DOCSLIB.ORG

Geophysical Unit of Menlo Park, Calif

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geophysical Unit of Menlo Park, Calif In Cooperation with the National Park Service Geophysical studies based on gravity and seismic data of Tule Desert, Meadow Valley Wash, and California Wash basins, southern Nevada By Daniel S. Scheirer, William R. Page, and John J. Miller Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Open-File Report 2006-1396 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Abstract .........................................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction and Geologic Setting.................................................................................................................................1 Gravity Observations.....................................................................................................................................................3 Gravity Analysis............................................................................................................................................................4 Rock Samples ................................................................................................................................................................6 Seismic Reflection Lines ...............................................................................................................................................6 Results ...........................................................................................................................................................................8 Tule Desert ................................................................................................................................................................8 Meadow Valley Wash .............................................................................................................................................10 California Wash.......................................................................................................................................................12 Implications for Groundwater Studies.........................................................................................................................13 Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................................................13 Literature Cited............................................................................................................................................................15 Appendix: Seismic Imaging Quality............................................................................................................................18 Figures Figure 1a.....................................................................................................................................................................19 Figure 1b.....................................................................................................................................................................20 Figure 1b (continued). ...............................................................................................................................................21 Figure 1c.....................................................................................................................................................................22 Figure 1d.....................................................................................................................................................................23 Figure 1e.....................................................................................................................................................................24 Figure 2a.....................................................................................................................................................................25 Figure 2b.....................................................................................................................................................................26 Figure 2c.....................................................................................................................................................................27 Figure 2d.....................................................................................................................................................................28 Figure 2e.....................................................................................................................................................................29 Figure 3a,b..................................................................................................................................................................30 Figure 3c,d..................................................................................................................................................................31 Figure 4a,b..................................................................................................................................................................32 Figure 5a,b..................................................................................................................................................................33 Figure 6a,b..................................................................................................................................................................34 Figure 7a,b..................................................................................................................................................................35 Tables Table 1. Cenozoic basin-fill density-depth functions..................................................................................................14 Table 2. Physical properties of rock samples grouped by lithology............................................................................14 Table A1. Principal facts for gravity stations collected in April 2002 and December 2002 in southern Nevada. ......36 Table A2. Physical property measurements of rock samples collected in April 2002 and December 2002. ..............42 Geophysical studies based on gravity and seismic data of Tule Desert, Meadow Valley Wash, and California Wash basins, southern Nevada By Daniel S. Scheirer, William R. Page, and John J. Miller Abstract Gravity and seismic data from Tule Desert, Meadow Valley Wash, and California Wash, Nevada, provide insight into the subsurface geometry of these three basins that lie adjacent to rapidly-developing areas of Clark County, Nevada. Each of the basins is the product of Tertiary extension accommodated with the general form of north-south oriented, asymmetrically-faulted half-grabens. Geophysical inversion of gravity observations indicates that Tule Desert and Meadow Valley Wash basins are segmented into subbasins by shallow, buried basement highs. In this study, “basement” refers to pre-Cenozoic bedrock units that underlie basins filled with Cenozoic sedimentary and volcanic units. In Tule Desert, a small, buried basement high inferred from gravity data appears to be a horst whose placement is consistent with seismic reflection and magnetotelluric observations. Meadow Valley Wash consists of three subbasins separated by basement highs at structural zones that accommodated different styles of extension of the adjacent subbasins, an interpretation consistent with geologic mapping of fault traces oblique to the predominant north-south fault orientation of Tertiary extension in this area. California Wash is a single structural basin. The three seismic reflection lines analyzed in this study image the sedimentary basin fill, and they allow identification of faults that offset basin deposits and underlying basement. The degree of faulting and folding of the basin-fill deposits increases with depth. Pre-Cenozoic units are observed in some of the seismic reflection lines, but their reflections are generally of poor quality or are absent. Factors that degrade seismic reflector quality in this area are rough land topography due to erosion, deformed sedimentary units at the land surface, rock layers that dip out of the plane of the seismic profile, and the presence of volcanic units that obscure underlying reflectors. Geophysical methods illustrate that basin geometry is more complicated than would be inferred from extrapolation of surface topography and geology, and these methods aid in defining a three-dimensional framework to understand groundwater storage and flow in southern Nevada. Introduction and Geologic Setting The geologic configuration of southern Nevada is complex, the result of multiple episodes of marine and non-marine sedimentation, igneous activity, and contractional, strike-slip, and extensional deformation from Precambrian time to the present. In recent decades, rapid urbanization in Clark County, Nev., has led to increased demand for surface water and groundwater resources in southern Nevada. Numerous studies have endeavored to understand the hydrogeologic framework that influences groundwater distribution and flow. The present study is a geophysical companion to a recent geologic map synthesis (Page and others, 2005) and a report of interpretive geologic cross-sections (Page and others, 2006) that focus on the lithologic and structural features that allow
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chuckwalla Habitat in Nevada
    Final Report 7 March 2003 Submitted to: Division of Wildlife, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, State of Nevada STATUS OF DISTRIBUTION, POPULATIONS, AND HABITAT RELATIONSHIPS OF THE COMMON CHUCKWALLA, Sauromalus obesus, IN NEVADA Principal Investigator, Edmund D. Brodie, Jr., Department of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-5305 (435)797-2485 Co-Principal Investigator, Thomas C. Edwards, Jr., Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-5210 (435)797-2509 Research Associate, Paul C. Ustach, Department of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-5305 (435)797-2450 1 INTRODUCTION As a primary consumer of vegetation in the desert, the common chuckwalla, Sauromalus obesus (=ater; Hollingsworth, 1998), is capable of attaining high population density and biomass (Fitch et al., 1982). The 21 November 1991 Federal Register (Vol. 56, No. 225, pages 58804-58835) listed the status of chuckwalla populations in Nevada as a Category 2 candidate for protection. Large size, open habitat and tendency to perch in conspicuous places have rendered chuckwallas particularly vulnerable to commercial and non-commercial collecting (Fitch et al., 1982). Past field and laboratory studies of the common chuckwalla have revealed an animal with a life history shaped by the fluctuating but predictable desert climate (Johnson, 1965; Nagy, 1973; Berry, 1974; Case, 1976; Prieto and Ryan, 1978; Smits, 1985a; Abts, 1987; Tracy, 1999; and Kwiatkowski and Sullivan, 2002a, b). Life history traits such as annual reproductive frequency, adult survivorships, and population density have all varied, particular to the population of chuckwallas studied. Past studies are mostly from populations well within the interior of chuckwalla range in the Sonoran Desert.
    [Show full text]
  • Tectonic Influences on the Spatial and Temporal Evolution of the Walker Lane: an Incipient Transform Fault Along the Evolving Pacific – North American Plate Boundary
    Arizona Geological Society Digest 22 2008 Tectonic influences on the spatial and temporal evolution of the Walker Lane: An incipient transform fault along the evolving Pacific – North American plate boundary James E. Faulds and Christopher D. Henry Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, 89557, USA ABSTRACT Since ~30 Ma, western North America has been evolving from an Andean type mar- gin to a dextral transform boundary. Transform growth has been marked by retreat of magmatic arcs, gravitational collapse of orogenic highlands, and periodic inland steps of the San Andreas fault system. In the western Great Basin, a system of dextral faults, known as the Walker Lane (WL) in the north and eastern California shear zone (ECSZ) in the south, currently accommodates ~20% of the Pacific – North America dextral motion. In contrast to the continuous 1100-km-long San Andreas system, discontinuous dextral faults with relatively short lengths (<10-250 km) characterize the WL-ECSZ. Cumulative dextral displacement across the WL-ECSZ generally decreases northward from ≥60 km in southern and east-central California, to ~25 km in northwest Nevada, to negligible in northeast California. GPS geodetic strain rates average ~10 mm/yr across the WL-ECSZ in the western Great Basin but are much less in the eastern WL near Las Vegas (<2 mm/ yr) and along the northwest terminus in northeast California (~2.5 mm/yr). The spatial and temporal evolution of the WL-ECSZ is closely linked to major plate boundary events along the San Andreas fault system. For example, the early Miocene elimination of microplates along the southern California coast, southward steps in the Rivera triple junction at 19-16 Ma and 13 Ma, and an increase in relative plate motions ~12 Ma collectively induced the first major episode of deformation in the WL-ECSZ, which began ~13 Ma along the N60°W-trending Las Vegas Valley shear zone.
    [Show full text]
  • ADOT Herbicide Treatment Program on Bureau of Land Management Lands in Arizona
    October 2015 BLM DOI-BLM-AZ-0000-2013-0001-EA ADOT Herbicide Treatment Program on Bureau of Land Management Lands in Arizona Final Environmental Assessment Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation ADOT Herbicide Treatment Program on Bureau of Land Management Lands in Arizona DOI-BLM-AZ-0000-2013-0001-EA Bureau of Land Management Arizona State Office One North Central Avenue, Suite 800 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4427 October 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. iii Acronym List ................................................................................................................................... iv Section 1 – Proposed Action, Purpose and Need, and Background Information ........................... 1 1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Proposed Action Overview ............................................................................................... 3 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium 2001: Resources, Production and Demand
    A Joint Report by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic Energy Agency Uranium 2001: Resources, Production and Demand NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: − to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; − to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and − to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996), Korea (12th December 1996) and the Slovak Republic (14 December 2000). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention).
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Mineral resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area and Addition, Lincoln and Clark Counties, Nevada by Daniel R. Shawe1 , H. Richard Blank, Jr. 1 , Brian P. Wernicke2 , Gary J. Axen3 , Harlan N. Barton1 , Gordon W. Day1 , and David C. Scott4 (Supplement to U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1729-B, Mineral resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada, by Shawe, D.R., Blank, H.R., Jr., Wernicke, B.P., Axen, G.J., Barton, H.N., Day, G.W., and Rains, R.L.) Open-File Report 90-0249 1990 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards nor with the North American stratigraphic code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 1U.S. Geological Survey Department of Geology, Box 6030 Denver, CO 80225 Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011 Department of Earth and Planetary Science 4U.S. Bureau of Mines Harvard University, Denver, CO 80225 Cambridge, MA 02138 STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-979, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present. Results must be made available to the public and be submitted to the President and the Congress. This report presents the results of a mineral survey of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area and Addition (NV-050-161), Lincoln and Clark Counties, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada
    Mineral Resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1729-B or ^JSSr Chapter B Mineral Resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada By DANIEL R. SHAWE, H. RICHARD BLANK, JR., BRIAN P. WERNICKE, GARY J. AXEN, HARLAN N. BARTON, and GORDON W. DAY U.S. Geological Survey RICHARD L RAINS U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1729 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS- SOUTHEASTERN NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Main entry under title: Mineral resources of the Mormon Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada. (Mineral resources of wilderness study areas southeastern Nevada ; ch. B) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1729-B) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1729-8. 1. Mines and mineral resources Nevada Mormon Mountains Wilderness. 2. Mormon Mountains Wilderness (Nev.). I. Shawe, Daniel R., 1925- . II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1729-B. QE75.B9 no. 1729-B 557.3s 87-600429 [TN24.N3] [553'.09793'14] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub
    Utah Geological Association Publication 30 - Pacific Section American Association of Petroleum Geologists Publication GB78 239 CENOZOIC EVOLUTION OF THE NORTHERN COLORADO RIVER EXTEN- SIONAL CORRIDOR, SOUTHERN NEVADA AND NORTHWEST ARIZONA JAMES E. FAULDS1, DANIEL L. FEUERBACH2*, CALVIN F. MILLER3, 4 AND EUGENE I. SMITH 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 178, Reno, NV 89557 2Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 *Now at Exxon Mobil Development Company, 16825 Northchase Drive, Houston, TX 77060 3Department of Geology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235 4Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 ABSTRACT The northern Colorado River extensional corridor is a 70- to 100-km-wide region of moderately to highly extended crust along the eastern margin of the Basin and Range province in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona. It has occupied a criti- cal structural position in the western Cordillera since Mesozoic time. In the Cretaceous through early Tertiary, it stood just east and north of major fold and thrust belts and also marked the northern end of a broad, gently (~15o) north-plunging uplift (Kingman arch) that extended southeastward through much of central Arizona. Mesozoic and Paleozoic strata were stripped from the arch by northeast-flowing streams. Peraluminous 65 to 73 Ma granites were emplaced at depths of at least 10 km and exposed in the core of the arch by earliest Miocene time. Calc-alkaline magmatism swept northward through the northern Colorado River extensional corridor during early to middle Miocene time, beginning at ~22 Ma in the south and ~12 Ma in the north.
    [Show full text]
  • DESERT BIGHORN COUNCIL TRANSACTIONS VOLUME 8 A
    DESERT BIGHORN COUNCIL TRANSACTIONS VOLUME 8 a Desert Bighorn Council A COMPILATION OF FORMAL PAPERS PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL AT THE EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING, APRIL 7, 8, AND 9, 1964, IN MEXICO AT THE AUDITORIO DE SOCIAL SEGURIDO IN MEXICALI AND AT THE HOTEL VILLA DEL MAR AT PUERTO SAN FELIPE, BAJA CALIFORNIA. THE DESERT BIGHORN COUNCIL TRANSACTIONS ARE PUBLISHED ANNUALLY AND ARE AVAILABLE BY WRITING THE . "DESERT BIGHORN COUNCIL" P. 0. BOX 440, LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. COVER DRAWING. BY PAT HANSEN. EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING DESERT BHGI3ORN COUNCIL April 7, 8, 9, 1964 Mexicali and Puerto San Felipe, Baia California TABLE OF CONTEWS Page .. - program ........................................................ 111 Group Picture ................................................... vii Opening Remarks Dr. Rodolfo Hernandez Corzo, Chairman ............................. xv John P. Russo, Vice-Chairman ................................... x.ix . pp-ppp- . ........................................- -- ... -- --- - .- FORMAL PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP AT THE SAN DIEGO ZOOLOGICAL GARDEN George H. Pournelle, Curator of hlammals ............................ 1 .~DIXTIOSALNOTES ON PARASITES OF BIGHORN SHEEP ON THE DESERT GAME RANGE, NEVADA Rex W. Allen .............................................. 5 1-OXG-DISTASCE AND NIGHTTLME MOVEMENTS OF DESERT BIGHORh' SHEEP Gale hlonson ............................................... 11 IIESERT BIGHORN MAVAGEMENT NEEDS FROM THE ACADEhllC . porn?; OF VIEW U'ilIiamGraf ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Concepts of Recharge in the Desert Southwest: A
    Water Sci. and Appl. Groundwater Recharge in a Desert Environment: The Southwestern United States Vol. 9 FundamentalConcepts of Rechargein the Desert Southwest: A RegionalModeling Perspective Alan L. Flint, LorraineE. Flint, and JosephA. Hevesi U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Sacramento, California JoanB. Blainey U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Tucson, Arizona Rechargein arid basinsdoes not occur in all years or at all locationswithin a basin.In the desertSouthwest potential evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation on an averageannual basis and, in many basins,on an averagemonthly basis. Groundwatertravel time from the surfaceto the water table and rechargeto the water table vary temporallyand spatiallyowing to variationsin precipitation,air temperature,root zone and soil propertiesand thickness,faults and fractures,and hydrologicproperties of geologicstrata in the unsaturatedzone. To highlightthe fundamentalconcepts controlling recharge in the Southwest,and addressthe tem- poral and spatial variability of recharge, a basin characterizationmodel was developedusing a straightforwardwater balanceapproach to estimatepotential rechargeand runoff and allow for determinationof the locationof rechargewith- in a basin.It providesa meansfor interbasincomparison of the mechanismsand processesthat result in rechargeand calculatesthe potential for rechargeunder current,wetter, and drier climates.Model estimatesof rechargecompare favor- ably with othermethods estimating recharge in the Great Basin. Resultsindicate that net infiltration occursin less than 5 percentof
    [Show full text]
  • Geophysical Constraints on the Virgin River Depression, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona by V.E
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geophysical Constraints on the Virgin River Depression, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona by V.E. Langenheim1 , J.M. Glen1 , R.C. Jachens1 , G.L. Dixon2 , T.C. Katzer3 , and R.L. Morin1 Open-File Report 00-407 2000 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1Menlo Park, California 2Las Vegas, Nevada 3Cordilleran Hydrology, Inc., Reno, Nevada TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract.................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 Geologic Setting....................................................................................................... 1 Previous Geophysical Work .................................................................................... 2 Drill-Hole Data and Physical Properties .................................................................. 3 Gravity and Magnetic Data....................................................................................... 4 Depth to Basement................................................................................................... 7 Method.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PDF Linkchapter
    Index (Italic page numbers indicate major references) Abalone Cove landslide, California, Badger Spring, Nevada, 92, 94 Black Dyke Formation, Nevada, 69, 179, 180, 181, 183 Badwater turtleback, California, 128, 70, 71 abatement districts, California, 180 132 Black Mountain Basalt, California, Abrigo Limestone, Arizona, 34 Bailey ash, California, 221, 223 135 Acropora, 7 Baked Mountain, Alaska, 430 Black Mountains, California, 121, Adams Argillite, Alaska, 459, 462 Baker’s Beach, California, 267, 268 122, 127, 128, 129 Adobe Range, Nevada, 91 Bald Peter, Oregon, 311 Black Point, California, 165 Adobe Valley, California, 163 Balloon thrust fault, Nevada, 71, 72 Black Prince Limestone, Arizona, 33 Airport Lake, California, 143 Banning fault, California, 191 Black Rapids Glacier, Alaska, 451, Alabama Hills, California, 152, 154 Barrett Canyon, California, 202 454, 455 Alaska Range, Alaska, 442, 444, 445, Barrier, The, British Columbia, 403, Blackhawk Canyon, California, 109, 449, 451 405 111 Aldwell Formation, Washington, 380 Basin and Range Province, 29, 43, Blackhawk landslide, California, 109 algae 48, 51, 53, 73, 75, 77, 83, 121, Blackrock Point, Oregon, 295 Oahu, 6, 7, 8, 10 163 block slide, California, 201 Owens Lake, California, 150 Basin Range fault, California, 236 Blue Lake, Oregon, 329 Searles Valley, California, 142 Beacon Rock, Oregon, 324 Blue Mountains, Oregon, 318 Tatonduk River, Alaska, 459 Bear Meadow, Washington, 336 Blue Mountain unit, Washington, 380 Algodones dunes, California, 101 Bear Mountain fault zone, California,
    [Show full text]
  • Overton Power District No. 5 Power Transmission Expansion Project Environmental Assessment
    DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2009-1020-EA Overton Power District No. 5 Power Transmission Expansion Project Environmental Assessment Clark County, Nevada March 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office 4701 North Torrey Pines Las Vegas, NV 89130 Phone: 702-515-5000 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action ............................................................... 8 1.3 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, Plans or Other Environmental Analyses ............ 8 1.3.1 Conformance With Land Use Plan ........................................................................... 8 1.3.2 Local Land Use Plans ..................................................................................................... 8 1.3.3 Authorizing Actions ................................................................................................... 8 1.4 Scoping, Public Involvement, and Issues ....................................................................... 8 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 10 2.1 Alternative I – No Action Alternative ............................................................................. 10 2.2 Alternative II – Proposed Action ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]