DOCSLIB.ORG

Scanned Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Scanned Document LOS ANGELES, CA, DISTRICT This district (total area about 230,000 square miles) comprises drainage basins tributary to the Pacific Ocean in California between the Mexican boundary and Cape San Martin (about 265 miles north of the entrance to the Los Angeles Harbor). The lower Colorado River drainage basin (below Lee Ferry, AZ) which is southeastern California, southeastern Nevada, southwestern Utah, and all of Arizona, except the northeastern corner; that part of the Great Basin that is in southern Nevada and southeastern California; and the southern Arizona that drain southward into Mexico. IMPROVEMENTS Navigation Page Page 1. Channel Islands Harbor, CA 33-2 45. Tucson Drainage Area, AZ 33-15 2. Dana Point Harbor, CA 33-2 46. Whitlow Ranch Dam, AZ 33-15 3. Imperial Beach, Silver Strand Shoreline, CA 33-2 47. Whittier Narrows Dam Safety, CA 33-16 4. LA-LB Harbors (LA Harbor), CA 33-2 48. Inspection of Completed Works 33-16 5. LA Harbor Main Channel Deepening, CA 33-3 49. Scheduling of Flood Control Operations 33-16 6. Marina Del Rey, CA 33-3 50. Flood Control Work Under Special Auth 33-16 7. Morro Bay Harbor, CA 33-4 51. Emergency Response Activities Program 33-16 8. Newport Bay Harbor, CA 33-4 Environmental Improvements 9. Oceanside Harbor, CA 33-4 52. Cambria Seawater Desalination, CA 33-17 10. Port Hueneme, CA 33-5 53. City of Inglewood, CA 33-17 11. Port of Long Beach, CA 33-5 54. City of Santa Clarita (Perchlorate), CA 33-17 12. Redondo Beach Harbor (King Harbor), CA 33-5 55. Harbor South Bay Water Recycling, CA 33-17 13. San Diego Harbor, CA 33-6 56. LA River Demonstration Projects, CA 33-18 14. San Diego River and Mission Bay, CA 33-6 57. North Valley Regional Water Infrastructure 33-18 15. Santa Barbara Harbor, CA 33-6 58. Rio Salado Phoenix & Tempe Reaches, AZ 33-18 16. Santa Monica Breakwater, CA 33-7 59. Rural Nevada, NV 33-19 17. Surfside, Sunset, and Newport Beach, CA 33-7 60. South Perris, CA 33-19 18. Ventura Harbor, CA 33-7 61. Tres Rios, AZ 33-20 19. Navigation Work Under Special Authority 33-8 62. Upper Newport Bay Harbor, CA 33-20 20. Reconnaissance and Conditions Surveys 33-8 63. Other Work Under Special Authority 33-20 Flood Control Investigations 21. Alamo Dam, AZ 33-8 64. Surveys 33-21 22. Clifton, AZ 33-8 65. Collection and Study of Basic Data 33-21 23. Hansen Dam (Recreation Development), CA 33-8 66. Preconstruction Engineering and Design 33-21 24. Holbrook, AZ 33-9 67. General Regulatory Functions 33-23 25. Los Angeles County Drainage Area, CA 33-9 26. Los Angeles River, Arroyo Seco, CA 33-10 27. Mojave River Dam, CA 33-10 28. Murrieta Creek, CA 33-10 Tables 29. Nogales Wash, AZ 33-10 33-A Cost and Financial Statement 33-24 30. Norco Bluffs, CA 33-11 33-B Authorizing Legislation 33-34 31. Painted Rock Dam, AZ 33-11 33-C Other Authorized Navigation Projects 33-47 32. Pine and Mathews Canyons Dams, NV 33-11 33-D Other Authorized Shoreline Protection 33-48 33. Rillito River, AZ 33-11 33-E Other Authorized Flood Control Projects 33-49 34. Rio de Flag, Flagstaff, AZ 33-12 33-F Not Applicable - 35. Santa Ana River Mainstem, CA 33-12 33-G Deauthorized Projects 33-51 36. Santa Ana River Basin, CA 33-12 33-H Reconnaissance and Condition Surveys 33-52 37. San Antonio Dam Seepage, CA 33-13 33-I Inspection of Completed Flood Control 33-52 38. Santa Maria River Levees, CA 33-13 Projects 39 Santa Paula Creek, CA 33-13 33-J Flood Control Activities Pursuant to 33-53 40. San Luis Rey River, CA 33-14 Section 205, PL 80-858, as Amended 41. Sepulveda Dam (Recreation Development) 33-14 33-K Project Modifications for Improvement of 33-53 42. Sweetwater River, CA 33-14 the Environment, Sec 1135, WRDA 86 43. Tropicana and Flamingo Washes, NV 33-14 33-L Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, Section 33-54 44. Tucson Diversion Channel (Recreation Dev.) 33-15 206, PL 104-303, as Amended 33-1 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITES FOR FY 2011 NAVIGATION narrow beaches and backshore development for commercial, residential, and recreational use. 1. CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA Existing Project: The current project authorized by WRDA 2007 is initial construction of a 32-meter- Location: On the coast of southern California about wide (105 feet) beach nourishment project along a a mile northwest of Port Hueneme, 65 miles 2,165-meter-long (7,100 feet) stretch of shoreline northwest of Los Angeles Harbor, and 345 miles (initial fill volume 1,214,000 cubic meters (1,588,000 south of San Francisco. See Coast and Geodetic cubic yards)), with periodic renourishment (764,00 Survey Charts 5007 and 5202. cubic meters (999,000 cubic yards)) every 10 years over a 50-yr period of Federal participation, for a Existing Project: For details see page 33-2 of total of four additional beach nourishments. Annual Report for 1981. Local Cooperation: Fully complied with. The local Local Cooperation: Fully complied with. sponsor is the City of Imperial Beach. Terminal Facilities: For details see page 33-2 of Operations During the Fiscal Year: Completed the Annual Report for 1989. plans and specs (95%) and memorandum for the record to annotate updated geotechnical conditions. Operations During the Fiscal Year: The final Continued development of the supplemental EA/EIS. cycle of a five year (FY07 through FY11) three-cycle dredging contract was completed in FY11. 4. LOS ANGELES – LONG BEACH Rockwork inspection and navigation surveys were also conducted under the ‘Project Condition Survey’ HARBORS, CA program. Total Operations and Maintenance On the coast of southern California in San expenditures were $4,326,554. Project condition is Location: Pedro Bay about 25 miles south of the City of Los fair. Angeles, about 96 miles northwest of San Diego Harbor, and about 410 miles southeast of San 2. DANA POINT HARBOR, CA Francisco Harbor. Location: Dana Point Harbor is approximately 40 Existing Project: The project consists of two major miles southeast of Los Angeles and 60 miles ports, Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach and a northwest of the City of San Diego. federal channel in the mouth of Los Angeles River Estuary. Current project in the Port of Los Angeles is Performed Operations During the Fiscal Year: the Los Angeles Harbor Main Channel Deepening, as comprehensive condition survey of the breakwater. described in number 5 of this section. Project in the Total Operations and Maintenance, General Port of Long Beach is the Port of Long Beach expenditures were $33,455 plus American Recovery Channel Deepening, as described in number 11 of & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) expenditures of this section. four increments of dredging to be $237,538. Project condition is good. constructed in two stages - deepening the existing entrance channel for the Port of Los Angeles and 3. IMPERIAL BEACH, SILVER providing new channels to existing and new port STRAND SHORELINE, CA facilities. The dredge material will be used for fill to create Pier 400. Estimated cost (October 1998) for Location: The project area is located on the Coast of existing project is $401,000,000 (includes an Southern California, in San Diego County, about 3.5 allowance for estimated inflation through the miles North of the Mexico border which consists of construction period), of which $115,200,000 is 33-2 LOS ANGELES, CA, DISTRICT Federal ($114,900,000 Corps and $300,000 U.S. Northwest Slip were added as additional disposal Coast Guard) and $285,800,000 is non-Federal. locations. Deepening the channel will improve the efficiency of operations and reduce the costs for Local cooperation. The Port of Los Angeles and the transporting containers to the region. Corps of Engineers executed the Project Cooperation Agreement July 25, 2002. Local Cooperation: Fully complied with. The Port of Los Angeles and the Corps of Engineers executed Terminal Facilities: For details see page 33-3 of the Project Cooperation Agreement July 25, 2002 and Annual Report for 2009. See page 33-3 of Annual an amendment to this PCA was completed 5 Report for 1981 for requirements under the terms of February 2010. The amendment confirms the Port of the 1976 Water Resources Development Act. The Los Angeles is responsible for all additional costs to revised recommended project was changed due to the the project. withdrawal of the Port of Long Beach on October 1, 1991. The Port of Los Angeles, the local sponsor, Operations During the Fiscal Year: Funding was received credit, for advance work (Stage 1) provided from the Port of Los Angeles (POLA) to performed per WRDA 1988. Project Cooperation continue work on the contract modification and Agreement executed March 18, 1997. options were awarded for addition work on the Federal Channel and construction of containment Operations During the Fiscal Year: Aside from areas for the dredge material. the continuous construction in the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach as described in number 5 6. MARINA DEL REY, CA and number 11 of this section the USACE also completed a maintenance dredging project of the Location: Marina del Rey is located on Santa federal channel in Los Angeles River Estuary. Monica Bay, 15 miles west of downtown Los Dredged material was place in pier G and Slip 1 in Angeles, 29 miles northwest of Los Angeles Harbor the Middle Harbor, Port of Long Beach.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4.3 Water Resources 4.3 Water Resources
    4.3 WATER RESOURCES 4.3 WATER RESOURCES This section describes the existing hydrological setting for the County, including a discussion of water quality, based on published and unpublished reports and data compiled by regional agencies. Agencies contacted include the United States Geological Survey, the California Department of Water Resources, and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. This section also identifies impacts that may result from the project. SETTING CLIMATE The local climate is considered warm desert receiving approximately six to eight inches of rainfall per year (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1986). Rainfall occurs primarily in the winter months, with lesser amounts falling in late summer and fall. Kings County would also be considered a dry climate since evaporation greatly exceeds precipitation.1 A common characteristic of dry climates, other than relatively small amounts of precipitation, is that the amount of precipitation received each year is highly variable. Generally, the lower the mean annual rainfall, the greater the year-to-year variability (Lutgens and Tarbuck, 1979). SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY The County is part of a hydrologic system referred to as the Tulare Lake Basin (Figure 4.3- 1). The management of water resources within the Tulare Lake Basin is a complex activity and is critical to the region’s agricultural operations. The County can be divided into three main hydrologic subareas: the northern alluvial fan and basin area (in the vicinity of the Kings, Kaweah, and Tule rivers and their distributaries), the Tulare Lake Zone, and the southwestern uplands (including the areas west of the California Aqueduct and Highway 5) (Figure 4.3-2).
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I Appendix I Appendix I Appendix I Appendix I Appendix I
    APPENDIX I APPENDIX I APPENDIX I APPENDIX I APPENDIX I APPENDIX I Harbors, Beaches and Parks Facilities Inventory Assessment Findings Report Prepared for: Orange County Board of Supervisors and the Resources and Development Management Department Harbors, Beaches and Parks Prepared by: Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG) 169 North Marengo Avenue Pasadena, CA 91104 August 2007 APPENDIX I Table of Contents CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION and SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...................... 3 Purpose............................................................................................................... 3 Criteria................................................................................................................ 3 Methodology...................................................................................................... 5 Overall Assessment Findings.......................................................................... 7 CHAPTER II – REGIONAL RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ASSESSMENTS..18 Non‐Coastal Regional Parks............................................................................18 Nature Preserves...............................................................................................50 Coastal Regional Parks.....................................................................................54 Historic Regional Parks....................................................................................71 Proposed Regional Recreational Facilities ....................................................77 Local Parks ........................................................................................................83
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resource Condition Assessment San Juan Island National Historical Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment San Juan Island National Historical Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SAJH/NRR—2020/2131 ON THIS PAGE View east from Mt. Finlayson at American Camp towards Lopez Island in distance. (Photo by Peter Dunwiddie) ON THE COVER Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) on Young Hill, English Camp. (NPS) Natural Resource Condition Assessment San Juan Island National Historical Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SAJH/NRR—2020/2131 Catherin A. Schwemm, Editor Institute for Wildlife Studies Arcata, CA 95518 May 2020 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Newport Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project
    Upper Newport Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 1. Why is the project necessary? Upper Newport Bay is one of the last remaining coastal wetlands in southern California, and continues to play a significant role in providing critical habitat for a variety of migratory waterfowl, shorebirds and endangered species of birds and plants. Bay sedimentation has significantly increased in the last several decades due to rapid urbanization of the watershed. As a result, open water areas are disappearing in the bay, tidal circulation has diminished and shoaling is occurring within the Federal and local navigation channels and slips. Upstream efforts to control sediment inputs to the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve and within-Bay dredging projects have not been completely effective. A primary objective of this project is to effect management of sediments deposited within the bay, with the objective of reducing the frequency of dredging projects while also enhancing habitat values within the upper bay and slowing the detrimental impacts of sediment accumulation on the fish and wildlife habitats. 2. What are the benefits of the project? The Upper Newport Bay restoration project will allow for a reduced frequency of maintenance dredging; improve or restore estuarine habitats; sustain a mix of open water, mudflat and marsh habitat; increase tidal circulation for water quality; reduce predator access to sensitive habitats; improve public use and recreational access; and improve educational opportunities. 3. What do
    [Show full text]
  • Ebird Top 100 Birding Hot Sots
    eBird Top 100 Birding Locations in Orange County 01 Huntington Central Park 02 San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary 03 Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve 04 Seal Beach NWR (restricted access) 05 Huntington Central Park – East 06 Bolsa Chica – walkbridge/inner bay 07 Huntington Central Park – West 08 William R. Mason Regional Park 09 Upper Newport Bay 10 Laguna Niguel Regional Park 11 Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park 12 Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve 13 Mile Square Regional Park 14 Irvine Regional Park 15 Peters Canyon Regional Park 16 Newport Back Bay 17 Talbert Nature Preserve 18 Upper Newport Bay – Back Bay Dr. 19 Yorba Regional Park 20 Crystal Cove State Park 21 Doheny State Beach 22 Bolsa Chica - Interpretive Center/Bolsa Bay 23 Upper Newport Bay – Back Bay Dr. parking lot 24 Bolsa Chica – Brightwater area 25 Carbon Canyon Regional Park 26 Santiago Oaks Regional Park 27 Upper Santa Ana River – Lincoln Ave. to Glassel St. 28 Huntington Central Park – Shipley Nature Center 29 Upper Santa Ana River – Lakeview Ave. to Imperial Hwy. 30 Craig Regional Park 31 Irvine Lake 32 Bolsa Chica – full tidal area 33 Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve – Muth Interpretive Center area 1 eBird Top 100 Birding Locations in Orange County 34 Upper Santa Ana River – Tustin Ave. to Lakeview Ave. 35 Fairview Park 36 Dana Point Harbor 37 San Joaquin Wildlife Area – Fledgling Loop Trail 38 Crystal Cove State Park – beach area 39 Ralph B. Clark Regional Park 40 Anaheim Coves Park (aka Burris Basin) 41 Villa Park Flood Control Basin 42 Aliso and Wood Canyons Wilderness Park 43 Upper Newport Bay – boardwalk 44 San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary – Tree Hill Trail 45 Starr Ranch 46 San Juan Creek mouth 47 Upper Newport Bay – Big Canyon 48 Santa Ana River mouth 49 Bolsa Chica State Beach 50 Crystal Cover State Park – El Moro 51 Riley Wilderness Park 52 Riverdale Park (ORA County) 53 Environmental Nature Center 54 Upper Santa Ana River – Taft Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • NWS Public Information Statement
    National Weather Service Page 1 of 3 Print This Page Media Home Version: Current 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NOUS46 KLOX 131839 PNSLOX PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 1140 AM PDT SAT OCT 13 2007 ...PRELIMINARY RAINFALL TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE FINAL RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS RAIN EVENT THROUGH 1100 AM THIS MORNING. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN HAWTHORNE (HHR)................... 0.50 LOS ANGELES AP (LAX).............. 0.64 DNTWN LOS ANGELES (CQT)........... 0.95 LONG BEACH (LGB).................. 0.54 MONTE NIDO FS..................... 0.59 BIG ROCK MESA..................... 0.75 BEL AIR HOTEL..................... 0.98 BALLONA CK @ SAWTELLE............. 0.83 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 0.96 L.A. R @ FIRESTONE................ 0.45 LA HABRA HEIGHTS.................. 0.35 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (BUR)..................... 0.49 VAN NUYS (VNY).................... 0.48 NEWHALL (3A6)..................... 0.38 AGOURA............................ 0.28 SEPULVEDA CYN @ MULHL............. 0.51 PACOIMA DAM....................... 0.71 HANSEN DAM........................ 0.48 SAUGUS............................ 0.20 DEL VALLE......................... 0.29 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN GABRIEL VALLEY EAGLE ROCK RSRV................... 0.35 EATON WASH @ LOFTUS............... 0.51 SAN GABRIEL R @ VLY............... 0.35 EATON DAM......................... 0.39 WALNUT CK S.B..................... 0.47 SANTA FE DAM...................... 0.41 WHITTIER HILLS.................... 0.55 CLAREMONT......................... 0.33 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND FOOTHILLS SANDBERG (SDB).................... 0.08 EATON DAM......................... 0.39 SANTA ANITA DAM................... 0.39 MORRIS DAM........................ 0.20 BIG DALTON DAM.................... 0.39 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/media/getprodplus.php?wfo=lox&prod=LAXPNSLOX&version=0&print... 10/14/2007 National Weather Service Page 2 of 3 SIERRA MADRE MAINT YD............
    [Show full text]
  • FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Project No. 298-080 – California Kaweah Hydroelectric Project Southern California Edison
    20170518-3018 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 05/18/2017 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington, DC 20426 May 18, 2017 OFFICE OF ENERGY PROJECTS Project No. 298-080 – California Kaweah Hydroelectric Project Southern California Edison Company Subject: Scoping Document 2 for the Kaweah Hydroelectric Project To the Party Addressed: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is currently reviewing the Pre-Application Document submitted by the Southern California Edison Company (SCE) for relicensing the Kaweah Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 298). The proposed project is located on the Kaweah River and East Fork Kaweah River in Tulare County, California. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, Commission staff intends to prepare an environmental assessment (EA), which will be used by the Commission to determine whether, and under what conditions, to issue a new license for the project. To support and assist our environmental review, we are beginning the public scoping process to ensure that all pertinent issues are identified and analyzed and that the EA is thorough and balanced. Our preliminary review of the environmental issues to be addressed in our EA was contained in Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which was issued on February 10, 2017. We requested comments on SD1 and held scoping meetings on March 14, 2017, to hear the views of all interested entities on the scope of issues to be included in the EA. We revised SD1 based on the oral comments we received at the scoping meetings and written comments we received throughout the scoping process. The enclosed Scoping Document 2 (SD2) describes the proposed action and alternatives, the environmental analysis process we will follow to prepare the EA, and a revised list of issues to be addressed in the EA.
    [Show full text]
  • 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report
    16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report Jingfen Sheng John P. Wilson Acknowledgements: Financial support for this work was provided by the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy and the County of Los Angeles, as part of the “Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California” Project. The authors thank Jennifer Wolch for her comments and edits on this report. The authors would also like to thank Frank Simpson for his input on this report. Prepared for: San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy 900 South Fremont Avenue, Alhambra, California 91802-1460 Photography: Cover, left to right: Arroyo Simi within the city of Moorpark (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng); eastern Calleguas Creek Watershed tributaries, classifi ed by Strahler stream order (Jingfen Sheng); Morris Dam (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng). All in-text photos are credited to Jaime Sayre/ Jingfen Sheng, with the exceptions of Photo 4.6 (http://www.you-are- here.com/location/la_river.html) and Photo 4.7 (digital-library.csun.edu/ cdm4/browse.php?...). Preferred Citation: Sheng, J. and Wilson, J.P. 2008. The Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California. 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report. University of Southern California GIS Research Laboratory and Center for Sustainable Cities, Los Angeles, California. This report was printed on recycled paper. The mission of the Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California is to offer a guide to habitat conservation, watershed health and recreational open space for the Los Angeles metropolitan region. The Plan will also provide decision support tools to nurture a living green matrix for southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Dam – Hydro Newstm
    4/3/2020 Some Dam – Hydro News TM And Other Stuff i Quote of Note: “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free!” - P.J. O'Rourk [see photos on last page] Some Dam - Hydro News Newsletter Archive for Current and Back Issues and Search: (Hold down Ctrl key when clicking on this link) http://npdp.stanford.edu/ . After clicking on link, scroll down under Partners/Newsletters on left, click one of the links (Current issue or View Back Issues). “Good wine is a necessity of life.” - -Thomas Jefferson [see photos on last page] Ron’s wine pick of the week: 2018 Herdade de Sao Miguel Portugal Red "Do Sul Red" “No nation was ever drunk when wine was cheap.” - - Thomas Jefferson Dams: (Yes, there are many unused dams, but there are many that provide valuable benefits to society; namely hydroelectric power, recreation, flood control, irrigation. transportation, and many more.) America thrived by choking its rivers with dams. Now it’s time to undo the damage. The country must decide the fate of more than 90,000 dams, many of which are in disrepair. By Kate Morgan, March 13, 2020, popsci.com The fish is nearly three feet long, and as it swims unhurriedly past the viewing window in Lower Granite Dam, Theresa Wilson glances up from her knitting. “Chinook,” she says, tapping her computer keyboard once to record its passage. The salmon pauses as if to be admired. Its mottled scales flash as it moves against the current of the Snake River.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Rov. 8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places JAN 23 1989 Registration Form NATIONAL REGISTER This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, styles, materials, and areas of significance, enter only the categories and subcategories listed in the instructions. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900a). Type all entries. 1. Name of Property historic name Groat-Gates House other names/site number 2. Location street & number ?S NF! Twenty-second Avenue N/ i\_ not for publication city, town Port 1 and N/ i\_ vicinity state code county Mnl tnomah code 051 zip code 97232 3. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property j~x| private building(s) Contributing Noncontributing LJ public-local B district 1 ____ buildings I I public-State LJsite ____ sites I I public-Federal I I structure ____ structures I I object ____ objects ____Total Name of related multiple property listing: Number of contributing resources previously __________N/A____________ listed in the National Register N/A 4. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National His C>ric Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this HM nomination LJ request for determination of ?$ b 1 ty ftieets the c )cumentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets ft Dteduial and | jofessiooal requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
    [Show full text]
  • NWS Public Information Statement
    Page 1 of 4 Send to Printer PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NOUS46 KLOX 040045 PNSLOX PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 445 PM PST MON FEB 03 2008 ...PRELIMINARY RAINFALL TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS RAIN EVENT THROUGH 400 PM THIS AFTERNOON. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN AVALON............................ 0.83 HAWTHORNE (KHHR).................. 0.63 DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES.............. 0.68 LOS ANGELES AP (KLAX)............. 0.40 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 0.49 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 0.42 MONTE NIDO FS..................... 0.63 BIG ROCK MESA..................... 0.75 BEL AIR HOTEL..................... 0.39 BALLONA CK @ SAWTELLE............. 0.40 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 0.30 HOLLYWOOD RSVR.................... 0.20 L.A. R @ FIRESTONE................ 0.30 DOMINGUEZ WATER CO................ 0.59 LA HABRA HEIGHTS.................. 0.28 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 0.14 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 0.50 NEWHALL........................... 0.22 AGOURA............................ 0.39 CHATSWORTH RSVR................... 0.61 CANOGA PARK....................... 0.53 SEPULVEDA CYN @ MULHL............. 0.43 PACOIMA DAM....................... 0.51 HANSEN DAM........................ 0.30 NEWHALL-SOLEDAD SCHL.............. 0.20 SAUGUS............................ 0.02 DEL VALLE......................... 0.39 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN GABRIEL VALLEY L.A. CITY COLLEGE................. 0.11 EAGLE ROCK RSRV................... 0.24 EATON WASH @ LOFTUS............... 0.20 SAN GABRIEL R @ VLY............... 0.15 WALNUT CK S.B..................... 0.39 SANTA FE DAM...................... 0.33 WHITTIER HILLS.................... 0.30 CLAREMONT......................... 0.61 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND FOOTHILLS http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/cnrfc/printprod.php?sid=LOX&pil=PNS&version=1 2/3/2008 Page 2 of 4 MOUNT WILSON CBS.................. 0.73 W FK HELIPORT..................... 0.95 SANTA ANITA DAM..................
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeological Conceptual Model and Water Budget of the Tule Subbasin Volume 1 August 1, 2017
    Hydrogeological Conceptual Model and Water Budget of the Tule Subbasin Volume 1 August 1, 2017 Tule Subbasin Lower Tule River ID GSA Pixley ID GSA Eastern Tule GSA Alpaugh GSA Delano- Earlimart Tri-County Water ID GSA Authority GSA Prepared for The Tule Subbasin MOU Group Tule Subbasin MOU Group Hydrogeological Conceptual Model and Water Budget of the Tule Subbasin 1-Aug-17 Table of Contents Volume 1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Tule Subbasin Area .......................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Types and Sources of Data ............................................................................................... 7 2.0 Hydrological Setting of the Tule Subbasin .......................................................................... 9 2.1 Location ............................................................................................................................ 9 2.2 Historical Precipitation Trends......................................................................................... 9 2.3 Historical Land Use .......................................................................................................... 9 2.4 Surface Water Features .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]