Riley Hills County Leavenworth Logan State Wildlife Bureau of Indian Affairs-managed surface 183 Park Wamego County Fishing Lake And Area ¤£ Jeffery Energy Center Perry Wildlife Area Wildlife Area Ottawa County Pottawatomie State Wyandotte Logan State Milford Nature Russell State Shawnee State Park Tonganoxie 670 Fishing Lake Wilson Lake Lincoln Center And £24 County §¨¦ Wallace Fishing Lake Fishing Lake ¤ 635 lands County Fish Hatchery §¨¦ Ellis County County Saline State Junction City 435 169 County Logan County Fishing Lake Ottawa State 470 70 §¨¦ ¤£ Gove County Fishing Lake §¨¦ §¨¦ Trego County Wilson Wabaunsee De Soto Scott Geary County Topeka State £50 Wildlife Russell County Eudora Johnson ¤ Greeley Hays Park Shawnee County Lawrence Bureau of Land Management Area Cedar Bluff Dickinson County Wildlife Wildlife Area Cedar County Douglas County Area Bluff Lake Geary State Fishing Kansas City Jerusalem Kanopolis Salina Ellsworth County ¤£77 Lake And Wildlife Area Baldwin Hills Fee Lake Pomona Lake Sunflower AAP Clinton Lake City Ellsworth Saline Council Cedar Bluff Bureau of Reclamation County Grove Hillsdale Scott State Park Kanopolis Lyon State State Park Lake Fishing 335 Pomona Lake State Maxwell £56 Greeley ¤ Lake §¨¦ Osage State Park Wichita Park Cheyenne Wildlife City Hillsdale Louisburg County Scott Rush County Bottoms Fee Lindsborg Refuge Morris County State Park Paola County Marion Corps of Engineers City Lane County Osage County Louisburg-middlecreek Ness County Smoky Hill Air Lake Ross Natural Wildlife Management Scott County Barton County National Guard History Franklin Osawatomie Chase State Fishing Area & Fishing Lake Range Reservation County Miami Finney State Mcpherson Lake And Wildlife Area 35 Miami State County Fishing Lake And Great State 50 §¨¦ Fishing Lake 83 Fort Larned ¤£ Emporia Fish and Wildlife Service ¤£ Wildlife Area Bend McPherson Fishing Lake National Lyons 256 Melvern Lake John Hamilton State ¤£ La Cygne Marais Des Hamilton Historic Site McPherson Chase County Redmond Fishing Lake And Rice County Wildlife Area Cygnes Wildlife rkansas River State 135 Reservoir Garnett A Wildlife Area Finney State County Marion County Chase State Area Fishing Lake Pawnee §¨¦ Lyon County Fishing Lake Hodgeman Fishing Lake Charles P. Anderson Forest Service County Larned Stafford Quivira Sandhills Linn County Finney County Concannon State County State Park Coughlen Burlington County Hamilton County National Flint Hills Marais Des Fishing Lake And ¤£56 Natural Area Kearny County Wildlife Refuge Hesston National Coffey County Anderson Cygnes National County Wildlife Area £400 Mcpherson Wildlife Refuge County Wildlife Refuge ¤ Garden Hutchinson El Dorado ¤£50 Concannon 283 Wildlife Area? Prairies Fee Department of Defense City ¤£ ¤£281 Newton Wildlife Area State 75 Cheney El Dorado ¤£ Fishing Lake Hodgeman State Reno County El Dorado Lake 50 Wildlife State Park Fishing Lake And ¤£ Harvey County Conservation Woodson Bourbon Bourbon Area Greenwood ¤£69 Fort Scott National Wildlife Area Pool Iola State Finney Game County County Historic Site Edwards Cheney Great County Fishing Lake National Park Service Refuge Pratt Sandhills State Cheney Plains County Conservation Pool Toronto Lake Dodge Wildlife Area Park Nature Center Woodson Allen County Gray County Ford County El Dorado £54 Eureka City Texas Lake ¤ Wildlife Hollister Kiowa State Wilson State 59 Crawford Wildlife Byron Walker Area ¤£ Wildlife Area Fishing Lake Fall River Fishing Lake State Park Stanton Area Pratt County Wildlife Area Sedgwick State £160 Ulysses 235 Wichita Augusta Lake Bourbon ¤ Haskell 400 Crawford County ¤£56 ¤£ Pratt ¤£54 Kingman County §¨¦ Toronto Chanute Wildlife County Clark 400 State Area Neosho State Isabel Wetlands Kingman ¤£ Wildlife Kiowa County 77 Butler County Park Wildlife Area Park Lake Grant County Wildlife Area Rose ¤£ Area County Hill Neosho County The Nature Conservancy §¨¦35 Wilson County ¤£183 Barber State Barber State McConnell AFB Girard Cimarron ¤£54 Big Basin Fishing Fishing Lake And Pearson-Skubitz Crawford National Stevens Elk County Lake (Big Hill Lake) Meade Prairie Lake-north Pool Wildlife Area Elk Neodesha County Pittsburg Grassland County Wildlife Preserve City ¤£169 Other surfaces owners (Agricultural Area Lake Barber State Cowley County Parsons Morton County Meade County Fishing Black Mesa ¤£160 Montgomery Kansas Cherokee State Park Hugoton Seward County Clark County Lake-south Pool Wellington 160 Chautauqua Elk City County AAP County Preserve Comanche ¤£ Cowley State Research Service, Bureau of Prisons, Barber County Sumner County Winfield Fishing Lake County State Park Independence Mined Land Spring River County Harper County And Wildlife Area Labette Wildlife 160 £400 Wildlife Area Black Mesa State Meade Big Hill County Area ¤£ ¤ Black Mesa Slate Park; Lake Liberal State Hulah Wildlife Wildlife Creek Cowley State 166 Carl Etling ¤£ Management Area Department of Energy, International Park Wetlands Fishing Lake Beaver Dunes Area Cimarron Lunceford Playa Kaw Wildlife State Park Copan Wildlife Baxter County Area Springs Salt Plains Osage Wildlife Management 56 ¤£ Optima National Kaw Wildlife Management Area; Area Twin Boundary Water Commission) Lake Beaver River Wildlife Woods County Osage County Bridges 44 Wildlife Refuge Management Western Wall Unit 385 ¤£64 Management Area £64 §¨¦ ¤£ Texas County Project ¤ Alabaster Area State Park Caverns Copan Lake verR Harper County Kaw Lake ea iv Beaver County State Park Alva Alfalfa Osage Hills Craig County B er Project Guymon County Grant County Blackwell State Park Nowata County Ottawa Urbanized area Kay County Copan Fort Supply County Little Lake Washington ¤£60 412 283 Wildlife Sahara Great Salt Project White Oak ¤£ 270 ¤£ Management Area Ponca ¤£60 Osage Wildlife Nowata Optima Wildlife ¤£ State Park Plains Lake Tonkawa County Prairie ¤£54 ¤£83 Great Salt City Management Area; Rock Delaware Management Area Plains Oologah Lake - Will Optima National Southern Plains Boiling Creek Unit Birch Lake County Private Fort Supply State Park Rogers State Park Cherokee Wildlife Refuge Project Experiment Lake Springs State Noble County Station Park State Park Glass Mountains ¤£75 Spavinaw Wildlife Dallam County State Park Skiatook Wildlife Pawnee Management Area Perryton Cooper Wildlife 412 281 Management Area Skiatook Woodward ¤£ ¤£ Bill Museum Rita Blanca Lake Project Rogers County Fort 59 Sherman Management Area Vance AFB Enid ¤£ National Hansford ¤£60 ¤£64 State Park Feyodi Creek Gibson Lake Grassland County Ochiltree Project ¤£87 County Lipscomb Ellis County Keystone State Park County Woodward N Canton Skiatook o Major County Waterfowl County Ellis County 183 r Lake Claremore Mayes County Spearman ¤£ th Garfield Lake Carl Refuge 169 BIA surface County Wildlife Project Canton Wildlife ¤£ Ca County Blackwell Tulsa Dalhart Management Area na Management Area Pawnee County dia ¤£177 ¤£412 Keystone 412 Cactus n River State Park ¤£ Natural Falls 244 State Park 444 Packsaddle Wildlife 77 §¨¦ Fort Gibson Wildlife 69 287 ¤£ Stillwater Heyburn §¨¦ ¤£ ¤£ Management Roman Nose Kingfisher Management Area Payne County Lake Cherokee Hartley Area State Park County Logan Dumas Dewey County Wagoner County County Lake Elmer Public County Keystone Wildlife Tulsa Adair Hutchinson Canadian County Roberts 270 Fishing Area Management Area County Wagoner County Moore County County Hemphill ¤£ Keystone 44 Fort Gibson Lake - 0 15 30 60 County §¨¦ County Blaine County Guthrie Lake Project Sequoyah State Park Kingfisher Ozark Washita National Alibates Flint Quarries Webbers Falls Fort Gibson State Plateau National Borger Roger Wildlife Refuge American Bristow Stilwell National Monument Foss Lock and Dam and Waterfowl Refuge Wildlife Refuge Black Kettle Mills Horse Lake Miles Fritch State Fishing Area Creek County Okmulgee
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sewage Data for Digital
    BODY OF WATER GALLONS OF SEWAGE IN 2018 *Unknown 35,445,373 Lake Ray Hubbard 14,002,405 Trinity River 10,217,500 Red Oak Creek 7,677,000 Sycamore Creek 7,237,800 Mauk Branch Creek 7,119,765 Elm Fork Trinity River 6,590,450 Horne Branch Creek 4,361,850 Ten Mile Creek 3,474,332 White Rock Creek 2,201,195 Clear Fork Trinity River 2,150,015 Bull Creek 1,770,900 Big Fossil Creek 1,326,602 Bear Creek 1,213,943 Little Creek to Mustang Creek 1,143,000 Ticky Creek to Lavon Lake 1,050,000 Marine Creek 1,045,240 White Rock Creek Basin 1,042,655 Post Oak Creek 787,300 West Fork Trinity River 749,910 Waxahachie Creek 680,100 Delaware Creek 662,000 Mustang Creek 520,200 Spring Creek Basin 365,970 White Rock Lake 364,400 Village Creek 360,080 Lake Lavon 317,214 Valleyview Branch 309,036 Rowlett Creek basin 296,830 Deer Creek 282,325 White Rock Creek Drainge Basin 271,000 Lake Arlington 259,350 Tenmile Creek 214,549 Segment 0821 Sister Grove Creek to Lake Lavon 205,000 Clear Fork Trinity 200,243 Sister Grove Creek 200,000 Cottonwood branch 192,600 Prairie Creek 169,834 Praire Branch, Big Cottonwood Creek, Kings Creek into Cedar Creek Reservoir 159,000 East Bank 155,666 Hutton Branch 151,200 Cooks Creek 133,500 Kings Creek to Cedar Creek Reservoir 88,000 Eagle Mountain Reservoir 86,000 White Rock Branch 80,000 Rowlett Creek 79,600 Spring Creek 79,224 Turtle Creek 78,660 Town Creek 78,600 Choctaw Creek 74,800 Coombs Creek 71,838 Beck Branch Creek 67,500 !1 Post oak creek to Choctaw Creek 64,000 Rowlett Creek Draiage Basin 62,350 Spring Creek Drainage Basin
    [Show full text]
  • City of Heath Newsletter
    DECEMBER2018 CITY OF HEATH C I S NEWSLETTER T A Y X O E F T H E A T H , HOLIDAY IN THE PARK BOY SCOUT TROOP 690 SERVES HEATH KICKS OFF CHRISTMAS IN HEATH! Boy Scout Troop 690 had an exciting camping trip planned for a recent As this newsletter was going to print, Santa and his wonderful helpers in fall weekend. Thanks to the rain, it was a wash out. So Scoutmaster Rick Heath were getting ready for another spectacular Holiday in the Park at Handschuch asked if the Scouts could perform a service project for the City Towne Center Park on Friday, November 30 from 5:30-8:30 p.m. Now in its instead. Troop 690 ended up cleaning the entire Highlands of Heath Trail, 24th year, this hometown tradition features all of the sights and sounds of which involved removing a tree that was blocking the path, shoveling off mud Christmas, including live music, the Christmas Tree Lighting, kids’ activities, from the rain, trimming shrubs and trees, and collecting trash. Thank you, miniature train rides, cookies, hot cocoa, food trucks and the Jolly Old Santa Troop 690! If you are looking for a Scouting home for a young man in your himself. To make your parking easier, the Heath Economic Development life, Troop 690 welcomes your interest. Contact Scoutmaster Handschuch at Corporation/Municipal Benefits Corporation (HEDC/HMBC) is providing a 214-755-5464 to learn more. courtesy mini-bus shuttle from the parking lot of Rockwall-Heath High School to Towne Center Park from 5 to 9 pm.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Recreational Use at Two New Lakes in Oklahoma: Kaw And
    102 IMPACT OF RECREATION USE AT TWO NEW LAKES IN OKLAHOMA: KAW AND HUGO* Vanessa Lenard and Daniel D. Badger Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074 Outdoor recreation in Oklahoma is closely related to water. Even people who don't like swimming or boating like lakeside scenery for camping or picnicking. After Kaw and Hugo lakes were constructed in Oklahoma, the recreational visits to these lakes increased very rapidly in the first full year of operation. Yet those visitations, i.e., the recreational use at these two new lakes, does not appear to have adversely affected recreational use at nearby lakes, such as Keystone and Pine Creek. Participation in such recreation activities has created a new "water-oriented" image of Oklahoma, in sharp contrast to that of the early-1900's frontier days or the image of the dust bowl era of the 1930's. Another impact of participation in recreation is economic―the incomes and jobs generated by the expenditures of people who engage in these activities. Recreation and tourism are associated with the expenditures on everything from fishing bait to hotel rooms, which result in increased tax revenues, employment, and income. INTRODUCTION Kaw Lake and Hugo Lake were constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as part of the flood control programs on major rivers in Oklahoma. Kaw Lake, completed in 1976, is located on the Arkansas River, in Osage and Kay counties, east of Ponca City in North Central Oklahoma. Being an integral part of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System, it has multiple purposes of navigation, flood control, municipal and industrial water supply, and recreation.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods in South-Central Oklahoma and North-Central Texas October 1981
    FLOODS IN SOUTH-CENTRAL OKLAHOMA AND NORTH-CENTRAL TEXAS OCTOBER 1981 By Harold D. Buckner and Joanne K. Kurklin U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 84-065 Austin, Texas 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information For sale by: write to: District Chief Open-File Services Section U.S. Geological Survey Western Distribution Branch 649 Federal Building U.S. Geological Survey, MS 306 300 E. Eighth Street Box 25425, Denver Federal Center Austin, TX 78701 Denver, CO 80225 Telephone: (303) 234-5888 II CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction- 2 Meteorological setting and precipitation distribution 4 Description of floods- 7 Red River basin 20 Trinity River basin- 25 Brazos River basin 28 Flood damages 33 Oklahoma 33 Texas- 33 Explanation of station data 36 References cited- 37 Supplementary data 38 III ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure 1. Map showing area of flooding in Oklahoma and Texas with location of flood-determination points 3 2. Map showing surface front, upper level trough line, and jet- stream on October 11, 1981 5 3. Map showing surface front, upper level trough line, outflow boundary, jetstream, and path of Hurricane Norrna- 6 4a-f. GOES enhanced infrared and visual imagery pictures showing track of Hurricane Norma across Mexico and Texas: a. 1:30 a.m. c.d.t., October 12, 1981 8 b. 5:00 a.m. c.d.t., October 12, 1981 9 c. 9:30 a.m. c.d.t., October 12, 1981 10 d. 1:30 p.m. c.d.t., October 12, 1981 11 e.
    [Show full text]
  • USACE Recreation 2016 State Report, Texas
    VALUE TO THE NATION FAST FACTS USACE RECREATION 2016 STATE REPORT TEXAS Natural and recreational resources at USACE lakes provide social, economic and environmental benefits for all Americans. The following information highlights some of the benefits related to USACE's role in managing natural and recreational resources in Texas. SOCIAL BENEFITS Facilities in FY 2016 Visits (person-trips) in FY 2016 Benefits in Perspective • 474 recreation areas • 21,116,345 in total By providing opportunities for active • 4,557 picnic sites • 2,579,059 picnickers recreation, USACE lakes help combat • 10,400 camping sites • 613,645 campers one of the most significant of the • 157 playgrounds • 2,213,810 swimmers nation's health problems: lack of • 98 swimming areas • 936,607 water skiers physical activity. • 217 trails • 4,044,269 boaters Recreational programs and activities • 861 trail miles • 7,736,119 sightseers at USACE lakes also help strengthen • • 49 fishing docks 6,204,027 anglers family ties and friendships; provide • 449 boat ramps • 176,745 hunters opportunities for children to develop • 15,473 marina slips • 3,169,565 others personal skills, social values, and self- esteem; and increase water safety. Public Outreach in FY 2016 • 309,805 public outreach contacts ECONOMIC BENEFITS Economic Data in FY 2016 Benefits in Perspective 21,116,345 visits per year resulted in: With multiplier effects, visitor trip spending The money spent by visitors to USACE • $ 621,411,261 in visitor spending within resulted in: lakes on trip expenses adds to the 30 miles of USACE lakes • $ 646,183,208 in total sales local and national economies by • $ 397,320,740 in sales within 30 miles • 5,600 jobs supporting jobs and generating of USACE lakes • $ 189,257,249 in labor income income.
    [Show full text]
  • Kiamichi River Basin Water Resources Development Plan
    FINAL REPORT KIAMICHI RIVER BASIN WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PLAN Kiamichi River Basin Working Group Pursuant to HCR 1066 February 1, 2000 Prepared by the Oklahoma Water Resources Board Duane A. Smith, Executive Director STATE Of OKlAHOMA WATER RESOURCES BOARD Fobfuaty 22, 2000 'os <lired«l """'" HeR 1066. tfle ~ol the Oklahoma Wal... ReOO<ltCU Boa,d henOy to<maIy..- '" "'" "8Ih 0kIa00mll SIa'a l",tura 1ha Kiamm _ Baoin Wata, AMoutcaI o.,."""",*~Plan Final Raporl. Wa ~ "'" Kiamdli _ Basin WOfI<ing G""", kit their -..lion and altO'! in ~ "'" OWR6 in 1" 01_ plan Th<l OWRB III commill"" 10 tM _ ~ 01 Oklal>oma'a wal... .-.'" tt>iI '''II'''d and ~t"';!hIha PIan'a 0XlrJl<lnI0na princopIa _ 1, .. III out <My 10 ........ Iha1 lila pr• ....-.t and luturtI _lor ....t.... by dOl<la!>:>mans or. addo ,os"" ""'" "'" l'O;I>IIl priority __,,, _ OkIoOOmllrlO 'asOding .,.;"., lh/I Kiamicni River Baoin. Wa ruHim'l the princopIa 11>01 OklaOOmll" wal", io '"'aM tor""""", tor Okl.ohomllno. Th<l Plan'. ~tior1lOclnolop _ Slatarrnbal walo&l' """'"4l"Cl pi(M(Io•• ..-.qua opportunoIy '" _ ""'" "'" CIIocto"",Cl>icI<aIllW ""liorlI"" ""'~ __lIO"lo tOf wal... <11•..."..,_, W. _ lNilllli\lOting ltI<I 0WTl0fI!lIp 01 wat only _."'" Slat. aM Trbaa. Through worlUno;J "'II"U- to find """"""" ground, can ~ 10 muctl mora tor "'" """""" 0I~.... Oklahoma, FurlMmlo<tI. we ~ any ...t", raoouroao <lI\ ,I"""te< II ot'al&gy Of plan lllat <;<>i,JId Iimrt Of ja<>par<lz. proopacIlI tor futur. g"""'" _ ~ """"""'""*" in _01 OkIat>om,o or _a in tM ....ta.
    [Show full text]
  • Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Assessment by Region
    Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan 2012 Update Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Assessment by Region April 2011 Prepared by CDM under a cooperative agreement between the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Oklahoma Water Resources Board Contents Section 1 - Executive Summary 1.1 OCWP Methodology .................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Regional Cost Estimates .......................................................................... 1-4 Section 2 - Cost Estimating Approach 2.1 Background: EPA Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Assessment ... 2-1 2.2 OCWP Regional Cost Development ......................................................... 2-2 2.2.1 OCWP Method: A General Overview ......................................... 2-3 2.2.2 OCWP Method: Selecting Providers ......................................... 2-6 2.2.3 OCWP Method: Developing Project List ................................... 2-7 2.2.4 OCWP Method: Summation of Projects ................................... 2-9 Section 3 - Summary of Regional Water Drinking Water Infrastructure Costs Section 4 - Beaver-Cache Regional Infrastructure Costs 4.1 Beaver-Cache – Regional Description .................................................... 4-1 4.2 Beaver-Cache – Developing Project Lists ............................................... 4-1 4.2.1 Beaver-Cache – Large Water Providers ................................... 4-1 4.2.1.1 Surface Water Providers ....................................... 4-1 4.2.1.2 Groundwater Providers ........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hugo Lake, Kiamichi River, Oklahoma, Furnished with Your Letter Dated 21 September 1973
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT HUOO LAKE KIAMICHI RIVER, OKLAHOMA Prepared by TULSA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENC,INKERS TULSA, OKLAHOMA February 1974 Statement of Findings Hugo Lake, Kiamichi River Basin, Oklahoma As Acting District Engineer, Tulsa District, Corps of Engineers, it is my duty in the role of responsible Federal Official to evaluate project data presented in the environmental statement, draw conclusions, and make recommendations to my higher authority. The overall public interest has been given the utmost consideration and personal concern in my review and evaluation of the documents concerning the proposed action, as well as the stated views of other interested agencies and the public, relative to the various alternatives in accomplishing the purposes of flood con­ trol, water supply, recreation, and fish and wildlife. Therefore, I have both a professional and personal concern in drawing the soundest possible conclusions from the studies, observations, and consultations made in the investigation of Hugo Lake. Project formulation studies for Hugo Lake occurred prior to the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act. During those studies public meetings, informal meetings, and workshops were conducted within the project area to determine public preferences, opinions, needs, and objectives. All project-related information derived from these meetings was carefully evaluated during plan formulation and was incorporated into the planning ana development of Hugo Lake for the total public interest. The construction of the project was 83 percent complete on 31 October 1973. A draft environmental statement was completed and released for review by other agencies, groups, and individuals on 21 September 1973. The final statement was then prepared utilizing comments received on the draft statement, technical assistance from the University of Oklahoma, and additional environmental studies by the Corps of Engineers.
    [Show full text]
  • Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(1) Appendix A
    Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(1) Appendix A - Site-specific Uses and Criteria for Classified Segments The following tables identify the water uses and supporting numerical criteria for each of the state's classified segments. The tables are ordered by basin with the segment number and segment name given for each classified segment. Marine segments are those that are specifically titled as "tidal" in the segment name, plus all bays, estuaries and the Gulf of Mexico. The following descriptions denote how each numerical criterion is used subject to the provisions in §307.7 of this title (relating to Site-Specific Uses and Criteria), §307.8 of this title (relating to Application of Standards), and §307.9 of this title (relating to Determination of Standards Attainment). Segments that include reaches that are dominated by springflow are footnoted in this appendix and have critical low-flows calculated according to §307.8(a)(2) of this title. These critical low-flows apply at or downstream of the spring(s) providing the flows. Critical low-flows upstream of these springs may be considerably smaller. Critical low-flows used in conjunction with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regulatory actions (such as discharge permits) may be adjusted based on the relative location of a discharge to a gauging station. -1 -2 The criteria for Cl (chloride), SO4 (sulfate), and TDS (total dissolved solids) are listed in this appendix as maximum annual averages for the segment. Dissolved oxygen criteria are listed as minimum 24-hour means at any site within the segment. Absolute minima and seasonal criteria are listed in §307.7 of this title unless otherwise specified in this appendix.
    [Show full text]
  • The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas
    Volume 2021 Article 1 2021 The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Timothy K. Perttula None Duncan McKinnon Scott Hammerstedt University of Oklahoma Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Perttula, Timothy K.; McKinnon, Duncan; and Hammerstedt, Scott (2021) "The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2021, Article 1. ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2021/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2021/iss1/1 1 The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Compiled by Timothy K.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor
    INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily d vendant upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image o f the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4 . The m ajority o f users indicate th at the textual content is o f greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Swim at Your Own Risk
    Swim at Your Own Risk Bacteria Pollution in Texas Beaches and Waterways Threatens Public Health Swim at Your Own Risk Bacteria Pollution in Texas Beaches and Waterways Threatens Public Health Gideon Weissman, Frontier Group Brian Zabcik and Luke Metzger, Environment Texas Research & Policy Center August 2018 Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Dr. Hanadi Rifai of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Houston, Ken Kramer of the Sierra Club–Lone Star Chapter, John Rumpler of Environment America Research and Policy Center, and additional individuals for their review of drafts of this document, and for their valuable insights and suggestions. Thanks also to Tony Dutzik and Abigail Bradford of Frontier Group for editorial support. Environment Texas Research & Policy Center thanks the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation, the Meadows Foundation, the Jacob and Terese Hershey Foundation, and the Pisces Foundation for making this report possible. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of Environment Texas Research & Policy Center. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. 2018 Environment Texas Research & Policy Center. Some Rights Reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 3.0 U.S. License. To view the terms of this license, visit http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/3.0/us. Environment Texas Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization. We are dedicated to protecting our air, water and open spaces. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public and decision-makers, and help the public make their voices heard in local, state and national debates over the quality of our environment and our lives.
    [Show full text]