Spring Guide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Eagle Crest Energy Gen-Tie and Water Pipeline Environmental
Eagle Crest Energy Gen-Tie and Water Pipeline Environmental Assessment and Proposed California Desert Conservation Area Plan Amendment BLM Case File No. CACA-054096 BLM-DOI-CA-D060-2016-0017-EA BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT California Desert District 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 April 2017 USDOI Bureau of Land Management April 2017Page 2 Eagle Crest Energy Gen-Tie and Water Pipeline EA and Proposed CDCA Plan Amendment United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT California Desert District 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 April XX, 2017 Dear Reader: The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has finalized the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed right-of-way (ROW) and associated California Desert Conservation Area Plan (CDCA) Plan Amendment (PA) for the Eagle Crest Energy Gen- Tie and Water Supply Pipeline (Proposed Action), located in eastern Riverside County, California. The Proposed Action is part of a larger project, the Eagle Mountain Pumped Storage Project (FERC Project), licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in 2014. The BLM is issuing a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the Proposed Action. The FERC Project would be located on approximately 1,150 acres of BLM-managed land and approximately 1,377 acres of private land. Of the 1,150 acres of BLM-managed land, 507 acres are in the 16-mile gen-tie line alignment; 154 acres are in the water supply pipeline alignment and other Proposed Action facilities outside the Central Project Area; and approximately 489 acres are lands within the Central Project Area of the hydropower project. -
California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California -
U2 to Perform in Mumbai, India for the Very First Time
U2 TO PERFORM IN MUMBAI, INDIA FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME Mumbai Date Will Be The Final Show As Part Of U2: THE JOSHUA TREE TOUR Concert Event To Take Place December 15, 2019 At DY Patil Stadium WATCH TOUR TRAILER https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M3pQb9HhX4&feature=youtu.be “Electrifying” – Daily Telegraph, 5/5 stars “Still masters of stadium rock” – Mail On Sunday “The stuff of encores… Had Twickenham had a roof, it would surely have been blown off…” - London Evening Standard, 5/5 stars Mumbai, India (Wednesday, September 18, 2019) – Live Nation and BookMyShow are excited to announce that U2 will bring their acclaimed U2: The Joshua Tree Tour - the record-breaking smash hit tour celebrating the band’s seminal 1987 album ‘The Joshua Tree’ - to Mumbai on Sunday, December 15 at DY Patil Stadium. The Mumbai show will be a huge celebration as it marks the band’s first ever performance in India as well as the final date on U2: The Joshua Tree Tour. The concert in Mumbai is produced by Live Nation Global Touring and brought to India by BookMyShow. U2: The Joshua Tree Tour 2019 will see the band – Bono, The Edge, Larry Mullen and Adam Clayton – make a much anticipated live return to Australia and New Zealand, as well as return to Tokyo for the first concerts since the Vertigo Tour in 2006. The tour will also bring the band to Singapore, Seoul, Manila and Mumbai - for the first time ever – with what promises to be very special concerts from “the biggest band in the world” (The Guardian). -
Appendix G1:Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix G1 Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Prepared for November 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 26111 Antonio Parkway Rancho Santa Margarita, CA Draft CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Prepared for November 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 26111 Antonio Parkway Rancho Santa Margarita, CA Prepared By: ESA 626 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Project site location: Cadiz, Cadiz Summit, Cadiz Lake NW, Cadiz Lake NE, Calumet Mine, Chubbuck, Milligan, East of Milligan, Danby Lake, Sablon, and Arica Mountains (CA) USGS 7.5’ Topographic Maps T1S R19E, 20E; T1N R18E, 19E; T2N R17E, 18E; 3N R16E, 17E; 4N R15E, 16E; 5N R14E, 15E Principal Investigator: Monica Strauss, M.A. Report Authors: Madeleine Bray, M.A, Candace Ehringer, M.A., Brian S. Marks, Ph.D. Keywords: San Bernardino County, Cadiz, Milligan, Archer, Freda, Chubbuck, Ward, Siam, Saltmarsh, Sablon, Fishel, Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, Parker Cutoff, General George Patton Desert Training Center, Railroad Siding, Archaeological Survey 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 www.esassoc.com Oakland Olympia Orlando Palm Springs Petaluma Portland Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills 210324 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, -
U.S. Geological Survey and A. M. Leszcykowski and J. D. Causey U.S
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP MF-1603-A UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL OF THE COXCOMB MOUNTAINS WILDERNESS STUDY AREA (CDCA-328), SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY REPORT By J. P. Calzia, J. E. Kilburn, R. W. Simpson, Jr., and C. M. Alien U.S. Geological Survey and A. M. Leszcykowski and J. D. Causey U.S. Bureau of Mines STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine their mineral resource potential. Results must be made available to the public and be submitted to the President and the Congress. This report presents the results of a mineral survey of the Coxcomb Mountains Wilderness Study Area (CDCA-328), California Desert Conservation Area, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, California. SUMMARY Geologic, geochemical, geophysical, and mineral surveys within the Coxcomb Mountains Wilderness Study Area in south eastern California define several areas with low to moderate potential for base and precious metals. Inferred subeconomic re sources of gold at the Moser mine (area Ha) are estimated at 150,000 tons averaging 1.7 ppm Au. The remainder of the study area has low potential for other mineral and energy resources including radioactive minerals and geothermal resources. Oil, gas, and coal resources are not present within the wilderness study area. INTRODUCTION Hope (1966), Greene (1968), and Calzia (1982) indicate that the wilderness study area is underlain by metaigneous and The Coxcomb Mountains Wilderness Study Area metasedimentary rocks of Jurassic and (or) older age intruded (CDCA-328) is located in the Mojave Desert of southeastern by granitic rocks of Late Jurassic to Late Cretaceous age. -
Wilderness Study Areas
I ___- .-ll..l .“..l..““l.--..- I. _.^.___” _^.__.._._ - ._____.-.-.. ------ FEDERAL LAND M.ANAGEMENT Status and Uses of Wilderness Study Areas I 150156 RESTRICTED--Not to be released outside the General Accounting Wice unless specifically approved by the Office of Congressional Relations. ssBO4’8 RELEASED ---- ---. - (;Ao/li:( ‘I:I)-!L~-l~~lL - United States General Accounting OfTice GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-262989 September 23,1993 The Honorable Bruce F. Vento Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Committee on Natural Resources House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: Concerned about alleged degradation of areas being considered for possible inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (wilderness study areas), you requested that we provide you with information on the types and effects of activities in these study areas. As agreed with your office, we gathered information on areas managed by two agencies: the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLN) and the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. Specifically, this report provides information on (1) legislative guidance and the agency policies governing wilderness study area management, (2) the various activities and uses occurring in the agencies’ study areas, (3) the ways these activities and uses affect the areas, and (4) agency actions to monitor and restrict these uses and to repair damage resulting from them. Appendixes I and II provide data on the number, acreage, and locations of wilderness study areas managed by BLM and the Forest Service, as well as data on the types of uses occurring in the areas. -
Sociopolitical Issues in U2's War and the Joshua Tree
Études irlandaises 45-2 | 2020 Varia “Flowers of Fire”: Sociopolitical Issues in U2’s War and The Joshua Tree Elena Canido Muiño Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/etudesirlandaises/10187 DOI: 10.4000/etudesirlandaises.10187 ISSN: 2259-8863 Publisher Presses universitaires de Caen Printed version Date of publication: 31 December 2020 Number of pages: 55-75 ISBN: 978-2-84133-996-9 ISSN: 0183-973X Electronic reference Elena Canido Muiño, ““Flowers of Fire”: Sociopolitical Issues in U2’s War and The Joshua Tree”, Études irlandaises [Online], 45-2 | 2020, Online since 31 December 2020, connection on 14 February 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/etudesirlandaises/10187 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ etudesirlandaises.10187 Études irlandaises est mise à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International. “Flowers of Fire”: Sociopolitical Issues in U2’s War and The Joshua Tree Abstract: U2 have always managed to hold a narrow line between social awareness and partisan political allegiance, belonging to a broad category of music that Rachel E. Seiler calls “contemporary conscious popular music”, which includes “music of any genre that focuses on social issues and perceived problems in society and may or may not include music that carries an overtly political message”. Consequently, much of the analysis of their songs claim that these are only a mere description of the terrible situation countries such as Ireland and the US were facing at that time. In this paper, however, I will examine the sociopolitical significance of U2’s songs as an appreciator of their cultural contribution and show that the events which formed the backdrop to some of U2’s most explicitly political songs in the 1980s – especially those included in War and The Joshua Tree – are etched indelibly into the text of both Ireland’s and America’s troubled colonial and political history. -
Palen Solar Project, Draft Supplemental EIS/EIR/LUPA
Palen Solar Project 4: Introduction *Please refer to tables 4.1-1 Existing Projects t:J ROW Boundary Joshua Tree National Park and 4.1-2 for Existing and f.:··::r:::·I Wilderness Area Foreseeable Projects 0 /V C] ~ Section 368 Energy Corridors Figure 4.1-1 e r-----, Area of Critical Environmental Foreseeable Projects DRECP Development Focus Areas L___J Concern Cumulative Projects: 0 4 8 Bureau of Land Management Land Miles 0 ,,,,,; CJ National Landscape Existing and Foreseeable Conservation System Draft Supplemental EIS/EIR/LUPA Palen Solar Project 4.10-1: Paleontolo ical Resources I I - ' D ROW Boundary Geologic Unit and Paleontological Sensitivity Figure 4.10-1 8 ( ~ Fenceline Qya/Qal; Class 5 - Low to High Sensitivity (increasing with depth) Paleontological Sensitivity of 0 0.5 1 - Qoa; Class 3 - Moderate Sensitivity Miles Project Area Geologic Units Draft Supplemental EIS/EIR/LUPA Palen Solar PV Project 3.16: Transportation and Public Access ,,. I ; ; ;-· ,,.. I -- ; / .,,/,,..--· .... ........ .... ·, ................. -- ------ .... ''·,,,.,, -...._._ ............... -.... ...... _ '·.... __________ ---. ..... ...._ ..... _ ............ .... ~~~~--1 -·....__._ ...._ __ _ .... ......... _. ____ ........ .... .... Source: Owlshead GPS • / Off-Highway Vehicle Property Boundary Project, 2013 1 c:::::J " ' (OHV) Route 8 c:::::J Fenceline /'./ Gen-Tie Line Figure 4.12-1 BLM Land 0 0.25 0.5 Removed for OHV Road Miles Avoidance (29.3 ac.) Open Route Mitigation June 2017 Palen Solar Project 4.14: Soil Resources Zone Ill Zone II ' ~~---....:.:.::___r=:JFRUOW Boundary .---·1 Sand TransPort Zone L._ ___J L nd CJ Reduced Footprint Bureau of a d Figure 4.14-1 E:223 Alternative . Management Lan 1 Miles ~AVOI·dance Alternative rt Zone and Alternatives San d Transpo I mental EIS/EIR/LUPA Draft Supp e Palen Solar Project Visual Resources Proposed Gen-Tie Line 1 2 o__..1Miles i. -
The California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 As Amended
the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as amended U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Desert District Riverside, California the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as Amended IN REPLY REFER TO United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT STATE OFFICE Federal Office Building 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 Dear Reader: Thank you.You and many other interested citizens like you have made this California Desert Conservation Area Plan. It was conceived of your interests and concerns, born into law through your elected representatives, molded by your direct personal involvement, matured and refined through public conflict, interaction, and compromise, and completed as a result of your review, comment and advice. It is a good plan. You have reason to be proud. Perhaps, as individuals, we may say, “This is not exactly the plan I would like,” but together we can say, “This is a plan we can agree on, it is fair, and it is possible.” This is the most important part of all, because this Plan is only a beginning. A plan is a piece of paper-what counts is what happens on the ground. The California Desert Plan encompasses a tremendous area and many different resources and uses. The decisions in the Plan are major and important, but they are only general guides to site—specific actions. The job ahead of us now involves three tasks: —Site-specific plans, such as grazing allotment management plans or vehicle route designation; —On-the-ground actions, such as granting mineral leases, developing water sources for wildlife, building fences for livestock pastures or for protecting petroglyphs; and —Keeping people informed of and involved in putting the Plan to work on the ground, and in changing the Plan to meet future needs. -
4.1 Aesthetics
4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures 4.1 Aesthetics The purpose of this Section is to identify existing aesthetic resources within the Project area, analyze potential impacts to aesthetic resources associated with the development of the proposed Project, and identify mitigation measures that would avoid or reduce the significance of any identified impacts. The aesthetics analysis identifies and evaluates key visual resources in the Project area and determines the degree of visual impacts that could occur from the proposed Project. The assessment is based on field observations of the proposed Project site, in addition to a review of topographic maps, Project drawings, and aerial and ground-level photographs of the Project area from representative viewing locations. Thresholds of significance for the impact analysis are derived from Appendix G of the 2011 CEQA Guidelines. 4.1.1 Environmental Setting Regional Setting The Project is located in a generally undeveloped region of the Mojave Desert within San Bernardino County, California (Figure 4.1-1). The Project area is approximately 10 miles south of the Mojave National Preserve and surrounded by federal lands managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for open space values. The visual character of the region is shaped by an arid landscape consisting of sparsely vegetated mountain ranges and broad valleys with expansive bajadas1 and scattered dry lakes.2 Land in the Project vicinity consists of open space and undeveloped natural areas, with scattered, isolated development including existing salt mining operations on the Bristol and Cadiz Dry Lakes, agricultural operations on Cadiz Property, scattered structures near Amboy and Cadiz, railroad lines, major roadways, dirt roads, and utility corridors crossing large expanses of the desert. -
Petition to List the Western Joshua Tree Under the California Endangered Species
BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION A Petition to List the Western Joshua Tree (Yucca brevifolia) as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Center for Biological Diversity October 15, 2019 i Notice of Petition For action pursuant to Section 670.1, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) and Division 3, Chapter 1.5, Article 2 of the California Fish and Game Code (Sections 2070 et seq.) relating to listing and delisting endangered and threatened species of plants and animals. I. SPECIES BEING PETITIONED: Species Name: Western Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia) as either a full species, or as the subspecies Yucca brevifolia brevifolia. II. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Listing as Threatened The Center for Biological Diversity submits this petition to list the western Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia) as Threatened pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act (California Fish and Game Code §§ 2050 et seq., “CESA”). The western Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia), long recognized as a subspecies or variety (Yucca brevifolia brevifolia), has recently been recognized as a full species distinct from its close relative, the eastern Joshua tree (Yucca jaegeriana). This petition demonstrates that the western Joshua tree is eligible for and warrants listing under CESA based on the factors specified in the statute and implementing regulations. Specifically, the western Joshua tree meets the definition of a “threatened species” since it is “a native species or subspecies of a … plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts . .” Cal. -
Eagle Mountain Pumped Storage Project Draft License Application Exhibit E, Volume 1, Public Information Palm Desert, California
Eagle Mountain Pumped Storage Project Draft License Application Exhibit E, Volume 1, Public Information Palm Desert, California Submitted to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Submitted by: Eagle Crest Energy Company Date: June 16, 2008 Project No. 080470 ©2008 Eagle Crest Energy DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION- EXHIBIT E Table of Contents 1 General Description 1-1 1.1 Project Description 1-1 1.2 Project Area 1-2 1.2.1 Existing Land Use 1-4 1.3 Compatibility with Landfill Project 1-5 1.3.1 Land Exchange 1-5 1.3.2 Landfill Operations 1-6 1.3.3 Landfill Permitting 1-6 1.3.4 Compatibility of Specific Features 1-7 1.3.4.1 Potential Seepage Issues 1-8 1.3.4.2 Ancillary Facilities Interferences 1-9 2 Water Use and Quality 2-1 2.1 Surface Waters 2-1 2.1.1 Instream Flow Uses of Streams 2-1 2.1.2 Water quality of surface water 2-1 2.1.3 Existing lakes and reservoirs 2-1 2.1.4 Impacts of Construction and Operation 2-1 2.1.5 Measures recommended by Federal and state agencies to protect surface water 2-1 2.2 Description of Existing Groundwater 2-1 2.2.1 Springs and Wells 2-3 2.2.2 Water Bearing Formations 2-3 2.2.3 Hydraulic Characteristics 2-4 2.2.4 Groundwater Levels 2-5 2.2.5 Groundwater Flow Direction 2-6 2.2.6 Groundwater Storage 2-7 2.2.7 Groundwater Pumping 2-7 2.2.8 Recharge Sources 2-8 2.2.9 Outflow 2-9 2.2.10 Perennial Yield 2-9 2.3 Potential Impacts to Groundwater Supply 2-9 2.3.1 Proposed Project Water Supply 2-9 2.3.2 Perennial Yield 2-10 2.3.3 Regional Groundwater Level Effects 2-12 2.3.4 Local Groundwater Level Effects 2-15 2.3.5 Groundwater