DOCSLIB.ORG

George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, Bulk 1945-1980

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, Bulk 1945-1980 http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt3z09r9hn No online items Finding Aid to the George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Finding Aid written by Janice Otani Funding for processing this collection was provided by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives program. The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ © 2007 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Finding Aid to the George BANC MSS 79/95 c 1 Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Finding Aid to the George Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Collection Number: BANC MSS 79/95 c The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CaliforniaFunding for processing this collection was provided by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives program. Finding Aid Written By: Janice Otani Date Completed: April 2011 © 2011 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Collection Summary Collection Title: George Marshall papers Date (inclusive): 1836-1993, Date (bulk): bulk 1945-1980 Collection Number: BANC MSS 79/95 c Creators : Marshall, George, 1904-2000 Extent: Number of containers: 56 cartons, 3 oversize folders, 1 tubeLinear feet: 72 linear ft Repository: The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ Abstract: The George Marshall Papers(1836-1993) consists of Marshall's professional materials accumulated during his lifelong career as a leading conservationist. The bulk of the collection includes correspondence and records of three conservation organizations; the Adirondack Mountain Club, The Wilderness Society, and Sierra Club; where he served in official positions and as a member of various committees. Resource files compiled by Marshall relating to National Parks and conservation issues consist of correspondence, statements, testimonies, legislative and legal documents, organization records, press releases, announcements, newsletters, brochures, maps, and photographs. The collection contains writings of Robert Marshall, George Marshall's brother, who died at an early age. There are both published and unpublished drafts of articles by Robert Marshall, articles written about Robert Marshall, and correspondence and materials relating to the posthumously published book, Alaska Wilderness: Exploring the Central Brooks Range, which was compiled and edited by George Marshall. Also included are records of the Robert Marshall Foundation and the Robert Marshall Wilderness Fund. George Marshall's personal papers contains correspondence with his family and friends, published writings and typescript drafts, childhood memorabilia, school papers, and miscellany. It should be noted, the collection does not includes George Marshall's professional papers as an economist or materials relating to his political activities in the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties and the Civil Rights Congress. Languages Represented: Collection materials are in English Physical Location: Many of the Bancroft Library collections are stored offsite and advance notice may be required for use. For current information on the location of these materials, please consult the Library's online catalog. Access Collection is open for research. Publication Rights Finding Aid to the George BANC MSS 79/95 c 2 Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Materials in this collection may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). In addition, the reproduction of some materials may be restricted by terms of University of California gift or purchase agreements, donor restrictions, privacy and publicity rights, licensing and trademarks. Transmission or reproduction of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. Works not in the public domain cannot be commercially exploited without permission of the copyright owner. Responsibility for any use rests exclusively with the user. All requests to reproduce, publish, quote from, or otherwise use collection materials must be submitted in writing to the Head of Public Services, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley 94720-6000. See: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/reference/permissions.html . Preferred Citation [Identification of item], George Marshall Papers, BANC MSS 79/95 c, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. Alternate Forms Available There are no alternate forms of this collection. Related Collections Robert Marshall papers, BANC MSS 79/94pz, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. Sierra Club records, BANC MSS 71/103c, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. Indexing Terms The following terms have been used to index the description of this collection in the library's online public access catalog. Marshall, George, 1904-2000--Archives Wilderness Society (U.S.) Sierra Club Conservation of natural resources--United States--History Forests and forestry Conservation of natural resources--Alaska Adirondack Mountains (N.Y.) Forests and forestry United States. National Park Service Marshall, Robert, 1901-1939 Uncovering California's Environmental Collections Project Acquisition Information The George Marshall Papers were given to The Bancroft Library by George Marshall 1978-1979. Additions were made on August and October 1993. Accruals No additions are expected. System of Arrangement Arranged to the folder level. Processing Information Processing of the George Marshall Papers was generously funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR). The Bancroft Library was awarded a Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives grant from 2010-2012, "Uncovering California's Environmental Collections," in collaboration with eight additional special collections and archival repositories throughout the state and the California Digital Library (CDL). Grant objectives included processing of over 33 hidden collections related to the state's environment and environmental history. The collections document an array of important sub-topics such as irrigation, mining, forestry, agriculture, industry, land use, activism, and research. Together they form a multifaceted picture of the natural world and the way it was probed, altered, exploited and protected in California over the twentieth century. Finding aids are made available through the Online Archive of California (OAC). Biographical Information George Marshall, born in 1904, was the son of Louis Marshall, noted constitutional lawyer and co-founder of the American Jewish Committee, and Florence Lowenstein. He was raised in Manhattan with his sister, Ruth, and brothers, James and Robert. Marshall attended the Ethnical Culture School, continued his education at Columbia University and the Brookings Finding Aid to the George BANC MSS 79/95 c 3 Marshall Papers, 1836-1993, bulk 1945-1980 Institution, where he received his PhD in economics. From 1934 to 1937, Marshall worked as an economist for the National Recovery Administration under Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. Along with his wife, Elisabeth Dublin, Marshall shifted focus to left-wing politics in New York City and served as chairman of the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties and the Civil Rights Congress. In 1950, he was convicted of contempt for refusal to turn over records of the organization and sent to federal prison for three months. During the 1950s and 1960s, Marshall lived in Los Angeles where he raised his son, Roger, and daughter, Nancy. George Marshall also had a career as a leading conservationist. He spent his childhood along the shores of Saranac Lake, New York, where he and his brother, Bob, climbed all 46 Adirondack peaks taller than 4,000 feet, an accomplishment that made him a charter member of the "46ers." After his brother's early death, Marshall became a trustee of the Robert Marshall Wilderness Fund, which supported conservation activities. Marshall made major contributions for over 50 years to both The Wilderness Society, which was founded by his brother, and the Sierra Club. Throughout those years, he served in many official capacities as well as editing The Wilderness Society's magazine, The Living Wilderness. He also compiled and edited Bob Marshall's notebooks on the Alaskan wilderness and published, Alaska Wilderness: Exploring the Central Brooks Range. Marshall moved to London, England until late in his life and returned to the United States following the death of his wife in 1993. He died on May 2000 in Nyack, New York. Scope and Content of Collection The George Marshall Papers (1836-1993) consists of Marshall's professional materials accumulated during his lifelong career as a leading conservationist. The bulk of the collection includes correspondence and records of three conservation organizations; the Adirondack Mountain Club, The Wilderness Society, and Sierra Club; where he served in official positions and as a member of various committees. Resource files compiled by Marshall relating
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information
    2015, Wilderness, Hume Lake RD, Sequoia NF Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information (trailhead names are in bold type) By: Jeff Duneman, Wilderness Ranger Hume Lake Ranger District, Sequoia National Forest Last updated: August 3rd, 2015 *NOTES: “How long will it take?! Is it a hard hike?!” Difficulty and time required depends on you, the hiker, and your condition. An experienced, strong hiker will cover 3-4 miles (or more!) an hour carrying a full pack, without stopping. Someone who doesn’t hike much (or walk much, for that matter) will cover 1-2 miles (or less!) an hour, without a big pack, with frequent stops. Know your abilities! Always carry water, always check weather conditions, always tell people where you are going, and always familiarize yourself with the area (real maps recommended, not GPS). Pay attention to your surroundings, and enjoy your wilderness! *LEAVE NO TRACE: Please take a look at the seven Leave No Trace wilderness ethics before you head out to the trail – https://lnt.org/learn/7-principles *Never leave trash or toilet paper behind! Pack it all in, pack it all out. *When campfires are allowed (check with the forest service on current fire status), always completely drown your campfire so that it is completely out! Jennie Lakes Wilderness (JLW) 1) Big Meadows Trail (#?)/Weaver Lake Trail (#30E09) Big Meadows trailhead up to Weaver Lake: At about 3.5 miles one-way, this is one of the easiest and most popular hikes in the JLW. The trail winds through Lodgepole Pines near the trailhead, climbs slowly (with a nice view into Kings Canyon) into Red and White Firs, with another slight ascent once you are getting closer to the lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 1 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences
    United States Department of Giant Sequoia Agriculture Forest Service National Monument Giant Sequoia National Monument Draft Environmental Impact Statement August 2010 Volume 1 The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Chapter 4 - Environmental Consequences Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 1 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Volume 1 Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement 2 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Chapter 4 includes the environmental effects analysis. It is organized by resource area, in the same manner as Chapter 3. Effects are displayed for separate resource areas in terms of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects associated with the six alternatives considered in detail. Effects can be neutral, beneficial, or adverse. This chapter also discusses the unavoidable adverse effects, the relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources. Environmental consequences form the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of the alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Interagency Wilderness Fire Management1
    The Biswell Symposium: Fire Issues and Solutions in Urban Interface and Wildland Ecosystems Concurrent Session I Interagency Wilderness Fire Management1 Jim Desmond2 Abstract: Wilderness fire managers are often confronted with that encompasses more than one million continuous acres in natural fire ignitions that start and/or burn near an adjoining agency’s the Sierra Nevada. wilderness area boundary. Management strategies for prescribed In the Central Sierra Nevada, National Forest wilderness natural fires (PNF) are often developed using the adjoining agency’s areas and National Parks adjoin along common boundaries. wilderness boundary as the maximum allowable perimeter (control These boundaries were established for a variety of line) for the PNF. When this occurs, fire’s natural role in the administrative reasons and may or may not make sense wilderness ecosystem may be restricted. The difficulty of burning near another agency’s jurisdictional boundary can be overcome by when managing a prescribed natural fire. In this area, the strong planning, close communications, and timely coordination National Park Service currently operates with approved Fire between the two affected agencies. Communications and coordi- Management Plans allowing for PNF in wilderness areas. nation can be achieved only through developing and maintaining a The Forest Service is in the plan development stage. In this strong working relationship with the fire manager of the adjoining current situation, park fire managers have to manage natural agency. Keys to good interagency coordination are (1) investing ignitions according to current agency procedures and time, (2) understanding the policies and procedures of the adjoin- restrictions if the natural ignition is close to the park/forest ing agency, (3) developing and maintaining open communications, boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • Monarch Wilderness Sequoia National Forest Giant Sequoia National Monument Hume Lake Ranger District
    United States Department of Agriculture Monarch Wilderness Sequoia National Forest Giant Sequoia National Monument Hume Lake Ranger District About: Trails: The Monarch Wilderness is located in the northeast corner Three main trailheads provide access to the Monarch of the Hume Lake Ranger District. Beautiful and dramatic, Wilderness and several of the trails also connect to Kings this extremely rugged 45,000 acres of wilder ness rises from Canyon National Park backcountry. Visitors can enjoy 2,000 feet elevation at the South Fork of the Kings River to overnight stays or a day hike into a less populated, more over 11,000 feet at Hogback Peak and provides amazing secluded wilderness and find outstanding opportunities for views of the Kings River canyon. The vegetation ranges solitude. Due to the ever-changing rugged terrain, most from chaparral to sub-alpine. There are mountain meadows, trails are not maintained and hikers may come across large lakes and spectacular geological formations. obstacles such as down trees and rockslides. For more information, contact the district office or the Wilderness The Monarch Wilderness spans two National Forests and is Ranger. divided by Hwy 180 Scenic Byway. The Hume Lake ranger District of Sequoia National Forest and the Giant Sequoia Central Monarch: National Monument manages the central and southern The one main access to the central portion of the portions while the northern portion is managed by the Sierra Wilderness is through Deer Cove Trailhead. Be aware National Forest. that these trails are not regularly maintained. The trail climbs 3,000 feet elevation in about four miles.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Issues in the Sequoia & Sierra Revised Draft Forest
    KEY ISSUES IN THE SEQUOIA & SIERRA REVISED DRAFT FOREST PLANS The revised draft Sequoia and Sierra Forest Plans are analyzed in the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement (RDEIS) as the Preferred Alternative B. Conservation groups urge the public to support Alternative C with the changes noted below. Alternative C recommends far more wilderness protection, proposes more acres of forest restored through prescribed and managed fire, and more riparian and meadow restoration than Alternative B. Wilderness Recommendations What’s Good: The RDEIS identifies more than 800,000 acres of wilderness-quality lands across the two forests. The conservation-oriented Alternative C recommends over 452,000 acres of new wilderness. The new Alternative E also creates a Backcountry Management Area designation for roadless lands not recommended as wilderness. However, the Forest Service’s preferred Alternative B only adds a paltry 4,900 acres of new wilderness on the Sequoia NF and recommends no new wilderness on the Sierra NF despite hundreds of thousands of eligible acres. Significant Improvements Needed: The Forest Service should adopt Alternative C or strengthen Alternative B to include more recommended wilderness areas on both forests, with an emphasis on low-elevation areas not typically protected by the wilderness system (see below for specific areas). Both plans should also apply Alternative E’s Backcountry Management Area designation to protect roadless areas not recommended for wilderness protection. Sequoia National Forest: Recommended wilderness areas should include the Golden Trout Wilderness Addition, Stormy Canyon, Oat Mountain, Cannell Peak, and the Domeland Wilderness West Addition, using boundaries developed by conservation groups to reduce conflicts with motorized and mountain bike trails (as displayed in Alternative E).
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 98-425 An
    PUBLIC LAW 98-425-SEPT. 28, 1984 98 STAT. 1619 Public Law 98-425 98th Congress An Act Sept. 28, 1984 Entitled the "California Wilderness Act of 1984". [H.R. 1437] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this title may California Wilderness Act be cited as the "California Wilderness Act of 1984". of 1984. National TITLE I Wilderness Preservation System. DESIGNATION OF WILDERNESS National Forest System. SEC. 101. (a) In furtherance of the purposes of the Wilderness Act, National parks, the following lands, as generally depicted on maps, appropriately monuments, etc. referenced, dated July 1980 (except as otherwise dated) are hereby 16 USC 1131 designated as wilderness, and therefore, as components of the Na­ note. tional Wilderness Preservation System- (1)scertain lands in the Lassen National Forest, California,s which comprise approximately one thousand eight hundred acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled "Caribou Wilder­ ness Additions-Proposed", and which are hereby incorporated in, and which shall be deemed to be a part of the Caribou Wilderness as designated by Public Law 88-577; 16 USC 1131 (2)s certain lands in the Stanislaus and Toiyabe Nationals note. 16 USC 1132 Forests, California, which comprise approximately one hundred note. sixty thousand acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled "Carson-Iceberg Wilderness-Proposed", dated July 1984, and which shall be known as the Carson-Iceberg Wilderness: Pro­ vided, however, That the designation of the Carson-Iceberg Wil­ derness shall not preclude continued motorized access to those previously existing facilities which are directly related to per­ mitted livestock grazing activities in the Wolf Creek Drainage on the Toiyabe National Forest in the same manner and degree in which such access was occurring as of the date of enactment of this title; (3)scertain lands in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Cali­ 16 USC 1132 fornia, which comprise approximately seven thousand three note.
    [Show full text]
  • August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest
    August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest Service, Region 5 Sent via: [email protected] Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans To the Forest Plan Revision Team: These comments on the Draft Forest Plans and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans are submitted on behalf of the organizations noted below. Collectively, we have been engaged in the forest plan revision process for these three national forests since initiated in 2012. Many of our organizations also have a long history of engagement in forest planning beginning with the first plans adopted in the late 1980s to early 1990s for national forests in the Sierra Nevada. We have embraced the new Planning Rule and taken seriously its invitation to provide feedback early in the process and throughout the development of the revised plans. We remain committed to working with your agency to develop revised forest plans that protect sensitive resources, provide for ecological integrity, and provide high quality recreational experiences. Our detailed review of the draft plans and DEIS indicate that there are significant gaps in assessment, development of plan components and evaluation of environmental consequences that preclude a meaningful analysis of the effects of the draft plans and alternatives on the environment. We ask that you revise the draft plans and revise or supplement the DEIS and circulate these documents for a 90-day comment period. Please contact Susan Britting (530-295-8210; [email protected]) if you have questions about these comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Recommendations
    U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region June 2016 Wilderness Recommendations Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Forest Plans for the Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests As part of revising the Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests land management plans (forest plans), the Forest Service is identifying and evaluating lands that may be suitable for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. This is a requirement of the 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR 219.7(c)(2)(v)). We are not designating any wilderness areas through this process; only Congress can take that action. The wilderness recommendation process has three steps, inventory, evaluation and analysis. This process is documented in Appendix B in the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for these forest plan revisions. We are following the 2012 Planning Rule Directives, Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.12 Chapter 70, which uses criteria based on the Wilderness Act of 1964. Appendix B describes the outcome of the inventory and evaluation, the areas included in one or more alternative in the draft EIS, and rationale for those areas that were not selected for analysis in the draft EIS. Based on the analysis in the environmental impact statement and public input received, the Forest Supervisor for each of the three national forests will make a decision on specific areas to recommend for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. The decision will be included in the Record of Decision for the plan as a preliminary administrative recommendation. Forest plan components will provide direction for managing areas recommended for wilderness designation. Wilderness Recommendation Process There are four steps in the wilderness recommendation process: inventory, evaluation, analysis and recommendation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Natural Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) Groves of the Sierra Nevada, California-An Updated Annotated List
    The Natural Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) Groves of the Sierra Nevada, California-An Updated Annotated List Dwight Willard1 Abstract: Giant sequoias naturally occur in the Sierra Nevada, California, names.) In contrast, many groves became known by single, in 65 groves, described in an annotated list. The grove list significantly accepted names by the early 20th century. Sequoia National differs from prior published giant sequoia grove lists, primarily as a result of more consistent application of objective criteria of geographic isolation Park groves were comprehensively and systematically listed and minimum giant sequoia group size in grove identification. The grove by the 1930's. However, comprehensive grove lists for the list also reflects significant gains in knowledge of giant sequoia natural entire Sierra Nevada were unsystematic prior to 1969. distributions during recent years. The first comprehensive and more systematic grove list for the entire Sierra Nevada was in Rundel (1969, 1972). Giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) naturally Rundel's list was more closely based on geographic distinction occurs in the Sierra Nevada, California, primarily in isolated than any prior list, and it reflected his scientific study of concentrations traditionally known as groves. Sequoia actual sequoia distribution. Rundel's list is the basis for the locations are most easily described by reference to named familiar post-1972 descriptions that giant sequoias occur groves, though a relatively few giant sequoias occur apart in "75 groves." His grove list used historical tradition as from recognized groves, in the same localities. the basis for some grove identifications, and he did not Significant additional giant sequoia location research consistently apply an identification criterion of minimum since the early 1970's makes the following updated annotated sequoia group size.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Wilderness Evaluation for the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National
    Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region December 2015 Draft Results of the Wilderness Evaluation for Public Feedback on Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Forest Legacy Objection to Inyo National Forest Plan and Final
    October 3, 2018 Barnie Gyant Objection Reviewing Officer Pacific Southwest Region USDA Forest Service 1323 Club Drive Vallejo, CA 94592 Submitted via: [email protected] Re: Objections to the Inyo National Forest Plan Revision and Species of Conservation Concern Dear Mr. Gyant: Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 219 Subpart B, Sierra Forest Legacy, California Wilderness Coalition, The Wilderness Society, Friends of the Inyo, California Native Plant Society, Mono Lake Committee, Western Watersheds Project, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation, Lassen Forest Preservation Group, and Forest Issues Group are objecting to portions of the Draft Record of Decision, Final Forest Plan, and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Inyo National Forest. The responsible official for the Inyo plan revision is Tammy Randall-Parker, Forest Supervisor, Inyo National Forest. We are also objecting to the list of Species of Conservation Concern adopted by Regional Forester Randy Moore. Collectively, the objecting organizations have provided substantive formal comments throughout the forest planning process for the Inyo National Forest on the objection issues we raise below. We are deeply invested in securing a forest plan for the Inyo National Forest that protects important natural resources and provides for people. This objection covers a variety of issues related to resources affected by the revised forest plan and offers recommendations on how objection issues could be resolved. We appreciate the opportunity for review and possible resolution of issues contained in this objection prior to the approval of the final plan. We look forward to an opportunity to discuss our concerns with you.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Biological Evaluation
    Summary It is determined that the Monument management plan: May affect undiscovered individuals but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability for: Species Occurring in Riparian/Meadow/Aquatic Habitats: Botrychium crenulatum, Botrychium minganense, Botrychium montanum, Bruchia bolanderi, Hydrotheria venosa, Meesia triquetra, and Meesia ulignosa. Species in Drier, Upland and Forest Habitats: Astragalus shevockii, Brodiaea insignis, Calochortus westonii, Cryptantha incana, Hulsea brevifolia, Leptosiphon serrulatus, and Mimulus gracilipes. Species Associated with Rock Outcrops, Cliffs, and other Special Geologic or Soil Features: Carlquista muirii, Delphinium inopinum, Dicentra nevadensis, Dudleya cymosa ssp. costifolia, Erigeron aequifolius, Eriogonum twisselmanii, Erythronium pusaterii, Heterotheca monarchensis, Lewisia congdonii, Lewisia disepala, Monardella linoides ssp. oblonga, Oreonana purpurascens, Petrophyton caespitosum ssp. acuminatum, and Streptanthus fenestratus. Other plant species listed on the Sequoia National Forest as Forest Service sensitive do not have habitat within the Monument, and therefore will not be affected. Introduction The Monument and surrounding Sequoia National Forest provide habitat for a number of rare plant species. The Clinton proclamation states: “The great elevational range of the monument embraces a number of climatic zones, providing habitats for an extraordinary diversity of plant species and communities. The monument is rich in rare plants and is home to more than 200 plant species endemic to the southern Sierra Nevada mountain range” (2000, p. 24096). The desired condition is that lands within the Monument continue to provide a diverse range of habitats. Riparian areas, montane meadows, and late succession forest are areas of particular concern. This biological evaluation (BE) documents analysis of programmatic direction (long term goal and objective based management) rather than individual projects under the Monument management plan.
    [Show full text]