DOCSLIB.ORG

United States and Cskt 10000 Claims Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States and Cskt 10000 Claims Summary Basins in which the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes have filed water rights claims June 25, 2015 76B 40T 40F 40K DANIELS SHERIDAN 40Q 76D GLACIER 41L 40F 40R TOOLE 40L 40N LINCOLN BLACKFEET 41N 40G HILL 40J LIBERTY ROOSEVELT 76LJ ROCKY 76I FORT PECK BOY'S BLAINE FLATHEAD 41M 41P PHILLIPS 40O 76C 40H 40S PONDERA FORT 40M BELKNAP VALLEY 40I TETON RICHLAND SANDERS 76J 41O CHOUTEAU 41T 76N LAKE 40EJ MCCONE 76K 40E 40P FLATHEAD 41K 41Q 41R 76L DAWSON 41U CASCADE FERGUS GARFIELD 42M 76M LEWIS 41QJ 40D MINERAL PETROLEUM 76F & CLARK JUDITH 41S 40B MISSOULA BASIN PRAIRIE 39G 76HB 76HB 41J WIBAUX GRANITE POWELL 40C 42K 41I MEAGHER 39H 76E 76G WHEATLAND ROSEBUD 76HF 76GJ MUSSELSHELL 42L BROADWATER 40A GOLDEN 42KJ FALLON 76HA 41E VALLEY TREASURE CUSTER 39FJ DEER JEFFERSON RAVALLI LODGE SILVER 43A 43BV 43Q 76HE BOW SWEET YELLOWSTONE 41D 41G GALLATIN STILLWATER 42A 42C 42J GRASS 43QJ 39E 43E NORTHERN CARTER BIG HORN CHEYENNE CROW 41H 43E POWDER 43BJ 43O RIVER MADISON PARK 43C 43E 43P 42I 39F 43B 43D 41B 41F 42B 38H COUNTIES 41C CARBON 43N BEAVERHEAD RESERVATIONS YELLOWSTONE PARK 41A Basin Boundary & CSKT Claims Basins included in CSKT claim filing CSKT Legal Department Basins not included in CSKT claim filing June 2015 NAD 1983 StatePlane Montana FIPS 2500 created by DOWL \\BIL-FS\BIL-projects\25\20083-05\60GIS\LitigationWork\ClaimFiles\BasinsWithClaims.mxd United States and CSKT 10,000 Claims Analysis THE CSKT COMPACT DOES NOT PROVIDE from the date on which the ratification of the TREATY OF HELLGATE AND OFF RESERVATION FINALITY Compact by the Montana Legislature takes effect RIGHTS: Off reservation rights in the CSKT under State law. This is a continuing right until Compact are claimed to arise from Article 3 of the Montana Code Annotated 85-20-1601: CSKT Compact: Congress ratifies the Compact; Treaty of Hellgate, a Stevens Treaty: Below is the ARTICLE VII. FINALITY b. Appropriations are not made in the manner language from Article 3. Where is the word water contemplated by the Federal legislation ratifying C. Disposition of State and Federal Suits. 1.c.: The this Compact; mentioned? What does the language “in Common United States, the Tribes, and the State shall execute c. The Parties do not reach agreement on the with the citizens of the Territory” mean? and file joint motions pursuant to Rule 41(a), State contribution to settlement; Mont.R.Civ.P., to dismiss without prejudice any and all d. The State has not authorized appropriations for …. the exclusive right of taking fish in all the claims of the Tribes, Tribal members, and Allottees and the State contribution to settlement within five stream running through or bordering said any and all claims made by the United States for the years from the date the Compact is ratified by the reservation is further secured to said Indians; as benefit of the Tribes, Tribal members, and Allottees United States; or also the right of taking fish at all usual and that have been filed in the Montana Water Court as e. Appropriations are not made by the State in the accustomed places, in common with the citizens of contemplated by Article VII.D.2. The case adjudicating manner contemplated by any agreement for the Territory and of erecting temporary buildings those claims may only be resumed if either the State or contributions to settlement made pursuant to for curing; together with the privilege of hunting, the Tribes exercise the rights each holds under Article Article VI.A. VII.A.2 and 4; gathering roots and berries, and pasturing their 4. Notwithstanding any other provision in the horses and cattle upon open and unclaimed land D. Settlement of Water Rights Claims. 2. The Tribes Compact, the State reserves the unilateral right to INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION STIPULATION and United States will file all of their claims to water on withdraw as a Party to the Compact if: and off of the Flathead Indian Reservation on or before AGREEMENT 1966 (17 Ind. Cl. Comm. 297) July 1, 2015, pursuant to 85-2-702(3), MCA. Upon filing, a. Congress has not ratified this Compact within the Tribes and United States will request that the four years from the date on which the ratification Indian Claims Commission Docket 61 settled the Montana Department of Natural Resources and of the Compact by the Montana Legislature takes tribe’s off reservation ceded lands claim and Conservation stay any action on such claims pending effect under State law. This is a continuing right extinguished aboriginal title to those lands. the occurrence of the following events: until Congress ratifies the Compact; a. The passage of an Act of Congress ratifying the b. The Tribes have not ratified this Compact within Stipulation agreement found at p. 309 reads: Compact and authorizing appropriations for monetary five years from the date on which the ratification settlement to the Tribes; of the Compact by the Montana Legislature takes “The judgment shall finally dispose of all claims or b. Approval by the Tribes of the Compact and the effect under State law; demands which petitioner has asserted or could Act described in Article VII.D.2.a. c. Congress requires a State contribution to have asserted in this case against defendant, and c. Issuance by the Montana Water Court of a final settlement that exceeds the contributions petitioner shall be barred from asserting all such water right decree or decrees incorporating the water described in Article VI.A; or claims or demands in any future action” rights quantified pursuant to this Compact; and d. Congress does not authorize and appropriate d. All portions of the final Water Court decree or the Federal share of funding agreed to pursuant to WHEN IS FINAL, FINAL? decrees survive exhaustion of all avenues of appeal. Article VI.B. The Indian Claims Commission was established by A. Ratification and Effectiveness of Compact. MEANING OF “WITHOUT PREJUDICE” Congress to forever resolve the grievances with the tribes that existed at the time. That included 2. Notwithstanding any other provision in the A case dismissed without prejudice is not over and their ceded lands, waters, and resources. If the Compact, the Tribes reserve the unilateral right to done with and can be brought back to court at any withdraw as a Party if: CSKT can take $ millions in settlement funds but time. The Plaintiffs (Tribes, United States), can ignore the stipulation agreement that was a. Congress has not ratified this Compact and bring a new lawsuit, or the same lawsuit again at incorporated into the final settlement, why would authorized appropriations for the Federal any time. they honor the law with respect to any reopening contribution to the settlement within four years of off reservation claims? United States and CSKT 10,000 Claims Filed June 15, 2015 © 2020 Concerned Citizens of Western Montana Page 2 of 28 United States and CSKT 10,000 Claims Analysis Towns and On / Off Priority Total # Basin Purpose / Use Source Cities FIR Date Claims 40A Harlowton, Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 62 Alabaugh Creek (2), American Fork Creek (2), American Fork Musselshell Ryegate Creek, South Fork (2), American Fork, Middle Fork (2), Big Elk River, Above Creek (2), Bonanza Creek (2), Boulder Creek (2), Box Canyon Roundup (2), Careless Creek (2), Checkerboard Creek (2), Comb Creek (2), Cottonwood Creek (2), Cottonwood Creek, Middle Fork (2), Cottonwood Creek, West Fork (2), Daisy Dean Creek (2), Flagstaff Creek, West Fork (2), Haymaker Creek (2), Hensley Creek (2), Hopley Creek, East Fork (2), Hopley Creek, West Fork (2), Lion Creek (2), Loco Creek (2), Morrisy Coulee (2), Musselshell River (1), Musselshell River, North Fork Reach 1 (2), Musselshell River, North Fork Reach 2 (2), Musselshell River, Reach 1 (1), Musselshell River, South Fork (2), Spring Creek (2), Swimming Woman Creek (2), Timber Creek (2), Warm Springs Creek (2) 40B Winnett Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 8 Cougar Gulch (aka Fords) Creek (2), Flatwillow Creek (2), Half Flatwillow Creek, Moon Creek (2), North Horsethief Canyon (2) Including Box Elder Creek 40C Roundup Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 6 Mussellshell River, Reach 2 (2), Mussellshell River, Reach 3 Musselshell (2), Willow Creek (2) River, Below Roundup 40EJ Zortman Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 4 Cow Creek (2), Missouri River (2) Missouri River, Between Bullwhacker Creek And Musselshell Rivers 40I Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 2 Peoples Creek (aka 'South Branch Peoples Creek) (2) Peoples Creek 40J Chinook, Havre, Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 6 Battle Creek (2), Beaver Creek (2), Little Box Elder (Boxelder) Milk River, bet. Malta, Saco Creek (2) Fresno Reservoir & Whitewater Creek United States and CSKT 10,000 Claims Filed June 15, 2015 © 2020 Concerned Citizens of Western Montana Page 3 of 28 United States and CSKT 10,000 Claims Analysis Towns and On / Off Priority Total # Basin Purpose / Use Source Cities FIR Date Claims 40L Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 2 Frenchman River (aka Frenchman Creek) (2) Frenchman Creek 40N Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 2 Rock (McEachern) Creek (2) Rock Creek, Tributary Of Milk River 41A Lima Off Fish & Wildlife Immemorial 72 Bear Creek (2), Big Sheep Creek (2), Black Canyon Creek (2), Red Rock River Bloody Dick Creek (2), Browns Canyon Creek (2), Cabin Creek (2), Clover Creek, East Fork (2), Corral Creek (2), Dad Creek (2), Deadman Creek (2), Deep Creek (2), Frying Pan Creek (2), Hell Roaring Creek (2), Horse Prairie Creek (2), Indian Creek (2), Jones Creek (2), Junction Creek (2), Kate Creek (2), Lake Canyon Creek (2), Little Sheep Creek (2), Little Sheep Creek, West Fork (2),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sewage Treatment System Impact Monitoring Program
    Sewage Treatment System Impact Monitoring Program Volume 1 Data Report 2019-20 Commercial-in-Confidence Sydney Water 1 Smith Street, Parramatta, NSW Australia 2150 PO Box 399 Parramatta NSW 2124 Report version: STSIMP Data Report 2019-20 Volume 1 final © Sydney Water 2020 This work is copyright. It may be reproduced for study, research or training purposes subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source and no commercial usage or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those listed requires permission from Sydney Water. Sewage Treatment System Impact Monitoring Program | Vol 1 Data Report 2019-20 Page | i Executive summary Background Sydney Water operates 23 wastewater treatment systems and each system has an Environment Protection Licence (EPL) regulated by the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA). Each EPL specifies the minimum performance standards and monitoring that is required. The Sewage Treatment System Impact Monitoring Program (STSIMP) commenced in 2008 to satisfy condition M5.1a of our EPLs. The results are reported to the NSW EPA every year. The STSIMP aims to monitor the environment within Sydney Water’s area of operations to determine general trends in water quality over time, monitor Sydney Water’s performance and to determine where Sydney Water’s contribution to water quality may pose a risk to environmental ecosystems and human health. The format and content of 2019-20 Data Report predominantly follows four earlier reports (2015-16 to 2018-19). Sydney Water’s overall approach to monitoring (design and method) is consistent with the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC 2000 and ANZG 2018) guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • San Mateo County
    Steelhead/rainbow trout resources of San Mateo County San Pedro San Pedro Creek flows northwesterly, entering the Pacific Ocean at Pacifica State Beach. It drains a watershed about eight square miles in area. The upper portions of the drainage contain springs (feeding the south and middle forks) that produce perennial flow in the creek. Documents with information regarding steelhead in the San Pedro Creek watershed may refer to the North Fork San Pedro Creek and the Sanchez Fork. For purposes of this report, these tributaries are considered as part of the mainstem. A 1912 letter regarding San Mateo County streams indicates that San Pedro Creek was stocked. A fishway also is noted on the creek (Smith 1912). Titus et al. (in prep.) note DFG records of steelhead spawning in the creek in 1941. In 1968, DFG staff estimated that the San Pedro Creek steelhead run consisted of 100 individuals (Wood 1968). A 1973 stream survey report notes, “Spawning habitat is a limiting factor for steelhead” (DFG 1973a, p. 2). The report called the steelhead resources of San Pedro Creek “viable and important” but cited passage at culverts, summer water diversion, and urbanization effects on the stream channel and watershed hydrology as placing “the long-term survival of the steelhead resource in question”(DFG 1973a, p. 5). The lower portions of San Pedro Creek were surveyed during the spring and summer of 1989. Three O. mykiss year classes were observed during the study throughout the lower creek. Researchers noticed “a marked exodus from the lower creek during the late summer” of yearling and age 2+ individuals, many of which showed “typical smolt characteristics” (Sullivan 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Control Plan. San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) California Regional Water Quality Control Board
    Golden Gate University School of Law GGU Law Digital Commons California Agencies California Documents 12-1986 Water Quality Control Plan. San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) California Regional Water Quality Control Board Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_agencies Part of the Environmental Law Commons, and the Water Law Commons Recommended Citation California Regional Water Quality Control Board, "Water Quality Control Plan. San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2)" (1986). California Agencies. Paper 393. http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_agencies/393 This Cal State Document is brought to you for free and open access by the California Documents at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in California Agencies by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WATER QUA~ITY · CONTROL PLAN Cover photo by: MICHAEL DRENNAN. Senior Water Resources Engineer San Francisco Bay Region DONALD E. ANDERSON, CHAIRMAN PETER W. SNYDER, VICE CHAIRMAN* FRED KLATTE* JANICE E. MONDAVI MARION OTSEA • KENNETH R. MERCER JEPTHA WADE PHILIP WENTE *Basin Plan Committee 1986 3 F N R R This report was prepared under the direction of Roger B. James ......................................................................... Executive Officer Lawrence P. Kolb ...................................................................... Assistant Executive Officer Richard H. Whitsel ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wool Statistical Area's
    Wool Statistical Area's Monday, 24 May, 2010 A ALBURY WEST 2640 N28 ANAMA 5464 S15 ARDEN VALE 5433 S05 ABBETON PARK 5417 S15 ALDAVILLA 2440 N42 ANCONA 3715 V14 ARDGLEN 2338 N20 ABBEY 6280 W18 ALDERSGATE 5070 S18 ANDAMOOKA OPALFIELDS5722 S04 ARDING 2358 N03 ABBOTSFORD 2046 N21 ALDERSYDE 6306 W11 ANDAMOOKA STATION 5720 S04 ARDINGLY 6630 W06 ABBOTSFORD 3067 V30 ALDGATE 5154 S18 ANDAS PARK 5353 S19 ARDJORIE STATION 6728 W01 ABBOTSFORD POINT 2046 N21 ALDGATE NORTH 5154 S18 ANDERSON 3995 V31 ARDLETHAN 2665 N29 ABBOTSHAM 7315 T02 ALDGATE PARK 5154 S18 ANDO 2631 N24 ARDMONA 3629 V09 ABERCROMBIE 2795 N19 ALDINGA 5173 S18 ANDOVER 7120 T05 ARDNO 3312 V20 ABERCROMBIE CAVES 2795 N19 ALDINGA BEACH 5173 S18 ANDREWS 5454 S09 ARDONACHIE 3286 V24 ABERDEEN 5417 S15 ALECTOWN 2870 N15 ANEMBO 2621 N24 ARDROSS 6153 W15 ABERDEEN 7310 T02 ALEXANDER PARK 5039 S18 ANGAS PLAINS 5255 S20 ARDROSSAN 5571 S17 ABERFELDY 3825 V33 ALEXANDRA 3714 V14 ANGAS VALLEY 5238 S25 AREEGRA 3480 V02 ABERFOYLE 2350 N03 ALEXANDRA BRIDGE 6288 W18 ANGASTON 5353 S19 ARGALONG 2720 N27 ABERFOYLE PARK 5159 S18 ALEXANDRA HILLS 4161 Q30 ANGEPENA 5732 S05 ARGENTON 2284 N20 ABINGA 5710 18 ALFORD 5554 S16 ANGIP 3393 V02 ARGENTS HILL 2449 N01 ABROLHOS ISLANDS 6532 W06 ALFORDS POINT 2234 N21 ANGLE PARK 5010 S18 ARGYLE 2852 N17 ABYDOS 6721 W02 ALFRED COVE 6154 W15 ANGLE VALE 5117 S18 ARGYLE 3523 V15 ACACIA CREEK 2476 N02 ALFRED TOWN 2650 N29 ANGLEDALE 2550 N43 ARGYLE 6239 W17 ACACIA PLATEAU 2476 N02 ALFREDTON 3350 V26 ANGLEDOOL 2832 N12 ARGYLE DOWNS STATION6743 W01 ACACIA RIDGE 4110 Q30 ALGEBUCKINA
    [Show full text]
  • Count of LLID and Sum of Miles Per State, RU, and Core Area for Current Presence
    Count of LLID and Sum of Miles Per State, RU, and Core Area For Current Presence STATE wa RecoveryUnit CORE_AREA NAME SumOfMILES Chilliwack River 0.424000 Columbia River 194.728000 Depot Creek 0.728000 Kettle River 0.001000 Palouse River 6.209000 Silesia Creek 0.374000 Skagit River 0.258000 Snake River 58.637000 Sumas River 1.449000 Yakima River 0.845000 Summary for 'CORE_AREA' = (10 detail records) SumMilesPerCoreArea 263.653000 CountLLIDPerCoreArea 10 SumMilesPerRUAndCoreArea 263.653000 CountLLIDPerRUAndCoreArea 10 Saturday, January 01, 2005 Page 1 of 46 STATE wa RecoveryUnit Clark Fork River Basin CORE_AREA Priest Lake NAME SumOfMILES Bench Creek 2.114000 Cache Creek 2.898000 Gold Creek 3.269000 Jackson Creek 3.140000 Kalispell Creek 15.541000 Muskegon Creek 1.838000 North Fork Granite Creek 6.642000 Sema Creek 4.365000 South Fork Granite Creek 12.461000 Tillicum Creek 0.742000 Summary for 'CORE_AREA' = Priest Lake (10 detail records) SumMilesPerCoreArea 53.010000 CountLLIDPerCoreArea 10 SumMilesPerRUAndCoreArea 53.010000 CountLLIDPerRUAndCoreArea 10 RecoveryUnit Clearwater River Basin CORE_AREA Lower and Middle Fork Clearwater River NAME SumOfMILES Bess Creek 1.770000 Snake River 0.077000 Summary for 'CORE_AREA' = Lower and Middle Fork Clearwater River (2 detail records) SumMilesPerCoreArea 1.847000 CountLLIDPerCoreArea 2 SumMilesPerRUAndCoreArea 1.847000 CountLLIDPerRUAndCoreArea 2 Saturday, January 01, 2005 Page 2 of 46 STATE wa RecoveryUnit Columbia River CORE_AREA NAME SumOfMILES Columbia River 98.250000 Summary for 'CORE_AREA'
    [Show full text]
  • 443 Subpart D—Federally Promulgated Water Quality Standards
    Environmental Protection Agency § 131.33 Subpart D—Federally Promulgated of streams located in Indian country, Water Quality Standards or as may be modified by the Regional Administrator, EPA Region X, pursu- § 131.31 Arizona. ant to paragraph (a)(3) of this section, ° (a) [Reserved] a temperature criterion of 10 C, ex- (b) The following waters have, in ad- pressed as an average of daily max- dition to the uses designated by the imum temperatures over a seven-day State, the designated use of fish con- period, applies to the waterbodies iden- sumption as defined in R18–11–101 tified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section (which is available from the Arizona during the months of June, July, Au- Department of Environmental Quality, gust and September. Water Quality Division, 3033 North (2) The following waters are pro- Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85012): tected for bull trout spawning and rearing: COLORADO MAIN STEM RIVER (i) BOISE-MORE BASIN: Devils BASIN: Creek, East Fork Sheep Creek, Sheep Hualapai Wash MIDDLE GILA RIVER BASIN: Creek. Agua Fria River (Camelback Road to (ii) BROWNLEE RESERVOIR BASIN: Avondale WWTP) Crooked River, Indian Creek. Galena Gulch (iii) CLEARWATER BASIN: Big Can- Gila River (Felix Road to the Salt yon Creek, Cougar Creek, Feather River) Creek, Laguna Creek, Lolo Creek, Queen Creek (Headwaters to the Su- Orofino Creek, Talapus Creek, West perior WWTP) Fork Potlatch River. Queen Creek (Below Potts Canyon) (iv) COEUR D’ALENE LAKE BASIN: SAN PEDRO RIVER BASIN: Cougar Creek, Fernan Creek, Kid Copper Creek Creek, Mica Creek, South Fork Mica SANTA CRUZ RIVER BASIN: Creek, Squaw Creek, Turner Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) Resources South of the Golden Gate, California
    Becker Steelhead/Rainbow Trout Reining (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Steelhead/Rainbow Trout Steelhead/Rainbow Trout Resources South of the Golden Gate, California October 2008 Gordon S. Becker #ENTERFOR%COSYSTEM-ANAGEMENT2ESTORATION Isabelle J. Reining (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Cartography by David A. Asbury Prepared for California State Coastal Conservancy and The Resources Legacy Fund Foundation Resources South of the Golden Gate, California Resources South of the Golden Gate, California The mission of the Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration is to make effective use of scientific information to promote the restoration and sustainable management of ecosystems. The Center is a not-for-profit corporation, and contributions in support of its programs are tax-deductible. Center for Ecosystem Management & Restoration 4179 Piedmont Ave, Suite 325, Oakland, CA 94611 Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration 510.420.4565 http://www.cemar.org CEMAR The cover image is a map of the watershed area of streams tributary to the Pacific Ocean south of the Golden Gate, California, by CEMAR. The image above is a 1934 Gazos Creek stream survey report published by the California Division of Fish and Game. Book design by Audrey Kallander. Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Resources South of the Golden Gate, California Gordon S. Becker Isabelle J. Reining Cartography by David A. Asbury This report should be cited as: Becker, G.S. and I.J. Reining. 2008. Steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) resources south of the Golden Gate, California. Cartography by D.A. Asbury. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration. Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreward pg. 3 Introduction pg.
    [Show full text]
  • Catalog of Hydrologic Units in Kentucky
    James C. Cobb, State Director and Geologist Kentucky Geological Survey UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY CATALOG OF HYDROLOGIC UNITS IN KENTUCKY Daniel I. Carey 2003 CONTENTS HYDROLOGIC UNITS.............................................................................................................................................................................4 Ohio River Basin - Region 05 (38,080 sq. mi.)..........................................................................................................................................5 Big Sandy River Basin - Subregion 0507 (2,290 sq. mi.) ......................................................................................................................5 Big Sandy River - Accounting Unit 050702 (2,290 sq. mi.)...........................................................................................................5 Big Sandy River - Catalog Unit 05070201 (478 sq. mi.) ..............................................................................................................5 Upper Levisa Fork - Catalog Unit 05070202 (359 sq. mi.).........................................................................................................7 Levisa Fork - Catalog Unit 05070203 (1,116 sq. mi.)...............................................................................................................12 Big Sandy River, Blaine Creek - Catalog Unit 05070204 (337 sq. mi.).......................................................................................18 Tygarts Creek, Little Sandy River,
    [Show full text]
  • Measured Sections of Paleogene Rocks from the California Coast Ranges for Field Conference on the Paleogene of California Sponso
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MEASURED SECTIONS OF PALEOGENE ROCKS FROM THE CALIFORNIA COAST RANGES By Earl E. Brabb, Joseph C. Clark and Constance K Throckmorton OPEN-FILE REPORT 77-714 FOR FIELD CONFERENCE ON THE PALEOGENE OF CALIFORNIA SPONSORED BY INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON PALEOGENE STRATIGRAPHY This report is pretiminary and has not been edited or reviewed for conformity with Geological Survey standards and nomencla­ ture Menlo Park, California 1977 REPORT PREPARED FOR INTERNATIONAL UNION OF GEOLOGICAL SCIENCES (I.U.G.S.) INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON PALEOGENE STRATIGRAPHY Chairman: Vie e-Chairman: Secretary General: Prof. Ch. POMEROL Prof. H. BOLLI Dr. I. PREMOLI-SILVA Universite Paris VI Geologisches Institut Institute de Geologia Geol. Bassins sedimentaires Sonneggstrasse 5 Piazzale Gorini 15 4, place Jussieu 8006 ZURICH 20133 MILANO 75230 PARIS Cedex 05 SUISSE ITALIA FRANCE FIELD CONFERENCE ON THE PALEOGENE OF CALIFORNIA AND MEXICO October - November 1977 Local Committee for California Field Trips Earl E. Brabb, Chairman Richard Z. Poore Kristin A. McDougall William A. Berggren CONTENTS Introduction----------------------------------------------------1 Previous work---------------------------------------------3 Present investigation-------------------------------------6 Acknowledgement s-------------------------------------------6 Regional sett ing-----------------------------------------------6 Description of the sect ions-----------------------------------12 Glauconite-----------------------------------------------------15
    [Show full text]
  • Cycling Team About Us Join Us! Our Sponsors Clothing Giving Events Local Routes FAQ Contact
    Cycling Team About Us Join Us! Our Sponsors Clothing Giving Events Local Routes FAQ Contact Our favorite cycling routes near Stanford Local Routes (Road) Shorter Flat Options The mini-loop: This is the route you want to take on a day when your legs are screaming and your body is aching and anything more than half hour will kill you. Take Old Page Mill to Arastradero and right on Arastradero to Alpine and right on Alpine to Campus. Ideal addition to get your extra half hour in on your base training days when you miscalculated a longer ride. [Aerial Photo] The Loop: Ideal option for a flat route with no stop lights on a recovery day. The standard route normally starts o by heading up Alpine to Portola and taking Portola to Sand Hill. The reverse direction is popular with the tailwind speedsters dashing along the downward slant of Alpine Rd. The benchmark 15 mile route can be enhanced by further additions like Arastradero; going to the gate at the end of Alpine; adding the "maze" to it in Woodside. The "maze" is short for: taking Tripp on 84E to Kings, R on Kings, L on Manuella, L on Albion and R on Olive Hill to Canada (or the reverse direction). Time: 45 mins to 1 hr + (depending on additions) [Aerial Photo (B/W)] Foothill: Reserved for days when all you want to do is recover as frequent stop lights make any steady eort quite impossible. The turnaround points for 45 mins (Grant), 1 hr (Homestead), 1:15 (if the route parallel to foothill is taken on way back), 1:30 (Stevens Creek Blvd).
    [Show full text]
  • National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 226.211
    National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 226.211 and the following DOI, USGS, 1:500,000 (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Critical habitat scale hydrologic unit maps: State of is designated to include all river Oregon, 1974 and State of California, reaches accessible to listed coho salm- 1978 which are incorporated by ref- on between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and erence. This incorporation by reference Punta Gorda, California. Critical habi- was approved by the Director of the tat consists of the water, substrate, Federal Register in accordance with 5 and adjacent riparian zone of estuarine U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies and riverine reaches (including off- of the USGS publication and maps may channel habitats) in hydrologic units be obtained from the USGS, Map Sales, and counties identified in Table 6 of Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225. Copies may this part. Accessible reaches are those be inspected at NMFS, Protected Re- within the historical range of the ESU sources Division, 525 NE Oregon that can still be occupied by any life Street—Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232– stage of coho salmon. Inaccessible 2737, or NMFS, Office of Protected Re- sources, 1315 East-West Highway, Sil- reaches are those above specific dams ver Spring, MD 20910, or at the Na- identified in Table 6 of this part or tional Archives and Records Adminis- above longstanding, naturally impass- tration (NARA). For information on able barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in the availability of this material at existence for at least several hundred NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// years).
    [Show full text]
  • Streamwatch Indications for New Guidelines Report SING 2017 Acknowledgements Contents Acknowledgements
    Streamwatch Indications for New Guidelines report SING 2017 Acknowledgements Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 ANZECC Guidelines................................................................................................................................ 2 Trigger values vs. Locally derived Guidelines ........................................................................................ 3 Nominal Range guidelines .................................................................................................................... 5 Rationale ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Temporal change .............................................................................................................................. 5 Percentile bandwidth ........................................................................................................................ 5 Seasonal values and data treatment and filtering ............................................................................ 8 Water Quality Parameters .................................................................................................................... 9 Program and Regional overview ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]