DOCSLIB.ORG

Henrys Fork Basin Study Final Report 1 1.0 Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Henrys Fork Basin Study Final Report 1 1.0 Introduction Henrys Fork Basin Study Final Report Produced in partnership with the State of Idaho Water Resource Board U.S. Department of the Interior Idaho Water Resource Board Bureau of Reclamation State of Idaho Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho Snake River Area Office Boise, Idaho January 2015 MISSION OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROTECTING AMERICA'S GREAT OUTDOORS AND POWERING OUR FUTURE The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America's natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. MISSION OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Photograph on front cover: Fly fishing, irrigated agriculture, and wildlife habitat are important activities in the Henrys Fork River basin Disclaimer The Henrys Fork Basin Study was funded jointly by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the Idaho Water Resource Board (IWRB), and is a collaborative product of the study participants as identified in Section 1.3, page 5 of this report. The purpose of the study is to assess current and future water supply and demand in the Henrys Fork Basin and adjacent areas that receive water from the basin, and to identify a range of potential strategies to address any projected imbalances. The study is a technical assessment and does not provide recommendations or represent a statement of policy or position of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of the Interior, or the funding partners. The study does not propose or address the feasibility of any specific project, program or plan. Nothing in the study is intended, nor shall the study be construed, to interpret, diminish, or modify the rights of any participant under applicable law. Nothing in the study represents a commitment for provision of Federal funds. All cost estimates included in this study are preliminary and intended only for comparative purposes. Henrys Fork Basin Study Final Report Produced in partnership with the State of Idaho Water Resource Board U.S. Department of the Interior Idaho Water Resource Board Bureau of Reclamation State of Idaho Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho Snake River Area Office Boise, Idaho January 2015 This page intentionally left blank Abbreviations and Acronyms AWEP Agricultural Water Enhancement Program Basin Study Henrys Fork Basin Study CBWTP Columbia Basin Water Transaction Program cfs Cubic feet per second CIG Conservation Innovation Grant Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program ESA Endangered Species Act ESPA Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer ESPA CAMP Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan ESPAM Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Model FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FMID Fremont-Madison Irrigation District GCMs Global Circulation Models Henrys Fork River Henrys Fork of the Snake River Idaho CREP Idaho Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program IDFG Idaho Department of Fish and Game IDWR Idaho Department of Water Resources IWRB Idaho Water Resource Board IWTP Idaho Water Transactions Program LRP Local rental pools LW/D Less warming and drier climate scenario LW/W Less warming and wetter climate scenario MC Minor change climate scenario NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFRC North Fork Reservoir Company NRCS U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service NWSRS National Wild and Scenic River System Plan Comprehensive State Water Plan Recharge Program Managed Aquifer Recharge Program Reclamation U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation RMP Teton River Canyon Resource Management Plan State State of Idaho USGS U.S. Geological Survey Watershed Council Henry’s Fork Watershed Council Workgroup Henry’s Fork Watershed Council and other interested stakeholders Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), in partnership with the Idaho Water Resource Board (IWRB), conducted a Henrys Fork Basin Study (Basin Study) and the results of this Basin Study are documented in this Final Report of the Henrys Fork Basin Study (Final Report). While the overall purpose of the Basin Study is to assess current and future water supply and demand in the Henrys Fork Basin and adjacent areas that receive water from the basin, and to identify a range of potential strategies to address any projected imbalances, it also assists the State and local planning efforts by exploring potential action alternatives for (1) meeting the complex water supply and management challenges in the basin, (2) meeting the goals of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA) Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) and Idaho State Water Plan, and (3) identifying risks posed to water supply by climate change and opportunities to mitigate that risk through developing water supplies, improving water management, and sustaining or improving environmental quality and ecological resiliency. This Basin Study complements the objectives of ESPA CAMP and policies of the State Water Plan by identifying specific alternatives to improve water supplies and water management in the upper Snake River basin. Reclamation and IWRB worked with the Henry’s Fork Watershed Council (Watershed Council) in developing alternatives to address the purposes of the Basin Study. The Watershed Council functioned as a stakeholder workgroup (Workgroup) throughout most of the process, providing review and input both collectively and as individuals. Throughout the Basin Study, the Watershed Council and many of its participating members elevated public awareness of the Basin Study process and clearly advertised opportunities for public review and involvement. The Henrys Fork of the Snake River (Henrys Fork River) is located in eastern Idaho, in the upper Snake River watershed. The river provides irrigation water for over 280,000 acres, sustains a world-class trout fishery, and is a strong hold for native Yellowstone cutthroat trout. Agricultural changes, population growth and its consequent urban development, drought conditions, and climate changes are impacting water resources. These factors are increasing the need to identify adaptation and mitigation strategies to resolve water supply imbalances and preserve ecological resiliency in the basin, especially with respect to climate change. Current water demands in the Henrys Fork River basin vary from year to year with varying annual precipitation amounts. Future water needs will vary with climate change impacts, population growth, changes in farming methods, water conservation, and other factors that January 2015 - Henrys Fork Study Final Report ES-1 Executive Summary may not be fully understood or predicted at this point in time. Declining aquifer levels and spring discharges, changing flows in the Snake River, and actions that have placed demands on already scarce water supplies (e.g., flow augmentation for anadromous fish survival) have resulted in insufficient supplies to satisfy existing beneficial uses across the upper Snake River basin. The ESPA CAMP identified an annual water budget deficit in the ESPA of 600,000 acre-feet, and established a long-term goal to adjust this deficit by implementing a mix of management strategies over a 20-year period (Reclamation 2012). The western portion of the Henrys Fork River basin overlies the ESPA so opportunities in the basin could support the objectives of the ESPA CAMP for stabilizing the ESPA. The Henrys Fork River basin contributes about 25 percent of the upper Snake River supply in eastern Idaho and also contributes to groundwater recharge in local aquifers and the ESPA. Climate change studies projected a shift in timing and increase in inflow volume to earlier in the year, which resulted in an increase in the end-of-month storage earlier in the year and a greater need to use reservoir storage to provide irrigation water later in the summer months (Reclamation 2011). A decrease of streamflows was shown to occur in the latter part of the summer in warmer months (Reclamation 2011). A decrease in instream flow in the late summer to early fall months would result in less water available for natural flow diversions and more pressure for deliveries from storage. For irrigation, reservoir management and ecological flow objectives, it was found that late season flow and reservoir objectives would be impacted the most by climate change, especially in the driest conditions (Reclamation 2011). The Workgroup, Reclamation, and IWRB initially identified 51 alternatives to address the Henrys Fork River basin water needs. From these 51 alternatives, a screened group of about 18 alternatives were evaluated, and the results were documented in the Final Henrys Fork Basin Special Study Interim Report dated July 2013 (Reclamation 2013a). Those alternatives were assessed so that only the most viable alternatives were passed on for more scrutiny and detail. The results of these assessments were presented to the Workgroup for input and the proposed alternatives were further filtered down to a group of 11 that were carried forward for additional analyses in this Basin Study. The IWRB and other water users requested the Teton Dam alternative be retained and evaluated for comparative purposes. The final analyses refined and revised the alternatives to a group of 12 alternatives, which were grouped into three major categories: surface storage, managed groundwater recharge, and water conservation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teton - 17040204 Idaho 8 Digit Hydrologic Unit Profile February 2008
    Dec Teton - 17040204 Idaho 8 Digit Hydrologic Unit Profile February 2008 Introduction The Teton 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) subbasin contains 700,960 acres. Forty percent of the subbasin is in Teton County, twenty-seven percent is in Madison County and seven percent is in Fremont County, Idaho. Twenty-seven percent is in Teton County, Wyoming. Fifty-four percent of the basin is privately owned and forty-six percent is publicly owned. Forty-one percent of the basin is in shrub, rangeland, grass, pasture or hayland, thirty-five percent of the basin is in forest, water, wetlands, developed or barren, and twenty-four percent is cropland. Elevations range from 11,005 feet in the eastern part of the HUC to 4,814 feet at the basin outlet on the west. Conservation assistance is provided by one Conservation District in Wyoming, two Soil Conservation Districts and one Soil and Water Conservation District in Idaho, and one Resource Conservation and Development office. Profile Contents Introduction Progress/Status Physical Description Resource Concerns Landuse Map & Precipitation Map Census and Social Data Common Resource Area Footnotes/Bibliography Resource Settings Future Conservation Needs The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and 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).
    [Show full text]
  • Water Storage Projects Committee Meeting Materials | August 8, 2013
    Henrys Fork Basin Study Update Idaho Water Resource Board Water Storage Projects Committee \ uA H o ~ ~ " Cynthia Bridge Clark ; "~ O:Jo August 8, 2013 "' <l'tsou1<C Background • State Authorization: • House Joint Memorial No 8 • Senate Bill 1511 approved by 2008 Idaho Legislature • Comprehensive State Water Plan • Federal Authority: • Department of Interior’s WaterSmart Program – Basin Study Program • Undertake comprehensive studies in cooperation with local partners • Basin Study MOA executed in March 2011 (IWRB and USBOR) • Study objectives: Identify additional water supplies and improvements in water management through surface storage, managed recharge, water marketing, and conservation, while sustaining environmental quality. Study Area • Henrys Fork Watershed (3,300 sq mi) – Parts of Fremont, Madison and Teton counties. • Four major subbasins – Upper Henrys Fork, Lower Henrys Fork, Teton River, and Fall River • Land use – forestland, rangeland, irrigated cropland, dryland agriculture and other urban developments • Fish & Wildlife – populations of native Yellowstone cutthroat trout, nonnative rainbow trout, and brown trout Variety of large and small mammals and birds Water Supply • Surface water supply Henrys Fork River largest tributary of the Snake The total Henrys Fork watershed discharge is 2.5 million af/yr under natural, unregulated conditions - Falls River contributes 700,000af/yr - Teton River contributes over 600,000 af/yr 1.6 million af/yr is discharged after the Henrys Fork basin diversions, seepage and evapotranspiration
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Newdale Quadrangle, Fremont and Madison Counties, Idaho
    IDAHO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIGITAL WEB MAP 122 MOSCOW-BOISE-POCATELLO WWW.IDAHOGEOLOGY.ORG EMBREE, PHILLIPS, AND WELHAN CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS EOLOGIC AP OF THE EWDALE UADRANGLE, REMONT AND ADISON OUNTIES, DAHO INTRODUCTION G M N Q F M C I Artificial Unit Alluvial Units Eolian Units Mass Wasting Volcanic The Newdale quadrangle lies on a dissected plateau locally known as the Units Units 1 2 3 Rexburg Bench. Geologic features of the Rexburg Bench are closely associ- Glenn F. Embree , William M. Phillips , and John A. Welhan Basalt Flows Rhyolitic Rock ated with water and agricultural resources. Near-surface geology of the m Qtfb Qtfg Qtfs Qtff Qls bench consists of the Huckleberry Ridge Tuff and three basalt units. The HOLOCENE 2011 Huckleberry Ridge is a highly permeable and jointed ash flow tuff. Most Qa Qc Qes high production irrigation water wells in the region draw from the Huckle- 10.0 ka berry Ridge aquifer. A dam constructed by the US Bureau of Reclamation in Qgh late the Teton River canyon failed catastrophically in 1976, largely due to Qel PLEISTOCENE Qbc Qbm Qgh uncontrolled seepage of reservoir water through joints and shear zones in Qbsp Qa the Huckleberry Ridge Tuff. Bedrock outcrops are rare in the Newdale ? Qa 1 Qgh quadrangle outside of the Teton River canyon because of widespread loess ~15 - 140 ka 126 ka Qa cover. The loess is the parent material for the rich soils of the region. QUATERNARY Qgh Qgh Qgh Qgh middle Qes Qbc PLEISTOCENE Qyh GEOLOGIC HISTORY Qel/Qbc Qyh 256 +/- 14 ka3 Qgh Qbsp Qel/Qbsp 780 ka The Huckleberry Ridge Tuff was erupted from the Henrys Fork caldera of the early Qyh Qyh Yellowstone Plateau at 2.059 Ma (Lanpere and others, 2002; Christiansen, Qbsp Qbm ? PLEISTOCENE Qel/Qyh 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservationists and the Battles to Keep Dams out of Yellowstone: Hetch Hetchy Overturned
    Conservationists and the Battles to Keep Dams Out of Yellowstone: Hetch Hetchy Overturned Michael J. Yochim Abstract Between 1919 and 1938 irrigation interests in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming repeatedly tried to construct reservoirs in Yellowstone National Park by damming several large park lakes and Bechler Meadows. Conservationists of the time joined forces with Horace Albright and Steven Mather of the National Park Service to oppose the dams. Ultimately successful in all their efforts, their key victory came in 1923 when they defeated an attempt to dam Yellowstone Lake. This victory reversed the loss of protected status for national parks that had occurred just ten years earlier at Hetch Hetchy Valley in Yosemite National Park. By chronicling the protracted conflict over dams in Yellowstone, I illustrate that the conservationists (including Mather and Albright) reestablished the funda- mental preservation policy of the national parks and empowered the newly cre- ated National Park Service to carry out its mission of park protection. This effort was the key battle in proving national parks and wilderness to be inviolate to industrial, exploitive uses. Conservationists both defined and tested the inviolate policy in Yellowstone; their battles in Dinosaur National Monument and the Grand Canyon cemented it into place. Introduction Far off, there lies a lovely lake Which rests in beauty, there to take Swift pictures of the changing sky, Ethereal blues, and clouds piled high. When black the sky, when fall the rains, When blow fierce winds, her face remains Still beautiful, but agitate, Nor mirrors back their troubled state. Within a park this treasure lies, — Such region ne’er did man devise — The hand of Mighty God, alone, Could form the Park of Yellowstone.
    [Show full text]
  • Trumpeter Swan Survey of the Rocky Mountain Population Winter 2012
    Trumpeter Swan Survey of the Rocky Mountain Population Winter 2012 Acknowledgements Personnel who conducted the survey are listed in Appendix C. The survey is a collaborative effort among Red Rock Lakes NWR, Migratory Birds and State Programs -- Mountain-Prairie Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Idaho National Wildlife Refuge Complex, National Elk Refuge, Harriman State Park, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Grand Teton National Park, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Ruby Lake NWR, Malheur NWR, and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Additionally, R. Cavallaro, M. Wackenhut, D. Christopherson, K. Cameron, and R. Lonsinger, assisted with counts in Idaho. S. Patla, N. Cadwell, D. Smith, M. St. Louis, and K. Cutting provided information and narratives used to develop this document; conclusions are attributable only to the author. TRUMPETER SWAN SURVEY of the ROCKY MOUNTAIN POPULATION WINTER 2012 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Birds and State Programs Mountain-Prairie Region Lakewood, Colorado May 1, 2012 4 Abstract.B Observers counted 6,331 swans (white birds and cygnets) in the Rocky Mountain Population of trumpeter swans during late January and early February 2012, which was an 11% increase from the 5,712 counted during winter 2011. The number of white birds (4,783) increased by 9% from the 2011 counts while the number of cygnets (1,028) experienced a 22% decrease. In the tri-state area, the number of total swans increased for Idaho (59%) and decreased for Montana (- 33%) and Wyoming (-19%) from counts in 2011. The number of birds wintering in areas near restoration flocks increased by 18% from 2011 and was the highest count since 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior ,C£$ PftRKSERVIC National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Pla Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not ap property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcatei instructins. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name: American Falls Reservoir Flooded Townsite other name/site number: 2. Location street & number American Falls Reservoir [ ] not for publication city or town American Falls ______ [ X ] vicinity state: Idaho code: ID county: Power code: 077 zip code: 83211 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this [X] nomination [ ] request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36
    [Show full text]
  • Yellowstone National Park, Submerged Resources Survey
    te t/:p--J038 .. } ,' ,, .. ' . ·� . I ; ,· . ' . '/ YEL.LOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK " � ! I '!'' • SUBMERGED RESOURCES SURVEY I ·' I i I \. ,· i .\ I: ··r· 'I I CC®ll®IT' §��IID� YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK a product of the NATIONAL PARK SERVICE SYSTEMWIDE ARCHEOLOGICALINVENTORY PROGRAM YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK Submerged Resources Survey James E. Bradford Archeologist Matthew A. Russell Archeologist Larry E. Murphy Archeologist Timothy G. Smith Geodesist Submerged Resources Center Intermountain Region National Park Service Santa Fe, New Mexico 1999 11 Submerged Resources Center Cultural Resources Management Intermountain Region National Park Service US Department of the Interior 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... vii FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................. X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... xi PART 1: REMOTE SENSING SURVEY ..................................... ............................................ 1 Matthew A. Russell, Larry E. Murphy and Timothy G. Smith INTRODUCTION .... ............................ ................ ........................................... ............. 2 PROBLEM STATEMENT................... ........................................................................ 3 SURVEY DESIGN AND RATIONALE ..............
    [Show full text]
  • IDAHO ACTION PLAN (V3.0) for Implementing the Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362
    IDAHO ACTION PLAN (V3.0) For Implementing the Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362: “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors” 10 September 2020 PREFACE Secretarial Order No. 3362 (SO3362) (09 February 2018; Appendix B) directs the Department of Interior (DOI) to assist western tribes, private landowners, state fish and wildlife agencies, and state transportation departments with conserving and managing priority big game winter ranges and migration corridors. Per SO3362, the DOI invited state wildlife agencies in 2018 to develop action plans identifying big game priority areas and corresponding management efforts across jurisdictional boundaries. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and DOI jointly developed Idaho’s first version (V1.0) of the SO3362 Action Plan in 2018, which identified 5 Priority Areas for managing pronghorn, mule deer, and elk winter range and migration habitat (Appendix A and D). V2.0 was prepared in 2019 with support from the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). This V3.0 was also prepared in coordination with ITD in response to DOI’s 14 April 2020 letter to IDFG (Appendix E) requesting updated Priority Area information. Correspondingly, IDFG views this Action Plan as a living document to be reviewed and updated as needed, for example when new priorities emerge, revised information becomes available, and management efforts are completed. Each version of Idaho’s Action Plan applies best available information to identify current and future needs for managing big game winter range and migration habitat, highlight ongoing and new priority management needs, leverage collaborative resources, and narrow focus to 5 Priority Areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Snake Region Idaho Fishing & Boating Access Guide
    UPPER SNAKE REGION IDAHO FISHING & BOATING ACCESS GUIDE 30 X r e v i Sand Creek Ponds X R P m Panhandle Small r a W k FREMONT Horseshoe P! e In-State Dubois re Lake RQ22 C s Jump Off Canyon Clearwater a Location m a Ashton Reservoir kC e P!X re C XX X Warm River Warm River ADA as Ora Bridge Salmon m RQ47 a C er CLARK S Ashton Riv a Lemon P! P Falls Stone Bridge Upper Snake Fall River n X d Lake Marysville C r X e e Magic Southwest South ¨¦§15 k Chester Wetland R Vernon Bridge Valley d XX -east P! Drummond Mud Lake WMA P P Camas Red Road Bridge Chester Dam Chester - North Ramp X PLamont RQ32 Egin P! Parker P! Fun Farm Bridge Lakes Saint Anthony Warm Slough Quayles Hamer X er P! Lake iv ton Riv R Te er n MONTANA Beaver Dick Teto ! Teton X P P! RQ33 P Felt X P Sugar City Newdale X Cartier Slough WMA 6000 W ¤£20 Terreton Rexburg Nature Park P! P 33 X Harrops Bridge X P! Tetonia RQ P !P X 33 Mud Lake Sage Junction Gem State WHA X RQ Rexburg Moody Creek W 400 N Erickson Dugway Rd MADISON Cache Bridge X Mud Lake WMA Market X TETON Lake X E 3500 Rd S X X - South Ramp P Thornton Horseshoe Bridge X X XW Buxton Rd P! Driggs P Menan Buttes Rd Menan Lorenzo tes Market Lake WMA P! Ba P! Dry Bed Rainey Bridge Roberts Dry X Bed P! Lewisville Twin Bridges RQ33 J EFFERSON X Bates Bridge P! X X RQ48 XX Rigby W 600 S P Byington Jim Moore Pond S Ririe Heise n P! Teton Creek ak X P! e Victor R ek S i e F v P! Cr S Fox Creek West e Ucon w llow n r ill o Wi Cr ake X X W eek R iv e West River Road RQ43 ¤£26 r Fox Creek East ¤£ 20 Ririe ¤£26 P! Iona Reservoir Trail Creek Pond P Lincoln RQ31 ¤£20 Conant Valley Idaho X Upper P !P P! ! Ammon th R Falls 49 d S Swan Valley Palisades ¨¦§15 49th Rd S d BONNEVILLE Lake R X E e Su n n o nys i B de P! R Irwin X d X Clowards Crossing Gem State ¤£26 Palisades Creek Grays Lake Outl P! Shelley Kepps Crossing X X k k BINGHAM e e ¤£ e e 91 r r C C Palisades Res.
    [Show full text]
  • Empey-Johnson Conservation Easements Acquisition LOCATION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION: the Property Is Located on the Western Side of Henrys Lake in Fremont County, Idaho
    Worksheet Determination of NEPA Adequacy (DNA) U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management OFFICE: Upper Snake Field Office, Idaho Falls District Office TRACKING NUMBER: DOI-BLM-ID-I010-2015-0005-DNA CASEFILE/PROJECT NUMBER: IDI-037506 PROPOSED ACTION TITLE/TYPE: Empey-Johnson Conservation Easements Acquisition LOCATION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The property is located on the western side of Henrys Lake in Fremont County, Idaho. The legal description for the property is Township 15 North, Range 42 East, sections 1, 12 and 13, Boise Meridian (Maps 1-3). APPLICANT (if any): Bureau of Land Management A. Description of the Proposed Action and any applicable mitigation measures The proposed action is to acquire two conservation easements on approximately 565 acres located on the western side of Henrys Lake in Fremont County, Idaho (Figures 1 and 2). The conservation easements would be acquired using Land and Water Conservation Funds (LWCF) appropriations for the Henrys Lake Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) project. The property is a private inholding within the Henrys Lake ACEC designation, an area containing one of the most unique and biologically diverse ecosystems in Idaho, and an active water-based recreation program. The property is bordered to the north and west by Forest Service lands and is adjacent to BLM land on the northern portion of its eastern boundary. The remainder of the eastern boundary is adjacent to private land which is conserved by the Wetland Reserves Program. The two conservation easements are held by The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The first conservation easement, Empey-Johnson 1 (Duck Creek), was purchased by TNC in 2008 to protect 50 acres of the ranch.
    [Show full text]
  • Wyoming Framework Water Plan Volume Ii Planning Recommendations
    WYOMING FRAMEWORK WATER PLAN VOLUME II PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS Wyoming Water Development Commission October 2007 This report was prepared by: Consulting Team State Agencies WWC Engineering Water Development Office Hinckley Consulting State Engineer’s Office Collins Planning Associates Game & Fish Department Greenwood Mapping, Inc. States West Water Resources Corporation Wyoming Framework Water Plan Volume II Planning Recommendations October 2007 This report was prepared for: Wyoming Water Development Commission 6920 Yellowtail Road Cheyenne, WY 82002 This report was prepared by: Consulting Team State Agencies WWC Engineering Water Development Office Hinckley Consulting State Engineer’s Office Collins Planning Associates Game & Fish Department Greenwood Mapping, Inc. States West Water Resources Corporation I, Murray T. Schroeder, a Wyoming registered Professional Engineer, certify that this Wyoming Framework Water Plan, Volume II report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. (The original signature and stamp are available at the Water Development Office.) I, Bern Hinckley, a Wyoming registered Professional Geologist, certify that this Wyoming Framework Water Plan, Volume II report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. (The original signature and stamp are available at the Water Development Office.) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1-1 2.0 INFORMATION AND DATA...................................................................................................2-1
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Resource Study
    Historic Resource Study Minidoka Internment National Monument _____________________________________________________ Prepared for the National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Seattle, Washington Minidoka Internment National Monument Historic Resource Study Amy Lowe Meger History Department Colorado State University National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Seattle, Washington 2005 Table of Contents Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………… i Note on Terminology………………………………………….…………………..…. ii List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………. iii Part One - Before World War II Chapter One - Introduction - Minidoka Internment National Monument …………... 1 Chapter Two - Life on the Margins - History of Early Idaho………………………… 5 Chapter Three - Gardening in a Desert - Settlement and Development……………… 21 Chapter Four - Legalized Discrimination - Nikkei Before World War II……………. 37 Part Two - World War II Chapter Five- Outcry for Relocation - World War II in America ………….…..…… 65 Chapter Six - A Dust Covered Pseudo City - Camp Construction……………………. 87 Chapter Seven - Camp Minidoka - Evacuation, Relocation, and Incarceration ………105 Part Three - After World War II Chapter Eight - Farm in a Day- Settlement and Development Resume……………… 153 Chapter Nine - Conclusion- Commemoration and Memory………………………….. 163 Appendixes ………………………………………………………………………… 173 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………. 181 Cover: Nikkei working on canal drop at Minidoka, date and photographer unknown, circa 1943. (Minidoka Manuscript Collection, Hagerman Fossil
    [Show full text]