Appendix F3.12 Rangelands and Grazing

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Appendix F3.12 Rangelands and Grazing Appendix F3.12 Rangelands and Grazing BLM June 2011 Appendix F3.12 Table of Contents Figure F3.12-1 Grazing Allotments Table F3.12-1 Grazing Allotments Located Within the ROWs/Groundwater Development Areas for the Proposed Action Table F3.12-2 Springs in Area of Potential Impact per Grazing Allotments by Time Period Table F3.12-3 Sum of Miles of Perennial and Ephemeral Streams within the Area of Drawdown 10-foot or Greater Table F3.12-4 Sum of Acres by Drawdown of Greater than 10-foot to Wetland/Meadow and Basin Shrubland Vegetation Table F3.12-5 Cumulative Alternatives Comparison Carlin West Wendover Battle Mountain 196 306 228 144 ALT 93 93 55 22 Elko County 218 100 White Pine County 14 87 349 36 278 311 128 173 88 Tooele County 13 2 362 34 DEEP 382 Callao Juab County 489 335 278 147 CREEK 277 207 VALLEY Lander 113 256 County 177 FISH 130 211 SPRINGS STEPTOE 208 120 FLAT VALLEY 160 380 86 893 165 291 17 132 352 205 Juab County 892 96 93 101 180 191 198 68 126 Millard County 211 136 Eureka 78 Austin 61 390 199 SPRING 67 11 382 VALLEY 289 299 McGill 284 96 85 66 122 283 381 50 486 203 332 80 TULE VALLEY 82 365 47 219 197 6 Opt. 1 364 329 Ely 143 309 258 211 38 211 Eureka SNAKE VALLEY 270 County 211 209 211 70 351 102 189 327 326 172 Eskdale 282 83 204 365 12 6 56 108 212 White Pine County 487 159 119 240 255 224 43 Baker Nye County 228 211 125 112 8 Garrison 69 46 161 175 179 280 257 168 358 231 35 Opt. 2 287 350 62 251 25 31 894 382 229 145 18 162 212 63 271 202 334 285 318 182 194 146 376 57 CAVE 50 190 VALLEY 37 121 Millard County 32 92 184 48 302 6 217 81 185 33 294 Beaver County 93 21 29 PINE VALLEY 337 200 312 76 HAMLIN VALLEY 336 WAH WAH 318 VALLEY WHITE RIVER LAKE VALLEY VALLEY 313 93 319 320 348 Opt. 3 314 64 77 SPRING 316 315 Beaver County 232 VALLEY 242 211 317 239 142 279 Iron County PATTERSON 348 Nye County VALLEY 276 374 247 361 211 220 376 245 206 248 Lincoln County 359 375 42 Pioche 186 158 333 EAGLE 140 59 DRY LAKE VALLEY 74 VALLEY DRY 98 45 192 VALLEY 300 141 73 ROSE VALLEY PAHROC Panaca 20 118 137 VALLEY 164 216 19 44 124 223 222 21 16 163 206 PANACA 106 183 138 169 VALLEY 215 56 104 39 99 155 162 154 26 52 Iron County 51 318 30 111 149 120 193 153 Caliente 41 75 53 DELAMAR 227 Hiko 148 Washington County VALLEY 3 176 139 CLOVER 54 187 174 VALLEY 10 Opt. 4 127 157 9 152 151 317 49 93 156 181 Alamo 72 5 27 PAHRANAGAT 162 KANE 178 SPRINGS 131 VALLEY 115 VALLEY 79 60 114 23 95 225 15 90 Nevada Utah LOWER MEADOW VALLEY WASH COYOTE 24 SPRING Arizona 133 Beatty VALLEY Lincoln County 171 LOWER Mesquite MOAPA HIDDEN VALLEY Clark County VALLEY 15 (NORTH) 168 MUDDY RIVER SPRINGS AREA Indian Springs CALIFORNIA 95 WASH LAS VEGAS VALLEY Project MohaveComponents County GARNET Proposed Powerline Centerline Pahrump Las BLACK MOUNTAINS AREA VALLEY Vegas Proposed Pipeline Centerline Alternate Electrical Substation Site 515 Alignment Option Boulder 215 City Groundwater Development Area 93 Coco Cou Water Resources Region of Study 46 Grazing Allotment Proposed Clark, Lincoln, and ID OR City or Town White Pine Counties Groundwater NV UT Interstate Highway 211 USFS Grazing Allotment Development Project US Highway Figure F3.12-1 Major Road State Boundary Grazing Allotments County Boundary Hydrographic Basins CA 0255012.5 Miles Kilometers 0306015 AZ 1 inch equals 25 miles No Warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data for individual use or aggregate use with other data. BLM June 2011 Table F3.12-1 Grazing Allotments Located Within the ROWs/Groundwater Development Areas for the Proposed Action Groundwater Total Active Allotment ROW Development Kind of Livestock and Season of Animal Unit Basin Allotment Name Number Public Acres Acreage Area Acreage Use Months California Wash Ute¹ 02025 NDA2 1,388 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Cave Valley Cave Valley Ranch1 00904 38,524 63 5,314 Cattle - 5/1 to 10/31 2,403 Cave Valley Cave Valley Seeding 00908 942 — 1,274 Cattle - 5/1 to 8/10 200 Cave Valley Fox Mountain 11001 73,412 __ 4 Cattle – 11/1 to 4/10 6,322 Cave Valley Haggarty Wash1 00907 904 — 1,056 Cattle - 6/15 to 10/15 194 Cave Valley Shingle Pass1 00906 74,788 103 11,897 Cattle - 5/16 to 10/15 2,724 Cave Valley Sunnyside¹ 21023 219,519 514 25,116 Cattle – 6/1 to 10/31 5,402 Cave Valley Wilson Creek¹ 01201 1,007,994 32 365 Cattle and Sheep – 3/1 to 2/28 48,250 Coyote Spring Valley Arrow Canyon¹ 02002 88,108 552 ___ Cattle – Mar. to May; Sept. to 225 Nov. Coyote Spring Valley Delamar1 01083 203,000 478 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 5,558 Coyote Spring Valley Lower Lake East¹ 21022 NDA2 422 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Coyote Spring Valley Military Withdrawal¹ A NDA2 37 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Coyote Spring Valley Pittman Well 02019 43,210 156 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Delamar Valley Buckhorn1 21012 82,968 508 19,221 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 3,370 Delamar Valley Delamar 01083 203,000 ___ 16,843 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 5,558 Delamar Valley Oak Springs1 01050 193,609 599 26,060 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 9,268 Delamar Valley Pahroc 01052 117,443 ___ 480 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 4,783 Dry Lake Valley Cliff Springs1 21016 35,821 289 10,483 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 2,043 Dry Lake Valley Ely Springs Cattle 11029 55,168 430 20,183 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 4,248 Dry Lake Valley Ely Springs Sheep 21030 22,927 ___ 2,874 Cattle – 10/16 to 5/15 1,802 Dry Lake Valley Geyser Ranch 01101 237,413 225 7,743 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 12,308 Dry Lake Valley Mustang¹ 01047 23,877 ___ 5,397 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 1,134 Dry Lake Valley Oak Springs 01050 193,609 372 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 9,268 Dry Lake Valley Rattlesnake 01058 28,426 ___ 10,019 Cattle – 10/16 to 5/30 1,180 Dry Lake Valley Simpson 21004 8,379 127 2,671 Cattle - 3/1 to 4/30 747 Dry Lake Valley Wilson Creek1 01201 1,07,994 1336 82,941 Cattle and Sheep - 3/1 to 2/28 48,250 Appendix F3.12, Page F3.12-2 Appendix F3.12, Rangelands and Grazing BLM June 2011 Table F3.12-1 Grazing Allotments Located Within the ROWs/Groundwater Development Areas for the Proposed Action (Continued) Groundwater Total Active Allotment ROW Development Kind of Livestock and Season of Animal Unit Basin Allotment Name Number Public Acres Acreage Area Acreage Use Months Garnet Valley Dry Lake1 02007 3,865 162 ___ NDA2 NDA Garnet Valley Las Vegas Valley A NDA2 112 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Garnet Valley Pittman Well 02019 43,210 31 ___ NDA2 NDA Hamlin Valley Hamlin Valley1 00133 105,831 384 ___ Cattle and Sheep - 11/1 to 5/31 8,177 Hidden Valley Pittman Well1 02019 43,210 478 ___ NDA2 NDA Lake Valley Geyser Ranch1 01101 237,413 1,275 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 12,308 Lake Valley Meadow Valley Wash 10129 NDA2 108 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Lake Valley Meadow Valley Wash 01201 NDA2 307 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Las Vegas Valley Las Vegas Valley – A1 A 49,004 204 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Las Vegas Valley Military Withdrawal1 A 4,529,391 19 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Lower Meadow Valley Wash Caliente 21014 2,008 8 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 40 Lower Meadow Valley Wash Oak Springs 01050 193,609 114 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 9,268 Pahranagat Valley Buckhorn 21012 82,968 112 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 3,370 Pahranagat Valley Lower Lake East1 21022 41,800 141 ___ Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 640 Snake Valley Baker Creek 10125 55,515 491 22,476 Cattle: 10/16 to 6/18 4,311 Sheep - 12/1 to 4/30 Snake Valley Chokecherry 10131 32,334 ___ 7,663 Cattle – 10/16 to 6/5 3,327 Snake Valley Hamblin Valley 00133 105,831 240 9,706 Cattle and Sheep – 11/1 to 5/31 8,177 Snake Valley North Chokecherry 20134 8,692 149 8,288 Cattle - 10/15 to 5/15 770 Snake Valley Bassett Creek 10114 7,328 ___ 2,405 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 591 Snake Valley Bastian Creek 10121 13,527 ___ 4,895 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 1,778 Spring Valley Cleveland Ranch 01119 11,656 12 10,490 Cattle - 11/1 to 2/28 1,021 Spring Valley Cottonwood1 00132 491727 468 37,206 Cattle – 11/1 to 6/15 2,248 Spring Valley Hamlin Valley 00133 105,831 7 11,431 Cattle and Sheep – 11/1 to 5/31 8,177 Spring Valley Majors Allotment1 10126 99,193 736 52,213 Cattle - 3/1 to 5/31, 12,535 Sheep - 5/1 to 10/31 Spring Valley McCoy Creek 10135 5,289 ___ 5,133 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 508 Spring Valley Meadow Creek 10113 8,273 ___ 5,013 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 445 Appendix F3.12, Rangelands and Grazing Appendix F3.12, Page F3.12-3 BLM June 2011 Table F3.12-1 Grazing Allotments Located Within the ROWs/Groundwater Development Areas for the Proposed Action (Continued) Groundwater Total Active Allotment ROW Development Kind of Livestock and Season of Animal Unit Basin Allotment Name Number Public Acres Acreage Area Acreage Use Months Spring Valley Muncy Creek 20111 207,906 ___ 15,708 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 12,684 Spring Valley Negro Creek 00120 31,985 ___ 1,771 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 3,727 Spring Valley Red Hills 00108 35,489 ___ 19 Cattle – 11/1 to 4/30 2,600 Spring Valley Scotty Meadows 10128 17,322 ___ 8,862 Cattle – 6/1 to 9/30 1,227 Spring Valley South Spring Valley1 10130 79,323 624 47,581 Cattle - 2/1 to 6/15 6,329 Sheep - 5/1 to 6/15, 9/1 to 9/30 Spring Valley Stephens Creek 10118 3,784 ___ 2,935 Cattle and Sheep – 6/1 to 10/31 318 Spring Valley Taft Creek 10116 28,294 ___ 3,828 Cattle – 4/15 to 11/30 1,831 Sheep – 11/1 to 2/28 Spring Valley USFS – A1 A — 77 193 NDA2 NDA2 Spring Valley USFS/USPS A NDA2 ___ 61 NDA2 Spring Valley Willard Creek 10127 10,246 ___ 5,018 Cattle – 4/15 to 11/30 1,132 Spring Valley Willow Springs1 10129 46,967 629 37,391 Cattle - 3/1 to 2/28 6,608 Spring Valley Wilson Creek 01201 1,007,994 175 3,862 Cattle and Sheep - 3/1 to 2/28 48,250 Spring Valley Cold Spring 00909 10,253 68 ___ Cattle – 5/1 to 9/30 1,265 Spring Valley Majors 10126 99,193 1 ___ Cattle – 3/1 to 5/31 12,535 Sheep – 5/1 to 10/31 Steptoe Valley Tamberlaine 00901 31,692 160 ___ Cattle - 3/15 to 10/15 2,002 Steptoe Valley USFS A NDA2 31 ___ NDA2 NDA2 Steptoe Valley West Schell Bench 00433 25,915 115 ___ Sheep - 5/01 to 11/01; 1,395 1Majority of allotment occurs in the basin noted.
Recommended publications
  • Photograph Taken by David A
    Prepared in cooperation with the National Park Service Characterization of Surface-Water Resources in the Great Basin National Park Area and Their Susceptibility to Ground-Water Withdrawals in Adjacent Valleys, White Pine County, Nevada Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5099 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Confluence of Lehman and Baker Creeks, looking west toward Great Basin National Park, White Pine County, Nevada. (Photograph taken by David A. Beck, U.S. Geological Survey, 2003.) Characterization of Surface-Water Resources in the Great Basin National Park Area and Their Susceptibility to Ground-Water Withdrawals in Adjacent Valleys, White Pine County, Nevada By Peggy E. Elliott, David A. Beck, and David E. Prudic Prepared in cooperation with the National Park Service Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5099 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Elliott, P.E., Beck, D.A., and Prudic, D.E., 2006, Characterization of surface-water resources in the Great Basin National Park area and their susceptibility to ground-water withdrawals in adjacent valleys, White Pine County, Nevada: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Historical Quarterly, Use of the Atomic Bomb
    78 102 128 NO. 2 NO. I VOL. 86 VOL. I 148 179 UHQ 75 CONTENTS Departments 78 The Crimson Cowboys: 148 Remembering Topaz and Wendover The Remarkable Odyssey of the 1931 By Christian Heimburger, Jane Beckwith, Claflin-Emerson Expedition Donald K. Tamaki, and Edwin P. Hawkins, Jr. By Jerry D. Spangler and James M. Aton 165 Voices from Drug Court By Randy Williams 102 Small but Significant: The School of Nursing at Provo 77 In This Issue General Hospital, 1904–1924 By Polly Aird 172 Book Reviews & Notices 128 The Mountain Men, the 179 In Memoriam Cartographers, and the Lakes 182 Contributors By Sheri Wysong 183 Utah In Focus Book Reviews 172 Depredation and Deceit: The Making of the Jicarilla and Ute Wars in New Mexico By Gregory F. Michno Reviewed by Jennifer Macias 173 Juan Rivera’s Colorado, 1765: The First Spaniards among the Ute and Paiute Indians on the Trail to Teguayo By Steven G. Baker, Rick Hendricks, and Gail Carroll Sargent Reviewed by Robert McPherson 175 Isabel T. Kelly’s Southern Paiute Ethnographic Field Notes, 1932–1934, Las Vegas NO. 2 NO. Edited by Catherine S. Fowler and Darla Garey-Sage I Reviewed by Heidi Roberts 176 Mountain Meadows Massacre: Collected Legal Papers Edited by Richard E. Turley, Jr., Janiece L. Johnson, VOL. 86 VOL. and LaJean Purcell Carruth I Reviewed by Gene A. Sessions. UHQ Book Notices 177 Cowboying in Canyon Country: 76 The Life and Rhymes of Fin Bayles, Cowboy Poet By Robert S. McPherson and Fin Bayles 178 Dime Novel Mormons Edited by Michael Austin and Ardis E.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources of Millard County, Utah
    WATER RESOURCES OF MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH by Fitzhugh D. Davis Utah Geological Survey, retired OPEN-FILE REPORT 447 May 2005 UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Although this product represents the work of professional scientists, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, makes no warranty, stated or implied, regarding its suitability for a particular use. The Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, shall not be liable under any circumstances for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to claims by users of this product. This Open-File Report makes information available to the public in a timely manner. It may not conform to policy and editorial standards of the Utah Geological Survey. Thus it may be premature for an individual or group to take action based on its contents. WATER RESOURCES OF MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH by Fitzhugh D. Davis Utah Geological Survey, retired 2005 This open-file release makes information available to the public in a timely manner. It may not conform to policy and editorial standards of the Utah Geological Survey. Thus it may be premature for an individual or group to take action based on its contents. Although this product is the work of professional scientists, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, makes no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding its suitability for a particular use. The Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey, shall not be liable under any circumstances for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to claims by users of this product.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeology of Spring, Cave, Dry Lake, and Delamar Valleys Impacts
    HYDROGEOLOGY OF SPRING, CAVE, DRY LAKE, AND DELAMAR VALLEYS IMPACTS OF DEVELOPING SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITY’S CLARK, LINCOLN, AND WHITE PINE COUNTIES GROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Presented to the Office of the Nevada State Engineer on behalf of Protestants White Pine County, Great Basin Water Network, et al. June, 2017 Prepared by: _______________________________________________________________ Thomas Myers, Ph.D. Hydrologic Consultant Reno, NV June 28, 2017 Date Table of Contents Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Method of Analysis .................................................................................................................................. 3 Study Area ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Water Rights Applications and Proposed Pumping Scenarios ............................................................... 8 Conceptual Flow Model ..................................................................................................................... 10 White River Flow System ................................................................................................................... 25 Hydrogeologic Properties of Aquifer Systems
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Monitoring Plan for the Spring Valley Stipulation
    Biological Monitoring Plan for the Spring Valley Stipulation Photo by Kelly Douglas February 2009 Biological Work Group Stipulation Parties: Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Land Management National Park Service Southern Nevada Water Authority U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Invited Parties: Nevada Department of Wildlife Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Technical assistance in the preparation of this document was provided by: Bio-West, Inc., Logan, Utah Great Basin Bird Observatory, Reno, Nevada KS2 Ecological Field Services LLC, Anton, Texas The Nature Conservancy, Reno, Nevada This document may be cited as: Biological Work Group. 2009. Biological Monitoring Plan for the Spring Valley Stipulation. February 2009. LIST OF ACRONYMS ANOVA Analysis of Variance ANS Aquatic Nuisance Species BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BLM Bureau of Land Management BWG Biological Work Group CAP Conservation Action Planning CCC Civilian Conservation Corps CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort DMP Data Management Plan DMS Document Management Software DOI Department of the Interior EC Executive Committee EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPT Ephemeroptera Plecoptera Trichoptera ESA Endangered Species Act FWS Fish and Wildlife Service GBNP Great Basin National Park GPS Global Positioning System HACCP Hazardous Analysis and Critical Control Points HB Hydrographic Basin IBMA Initial Biological Monitoring Area ICH Ichthiopterius (fish bacteria) LVVWD Las Vegas Valley Water District KEA Key Ecological Attribute MODFLOW Modular Three-Dimensional Finite-Difference Groundwater
    [Show full text]
  • Ten-Year Report
    SNAKE VALLEY HYDROLOGIC MONITORING: TEN-YEAR REPORT by Peter Goodwin, Paul Inkenbrandt, Diane Menuz, Hugh Hurlow, and Drew Dittmer A contract deliverable for the Endangered Species Mitigation Fund Project ID 63, BLM UT Aquatic Special Status Species Assistant Agreement L15AC00246, and Watershed Restoration Initiative Project ID 5132 OPEN-FILE REPORT 732 UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 2021 SNAKE VALLEY HYDROLOGIC MONITORING: TEN-YEAR REPORT by Peter Goodwin1, Paul Inkenbrandt1, Diane Menuz1, Hugh Hurlow1, and Drew Dittmer2 1Utah Geological Survey, Salt Lake City, Utah 2Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah Cover photo: (clockwise from upper left) Juvenile Columbia Spotted Frog, emergent wetland north of Miller Spring, Darkthroat shootingstar in the Gandy Salt Marsh, and Central Spring in the Bishop Springs complex. Suggested citation: Goodwin, P., Inkenbrandt, P., Menuz, D., Hurlow, H., and Dittmer, D., 2021, Snake Valley hydrologic monitoring—ten-year report: Utah Geological Survey Open-File Report 732, 36 p., 2 appendices, https://doi.org/10.34191/OFR-732. OPEN-FILE REPORT 732 UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 2021 STATE OF UTAH Spencer J. Cox, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Brian Steed, Executive Director UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY R. William Keach II, Director PUBLICATIONS contact Natural Resources Map & Bookstore 1594 W. North Temple Salt Lake City, UT 84116 telephone: 801-537-3320 toll-free: 1-888-UTAH MAP website: utahmapstore.com email: [email protected] UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY contact 1594 W. North Temple, Suite 3110 Salt Lake City, UT 84116 telephone: 801-537-3300 website: geology.utah.gov This open-file release makes information available to the public that may not conform to UGS technical, editorial, or policy standards; this should be considered by an individual or group planning to take action based on the contents of this report.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management ______
    United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management ________________________________________________ Environmental Assessment UT-010-2008-050 April 2009 OIL AND GAS LEASING IN THE FILLMORE FIELD OFFICE Location: Fillmore Field Office Juab and Millard Counties, Utah Applicant/Address: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Utah State Office 440 West 200 South, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 ________________________________________________ Fillmore Field Office 35 East 500 North Fillmore, Utah 84631 Phone: (435) 743-3100 Fax: (435) 743-3155 Fillmore Oil and Gas Leasing EA UT-010-2008-050 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 4 1.1 Purpose and Need .............................................................................................................4 1.2 Conformance with Applicable Land Use Plan and Implementation EA Decisions .........6 1.3 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, or Other Plans ......................................................6 1.4 Identification of Issues ......................................................................................................8 2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION .................................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Alternatives Considered but Not Carried Forward for Analysis ......................................9 2.2 No Action Alternative – Offer Leases Consistent
    [Show full text]
  • Utah State Water Plan - West Desert Basin
    Division of Water Resources April 2001 Utah State Water Plan - West Desert Basin Section 1 Foreword 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Demographics and Economic Future 5 Water Supply and Use 6 Management 7 Regulation/Institutional Considerations 8 Water Funding Programs 9 Water Planning and Development 10 Agricultural Water 11 Drinking Water 12 Water Quality 13 Disaster and Emergency Response 14 Fisheries and Water-Related Wildlife 15 Water-Related Recreation 16 Federal Water Planning and Development 17 Water Conservation 18 Industrial Water 19 Groundwater A Acronyms, Abbreviations and Definitions B Bibliography Utah State Water Plan West Desert Basin Utah Board of Water Resources 1594 West North Temple, Suite 310 PO Box 146201 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-6201 May 2001 Utah Division of Water Resources Utah Department of Natural Resources Section 1 West Desert Basin Utah State Water Plan Foreword Utah's State Water Plan, prepared and 1.1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT distributed in 1990, provides the foundation and The Board of Water Resources gratefully overall direction for state water management acknowledges the dedicated efforts of the State and policies. It established policies and Water Plan Coordinating Committee and guidelines for statewide water planning, Steering Committee in preparing the West conservation and development. As a part of the Desert Basin Plan. Work was led by the state water planning process, more detailed planning staff of the Division of Water plans are prepared for each of the hydrologic Resources, with valuable assistance from basins within the state. The West Desert Basin individual coordinating committee members Plan is the eleventh and final of such reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Simple Approach on Estimates
    2730 N. Deer Run Rd. Carson City, NV 89701 Phone: 775-887-7614 May 19, 2011 MEMORANDUM To: Devin Galloway, Ground-Water Specialist, Western Region, USGS From: Weiquan Dong, Hydrologist, Southern Nevada Water Authority, Ramon C Naranjo, Hydrologist, Nevada WSC, U.S. Geological Survey, and Keith J. Halford, Ground-Water Specialist, Nevada WSC, U.S. Geological Survey Subject: AQUIFER TEST—Analysis of water level fluctuations from pumpage for irrigation during multiple drought years in Snake Valley, HA195, near Needle Point and south of Garrison, Utah Ranges of transmissivity and specific yield of the basin fill and carbonate rock were estimated by analyzing water-level changes in multiple observation wells that were caused by irrigation of 1,800 acres in Snake Valley, HA195, south of Garrison, Utah (Figure 1). Annual effective groundwater withdrawals were estimated between 3,500 and 5,300 acre-feet (ac-ft) during the years 2001–2003. The analysis is referred to as the Needle Point aquifer test because most of the pumpage occurs just west of the carbonate outcrop Needle Point and the observation well that is completed in carbonate rocks is on the northern tip of Needle Point (Figure 1). Hydraulic property estimates from the Needle Point aquifer test will constrain calibration of regional groundwater flow models. Site and Geology The aquifer test occurred near Garrison, UT in Snake Valley where water levels in more than 100 mi² of basin fill and carbonate rock were affected by pumpage for irrigation (Figure 1). The basin fill was pumped largely between 100 and 800 ft below land surface where undifferentiated intervals of silt, sand, and gravel occurred.
    [Show full text]
  • Table XX Alternatives A, C, F, G, H, I Groundwater
    Appendix F3.7 Aquatic Biological Resources BLM 2012 Table F3.7-1 Aquatic Species in the Project Study Area 3 5 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 1 2 5 5 2 2 3 5 4 2 3 5 2 3 2 3 3 3 5 5 3 Valley h Wah Valley *Garnet Valley (North) Valley *Hidden Valley *Cave Valley Moapa Lower Dry Valley Clover Valley *Delamar Valley *Delamar Pahroc Valley White River Valley Wash California Area Mountains Black Valley *Lake #201) (basin Valley Spring Valley Eagle Valley Panaca Rose Valley Valley *Snake Valley Pine Tule Valley Tule Wa *Las Vegas Valley Vegas *Las Valley Spring *Coyote Valley *Pahranagat Valley Lake *Dry Valley Springs Kane Area Springs Muddy River Patterson Wash Valley Meadow Lower *Steptoe Valley #184) (basin Valley *Spring *Hamlin Valley Flat Springs Fish Deep Creek Valley Aquatic Species Status Fish Big Spring spinedace FT, BLM, NVP S S (Lepidomeda mollispinis pratensis) Bluegill GF S S (Lepomis macrochirus) Bonneville cutthroat trout GF, BLM, USFS, S RS S S (Oncorhynchus clarki utah) NVP, UTSC, CA Brook trout GF S RS S ES (Salvelinus fontinalis) Brown trout GF S S S RS RES ES (Salmo trutta) Bullhead species GF S S S S (Ameiurus spp.) Channel catfish GF S S S S (Ictalurus punctatis) Green sunfish GF S S (Lepomis cyanellus) Hiko White River springfish FE, BLM, NVP S (Crenichthys baileyi grandis) Lahontan cutthroat trout GF, FT, BLM, NVP, S (Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi) USFS Largemouth bass GF S S S S S S S S (Micropterus salmoides) Least Chub C, BLM, UTSC, CA S S (Iotichthys phlegethontis) Meadow Valley Wash desert sucker BLM, NVP S S S S S S (Catostomus
    [Show full text]
  • FJSH SPRINGS POND Snall " " REPORT
    ·. " " " FJSH SPRINGS POND SNAlL " " REPORT .. .. " f,. ·~ (\ 0 .. 2 Statu~ Report o n Fish Spri ngs Pon d Snail Taxon name: LymnaPft <Hinkleyia) oil?bryi Hemphill, 1890 Common name: Fi~h Springs Pond Snd>l Family: Lymnae1dae StAll-'s where taxon occurs: Utah Curr ent Feder al 5talu ~ : Candi date for endang~rcd or lhrcatcn e d status RPronomended Federal !Status: No li !iting Aulhor of report: Owtght W. Taylor , Dept . of Guolog y , Oregon State UnivcrGity , Corvalll5, OR 973 3 1-5506 Or"i gi nal da t e o f r eport: No vember 2;'1, ! 986 3 Table of Contents I. Specie~ Information 4 1. Cl~,sification ~nd nomPnclaturc 2. Present legal status 6 3 . Description 6 4. G~ographical distribution 7 5. Environment and habitat 0 6. Current land ownership and management responsibility 9 7 . Management practice~ and ~xpericnce 9 JI. AssesGment and Recommendations 10 B. Status change 10 9 . Conservation recommendati ons 10 III . Information Sources 11 10. Sources o~ information 11 IV. Authorship 1·­.:> 11. Initial authorship 15 Literature Ci t£1d 16 4 I . SPECIES INFORMATION J. Cla~~~~ication and nomenclature. A. Species. 1. Scientific Name. a . Lvmna~a CHinklPyia) Pilsbryi Hemphill , 1890. b. Original description: Hemphill , H. , 1890, NPw form~ of weslarn limniade~: Tile Nautilus , vel. 4, pp. 25-27; Limnpca CLPptolimnogtd pil s bryi, p. 25. c. Type specimen: 62293, Academy of Natural Sciences, Phil adel phi.:>. Other spPci nu;ms , col 1 ect.Jd by R. H. Russell in 1970, arc mostly in the Department of Zoology, University of Arizona , Tucson .
    [Show full text]
  • SNWA Hydrologic Management Program for Groundwater Development in Spring, Cave, Dry Lake, and Delamar Valleys, Nevada
    SNWA Hydrologic Management Program for Groundwater Development in Spring, Cave, Dry Lake, and Delamar Valleys, Nevada PRESENTATION TO THE OFFICE OF THE NEVADA STATE ENGINEER Prepared by June 2011 This document’s use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the Southern Nevada Water Authority. Although trademarked names are used, a trademark symbol does not appear after every occurrence of a trademarked name. Every attempt has been made to use proprietary trademarks in the capitalization style used by the manufacturer. Suggested citation: Prieur, J.P., 2011, SNWA hydrologic management program for groundwater development in Spring, Cave, Dry Lake, and Delamar valleys, Nevada: Presentation to the Office of the Nevada State Engineer: Southern Nevada Water Authority, Las Vegas, Nevada. SNWA Hydrologic Management Program for Groundwater Development CONTENTS List of Figures . iii List of Tables . .v List of Acronyms and Abbreviations . .vii 1.0 Introduction. 1-1 2.0 Spring Valley Hydrologic Management Program . 2-1 2.1 Monitoring Plan Development and Background . 2-1 2.1.1 Spring Valley Stipulation Agreement. 2-1 2.1.2 Proposed Monitoring Requirements for Non-Federal Water Rights . 2-3 2.2 Monitoring and Mitigation Plan Elements . 2-3 2.3 Monitor Well and Spring Network . 2-12 2.4 Aquifer Characterization. 2-14 2.5 Numerical Modeling of Regional Groundwater Flow . 2-14 2.6 Data Collection Methodology and Quality Control Procedures. 2-15 2.7 Database Management . 2-16 2.8 Reporting . 2-16 2.9 Management and Mitigation. 2-16 2.10 Plan Status.
    [Show full text]