DOCSLIB.ORG

Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office 2105 Osuna Road, NE Albuquerque, N.M. 87113 Consultation No. 02ENNM00-2014-F-0064 Memorandum To: Manager, Indian Program Branch, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Western Regional Office, Denver, Colorado From: Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Ecological Services, Albuquerque, New Mexico Subject: Biological Opinion for the Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project This transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) biological opinion (BO) regarding effects of actions associated with the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) proposed Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project on federally listed species and their critical habitats in accordance with section 7(b) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and implementing regulations (50 CFR 402). Species affected by the proposed action are: endangered Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius) and its critical habitat, endangered razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) and its critical habitat, endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) (flycatcher), threatened yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) (cuckoo), endangered California condor (Gymnogyps californianus), threatened Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida), endangered Mancos milkvetch (Astragalus humillimus), endangered Fickeisen plains cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae), threatened Mesa Verde cactus (Sclerocactus mesae-verdae), and threatened Zuni fleabane (Erigeron rhizomatus). You determined that the proposed action is likely to adversely affect Colorado pikeminnow and its critical habitat, razorback sucker and its critical habitat, as well as the flycatcher and the cuckoo. You also determined that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, California condor, Mexican spotted owl, Mancos milk vetch, Fickeisen plains cactus, Mesa Verde cactus and Zuni fleabane. We concur with OSMRE’s determinations (provided in the biological assessment (BA) (OSMRE 2014b)), which justify the findings that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect California condor, Mexican spotted owl, Mancos milk vetch, Fickeisen plains cactus, Mesa Verde cactus and Zuni fleabane. We base our concurrence on the rationales provided in the BA and additional Service review and analysis. We conclude informal consultation under section 7 of the ESA for California condor, Mexican spotted owl, Mancos milk vetch, Fickeisen plains cactus, Mesa Verde cactus and Zuni fleabane. Please contact the Service if the proposed action Biological Opinion for Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project 2 is changed and new information reveals effects of the proposed action to these species or critical habitat to an extent not addressed in the BA or this BO. This BO does not rely on the regulatory definition of “destruction or adverse modification” of critical habitat at 50 CFR 402.02; instead, we have relied upon the statute and the August 6, 2004, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (CIV No. 03-35279) to complete the following analysis with respect to critical habitat. This consultation analyzes the effects of the action and the relationship of those effects to the function and conservation role of critical habitat for the Colorado pikeminnow and razorback sucker to determine whether the current proposal destroys or adversely modifies critical habitat for these species. During formal consultation, we found that the proposed action will not jeopardize the continued existence of the Colorado Pikeminnow and razorback sucker; or the flycatcher or cuckoo, and will not adversely modify or destroy their respective designated critical habitats in the San Juan River Basin. Working with OSMRE and others, we developed Conservation Measures, Reasonable and Prudent Measures (RPM), and Terms and Conditions that can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended purpose of the proposed action, and that can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal agencies’ legal authorities and jurisdiction. The RPMs are economically and technologically feasible and we believe would avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the continued existence of Colorado pikeminnow and razorback sucker, flycatcher, and cuckoo or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their designated critical habitats in the San Juan River Basin. The RPMs are necessary and appropriate to minimize the effect of incidental take associated with the proposed action. In accordance with section 7 of the ESA and its implementing regulations, the BA and this BO represents the best scientific and commercial information available on the effects of the proposed action to federally listed species and their critical habitats, including from any release of nonnative species, water withdrawal, entrainment, or mercury and selenium emissions and subsequent deposition and accumulation in listed species in the San Juan River Basin. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at the Service’s New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, in Albuquerque, New Mexico. If you have questions regarding this consultation, please contact David Campbell at (505) 761-4745. Field Supervisor Attachment Biological Opinion for Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project 3 cc: (w/attch) Regional Director, BIA, Navajo Region, Gallup, New Mexico (Attn. H. Yazzie) (electronic copy) Director, Water Division, USEPA, Region 9, San Francisco, California (Attn. G. Sheh) (electronic copy) Commander, USACE, Albuquerque District, Albuquerque, New Mexico (Attn. D. Cummings) (electronic copy) Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6, Denver, Colorado (electronic copy) Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Grand Junction Ecological Services Field Office, Grand Junction, Colorado (electronic copy) Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office, Phoenix, Arizona (electronic copy) Biological Opinion for Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project 4 Endangered Species Act – Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project, New Mexico Agency: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Consultation Conducted By: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office Date Issued: April 8, 2015 Approved by: Wally Murphy Field Office Supervisor Biological Opinion Number: 02ENNM00-2014-F-0064 Biological Opinion for Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 14 Background and Consultation History ................................................................................. 14 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................... 16 ACTION AREA ............................................................................................................................ 16 PROPOSED ACTION..................................................................................................................... 23 Navajo Mine .......................................................................................................................... 23 Four Corners Power Plant ................................................................................................... 25 Transmission Lines and Ancillary Facilities ..................................................................... 27 San Juan River Diversion and Water Withdrawal ................................................................ 27 Conservation Measures ........................................................................................................ 28 STATUS OF THE SPECIES (INCLUDING IN THE ACTION AREA) .............................. 32 COLORADO PIKEMINNOW .......................................................................................................... 32 Colorado Pikeminnow Life History ...................................................................................... 33 Colorado Pikeminnow Population Dynamics ....................................................................... 37 Competition and Predation of Colorado Pikeminnow by Nonnative Fishes ........................ 39 Colorado Pikeminnow Status and Distribution .................................................................... 41 RAZORBACK SUCKER ................................................................................................................. 45 Razorback Sucker Life History ............................................................................................. 47 Razorback Sucker Population Dynamics .............................................................................. 48 Competition with and Predation of Razorback Suckers ....................................................... 49 Razorback Sucker Status and Distribution ........................................................................... 49 ENDANGERED FISHES PROPAGATION AND AUGMENTATION ...................................................... 51 SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hydropolitical Vulnerability and Resilience Along International Waters: Africa Is the First of a Five-Part Series of Continental Reports
    Copyright © 2005, United Nations Environment Programme ISBN: 92-807-2575-0 UNEP Job No. DEWA/0672/NA This publication is printed on chlorine and acid free paper from sustainable forests. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgment of the source is made. UNEP and the authors would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this report as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. United Nations Environment Programme PO Box 30552-00100, Nairobi, KENYA Tel: +254 20 7624028 Fax: +254 20 7623943/44 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.unep.org United Nations Environment Programme Division of Early Warning and Assessment–North America 47914 252nd Street, EROS Data Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198-0001 USA Tel: 1-605-594-6117 Fax: 1-605-594-6119 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.na.unep.net www.unep.org The “Hydropolitical Vulnerability and Resilience in International River Basins” project, directed by Aaron T. Wolf and managed by Marcia F. Macomber, both of Oregon State University (OSU), USA, is a collaboration between the United Nations Environment Programme - Division of Early Warning and Assessment (UNEP-DEWA) and the Universities Partnership for Transboundary Waters. The Partnership is an international consortium of water expertise, including ten universities on five continents, seeking to promote a global water governance culture that incorporates peace, environmental protection, and human security <http://waterpartners.geo.orst.edu>.
    [Show full text]
  • TUT Arch Booklet Nov 2019
    TUT ARCHITECTURE RE-IMAGINING THE FUTURE MINI-DISSERTATIONS 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 04. INTRODUCTION by Prof Amira Osman 07. DESIGN THINKING by Prof Jacques Laubscher 08. RE-IMAGINING THE FUTURE 11. LOCATION OF STUDENT PROJECTS STUDENT WORK - By Surname 28. ADLEM, Melvin 56. PHOOKO, David 30. ALBERTS, Yolandie 58. PLAATJIE, Aldon Timothy 32. BEMBE, Ntokozo 60. PROZESKY, Ian 34. BONGERIZE, Rubi Antoinnette 62. RASEROKA, Setshaba To move forward, people need to be 36. BOOYSEN, De Jager 64. SAVVIDES, Andreas inspired: they need buildings that enhance 38. CONWAY, Laa’iqah 66. SESEMANE, Katleho 40. DHLAKAMA, Tawanda 68. SKEAD, Douglas their creativity and push them to take their 42. FOURIE, Johan 70. STEENKAMP, Jaco Louis future into their own hands. 44. HENDRIKZ, Wihan 72. STEYN, Braam 46. JANSEN, Yvette 74. SWANEPOEL, Morne 48. LAMPRECHT, Laetitia 76. VAN STADEN, Wouter 50. LUMADI, Bono 78. XOKO, Lubabalo 52. NKOANA, Tiisetso 54. PETERS, Bastiaan Simon DIÉ B É DO FRANCIS KÉ R É 3 TUT ARCHITECTURE RE-IMAGINING THE FUTURE MINI-DISSERTATIONS 2019 AN INTRODUCTION By Prof Amira Osman The TUT Department of Architecture has a special relationship to its It is important to note, that this year the students collectively, and Topics are not prescribed, but candidates are expected to engage with In developing a strategy for the research agenda for our the TUT context. The location of the campus on the periphery of the Central independent of the lecturers, selected the theme: RE-IMAGINING THE sufficiently complex buildings on sufficiently sensitive sites, whether Architecture department, we are writing about “making” and “teaching”. Business District (CBD) gives it a unique relationship to the city.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Physalis Longifolia in the U.S
    The Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology of Wild Tomatillos, Physalis longifolia Nutt., and Related Physalis Species: A Review1 ,2 3 2 2 KELLY KINDSCHER* ,QUINN LONG ,STEVE CORBETT ,KIRSTEN BOSNAK , 2 4 5 HILLARY LORING ,MARK COHEN , AND BARBARA N. TIMMERMANN 2Kansas Biological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA 3Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO, USA 4Department of Surgery, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA 5Department of Medicinal Chemistry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA *Corresponding author; e-mail: [email protected] The Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology of Wild Tomatillos, Physalis longifolia Nutt., and Related Physalis Species: A Review. The wild tomatillo, Physalis longifolia Nutt., and related species have been important wild-harvested foods and medicinal plants. This paper reviews their traditional use as food and medicine; it also discusses taxonomic difficulties and provides information on recent medicinal chemistry discoveries within this and related species. Subtle morphological differences recognized by taxonomists to distinguish this species from closely related taxa can be confusing to botanists and ethnobotanists, and many of these differences are not considered to be important by indigenous people. Therefore, the food and medicinal uses reported here include information for P. longifolia, as well as uses for several related taxa found north of Mexico. The importance of wild Physalis species as food is reported by many tribes, and its long history of use is evidenced by frequent discovery in archaeological sites. These plants may have been cultivated, or “tended,” by Pueblo farmers and other tribes. The importance of this plant as medicine is made evident through its historical ethnobotanical use, information in recent literature on Physalis species pharmacology, and our Native Medicinal Plant Research Program’s recent discovery of 14 new natural products, some of which have potent anti-cancer activity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Four Corners Is a Region of the United States Consisting of The
    The Four Corners is a region of the United States consisting of the southwestern corner of Colorado, northwestern corner of New Mexico, northeastern corner of Arizona, and southeastern corner of Utah. The Four Corners area is named after the quadripoint where the boundaries of the four states meet, where the Four Corners Monument is located. It is the only location in the United States where four states meet. Most of the Four Corners region belongs to semi-autonomous Native American nations, the largest of which is the Navajo Nation, followed by Hopi, Ute, and Zuni tribal reserves and nations. The Four Corners region is part of a larger region known as the Colorado Plateau and is mostly rural, rugged, and arid. In addition to the monument, commonly visited areas within Four Corners include Monument Valley, Mesa Verde National Park, Chaco Canyon, and Canyon de Chelly National Monument. The most populous city in the Four Corners region is Farmington, New Mexico, followed by Durango, Colorado. 1 The Wave exposes large-scale, sets of cross-bedded eolian sandstone composed of rhythmic and cyclic alternating grainflow and windripple laminae. The rhythmic and cyclic alternating laminae represent periodic changes in the prevailing winds during the Jurassic as huge sand dunes migrated across a sandy desert. The thin ridges and ribbing seen within The Wave is the result of the differential erosion of rhythmic and cyclic alternating grainflow and windripple laminae within the Navajo Sandstone. These laminae have differing resistance to erosion as they have been differentially cemented according to variations in the grain size of the sand composing them.
    [Show full text]
  • The Four Corners Power Complex: Pollution on the Reservation
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Indiana University Bloomington Maurer School of Law Indiana Law Journal Volume 47 | Issue 4 Article 7 Summer 1972 The ourF Corners Power Complex: Pollution on the Reservation Laurence A. McHugh Indiana University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, and the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation McHugh, Laurence A. (1972) "The ourF Corners Power Complex: Pollution on the Reservation," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 47: Iss. 4, Article 7. Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol47/iss4/7 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FOUR CORNERS POWER COMPLEX: POLLUTION ON THE RESERVATION The decision to construct numerous large-scale, coal-fired power plants in the Four Corners area1 of the Southwest represents a classic conflict between increased economic development and the maintenance of a high level of environmental quality. Rapid population growth in the southwestern United States2 has been accompanied by a greatly increased demand for electricity.8 In order to meet that demand, members of the Western Energy Supply and Transmission Associates (WEST), a group of utilities,4 decided to construct the power plants. This decision, result- ing in the degradation of the environmental quality of the Four Corners area, was implemented by a series of incremental steps.
    [Show full text]
  • OFFICE INTERNATIONAL DE L'eau Développer Les Compétences Pour Mieux Gérer L'eau
    29/10/02 - DD OFFICE INTERNATIONAL DE L'EAU Développer les Compétences pour mieux Gérer l'Eau FLEUVES TRANSFRONTALIERS AFRICAINS - BILAN GLOBAL - AFRICA: International River Basin register (updated August 2002) Area of Percent Total area of country area of basin (sq. km) Country in basin country in Basin Name (1) name (sq. km) basin (%) Akpa (2) 4,900 Cameroon 3,000 61.65 Nigeria 1,900 38.17 Atui (3) 32,600 Mauritania 20,500 62.91 Western 11,200 34.24 Sahara Awash 154,900 Ethiopia 143,700 92.74 Djibouti 11,000 7.09 Somalia 300 0.16 Baraka 66,200 Eritrea 41,500 62.57 Sudan 24,800 37.43 Benito/Ntem 45,100 Cameroon 18,900 41.87 Equatorial 15,400 34.11 Guinea Gabon 10,800 23.86 Bia 11,100 Ghana 6,400 57.58 Ivory 4,500 40.28 Coast Mozambiq Buzi 27,700 24,500 88.35 ue Zimbabwe 3,200 11.65 Ivory Cavally 30,600 16,600 54.12 Coast Liberia 12,700 41.66 Guinea 1,300 4.22 Cestos 15,000 Liberia 12,800 84.99 Ivory 2,200 14.91 Coast Guinea 20 0.11 Congo, Democrati Chiloango 11,600 c Republic 7,500 64.60 of (Kinshasa) Angola 3,800 32.71 Congo, Republic of the 300 2.69 (Brazzavill e) Congo, Democrati Congo/Zaire (4, 2,302,80 3,691,000 c Republic 62.39 5) 0 of (Kinshasa) Central African 400,800 10.86 Republic Angola 290,600 7.87 Congo, Republic of the 248,100 6.72 (Brazzavill e) Zambia 176,000 4.77 Tanzania, United 166,300 4.51 Republic of Cameroon 85,200 2.31 Burundi 14,400 0.39 Rwanda 4,500 0.12 Sudan 1,400 0.04 Gabon 500 0.01 Malawi 100 0.00 Uganda 70 0.00 Corubal 24,000 Guinea 17,500 72.71 Guinea- 6,500 27.02 Bissau Cross 52,800 Nigeria 40,300 76.34
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Opportunities in the Four Corners Area
    Economic Opportunities in the Four Corners Area Kelly O’Donnell, PhD O'Donnell Economics & Strategy New Mexico July 2018 July 2018 Economic Opportunities in the Four Corners Area Table of Contents Foreword 3 ​ Executive Summary 4 ​ About the Author 5 ​ Introduction 6 ​ Overview 7 ​ Diminished Prospects for Coal 9 ​ Overcoming the Paradox of Plenty 9 ​ Economic Impact 11 ​ Quality of Life 12 ​ Workforce and Business Development 12 ​ Public Health and Economic Development 12 ​ Scenic Beauty, Cultural Heritage, and Outdoor Recreation 12 ​ A Path Forward In Energy 13 ​ Recommendations Reconsidered 14 ​ Priority Industries 14 ​ 1. Tourism and Recreation 14 ​ 2. Solar + Scalable Storage 14 ​ 3. Mine Reclamation 15 ​ 4. Healthcare 17 ​ 5. Local Food Systems 18 ​ Transport-related projects 18 ​ Not Recommended 19 ​ Petrochemical Manufacturing 19 ​ Electronics Manufacturing 19 ​ Industrial Gas Manufacturing 19 ​ Dimension Stone 19 ​ Conclusion 20 ​ 2 July 2018 Economic Opportunities in the Four Corners Area Foreword As a 30-year resident of San Juan County and first-hand observer of the changing economic landscape, I encourage you to read this report. I found the document to be an accurate assessment of the continuing decline of the coal industry in the Four Corners area. I also was impressed with the comprehensive nature of the economist's suggestions for the development of other economic drivers to replace that of coal. Although the diversification of the local economy has been a goal for many years, it is now imperative that concrete steps be taken as soon as possible so the least disruptive transition to a sounder, more sustainable economy can be developed.
    [Show full text]
  • Flooding in the Southern Midwestern United States, April–May 2017
    Flooding in the Southern Midwestern United States, April–May 2017 Open-File Report 2018–1004 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Above: Rapid-deployment gage installation, Gasconade River near Rich Fountain, Mo., May 1, 2017. Photograph by Larry Buschmann, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Front cover. Top center: Floodwater at Current River at Doniphan, Mo., May 1, 2017. Photograph by Shannon Kelly, USGS. Upper left: USGS hydrologic technician inspects gage at Big River at Byrnesville, Mo., May 1, 2017. Photograph by Aaron Walsh, USGS. Upper right: USGS hydrologic technician inspects gage platform at St. Francis River near Patterson, Mo., peak flood, April 30, 2017. Photograph by Josh Keele, USGS. Bottom center: USGS hydrologic technician wading from gage at Black River near Poplar Bluff, Mo., May 1, 2017. Photograph by Jarret Ellis, USGS. Flooding in the Southern Midwestern United States, April–May 2017 By David C. Heimann, Robert R. Holmes, Jr., and Thomas E. Harris Open-File Report 2018–1004 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey William H. Werkheiser, Deputy Director exercising the authority of the Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2018 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Four Corners Regional
    «¬96 ¤£191 ¤£40 «¬46 287 «¬79 UTAH ¬131 «¬9 ¤£6 40 ¤£ COLORADO«¬36 36 ¤£89 « «¬103 ¤£ ¨¦§225 ¤£ ¬264 «¬74 «¬132 « 70 177 «¬13 §¨¦ 6 «¬5 «¬ 1 Four Corners National Monument 117 ¤£ 1 Four«¬75 Corners«¬88 National«¬470 Monument «¬ 116 2 Hovenweep National Monument «¬78 «¬ 124 139 2 Canyons of the Ancients National Monument Four«¬ Corners«¬ Regional Map 9 3 Bluff Fort «¬ 3 «¬ 121Lowry¤£85 Pueblo 4 Valley of the Gods «¬31 4 Cortez 155 ¤£285 5 Goosenecks State Park 125 «¬ 5 Canyons of the Ancients Visitor Center «¬ 105 6 Goulding's Trading Post Museum «¬29 «¬91 6 Mesa«¬ Verde National Park 28 www.aztecnm.com 1-888-543-4629 7 La Plata Canyon 83 «¬86 7 The Dinosaur Museum «¬ «¬67 «¬ ¤£6 57 ¤£6 8 Durango - Silverton Narrow Gauge Railroad 8 Edge of the Cedars State Park «¬ 330 ¤£50 «¬ 9 Chimney Rock National Monument 9 Natural Bridges National Monument ¤£50 )"15 «¬82 9 ¬64 «¬ 10 Pagosa Springs 10 Newspaper Rock State Park « ¤£6 ¤£6 65 133 ¤£24 11 Silverton «¬217 11 Canyonlands National Park (East«¬100 Entrance) «¬10 «¬ «¬ )"18 «¬6 «¬141 12 Ouray 12 Canyonlands«¬257 National Park (North Entrance) 13 Telluride «¬21 13 Hole in the Rock 14 Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park 14 Arches National Park §¨¦70 15 Dinosaur Journey¤£24 (Museum of Western«¬94 Colorado) 15 Dead Horse Point State Park133 119 16«¬67 Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve «¬ «¬ «¬9 «¬21 16 Goblin Valley State Park ¤£89 «¬128 «¬135 17 Little Wild Horse Canyon «¬141 115 «¬313 «¬348 «¬ 18 John Wesley Powell River History Museum «¬72 )"14 Colorado Scenic Byways )"17)"16
    [Show full text]
  • Directions to Four Corners
    Directions To Four Corners Donated and roll-on Herbie plicated her courtships protrudes while Valdemar abodes some totara insidiously. How existentialist is Dory when untwisted and draffy Stewart wails some dithyramb? Leachy and roofless Tam construed: which Jon is immunized enough? Four Corners Monument Teec Nos Pos AZ 2020 Review. Be found that you for directions in pagosa springs colorado, restaurant of latitude or three bedroom apartments for any long you have. Need red cross Arizona Colorado New Mexico and Utah off or list of states to visit for solution laid the Four Corners Monument and you. Monument Valley for Four Corners Camera and any Canvas. Craftsmen and west, then ride to lebanon, bus route to a tropical backdrop left and four corners? What to take, simply extended the direction sheet like you have? The four cardinal directions form the leaving of Mesoamerican religion and. She was right to get expert advice, not travel guide selection of those highways from. Keep in terms of parks passes and four directions corners to. A great trunk route option in the middle pair the pigeon with suffer from Rolling M Ranch Near Los Serranos California. Choose not have you go and hopefully, and activities are a more information, protection and activities are original answer and long does. Love to create and stayed inside the road begins to open any idea of four directions, passes are members of the morning ranger program at what? 02 miles 1011 S AKARD ST DALLAS TEXAS 75215 Local Buzz Directions. Read the location in about it is also important sport fishery on the open areas of the aztec army provisioned and create your city limits of four corners.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Date 06/10/2021 14:34:02
    Native American Cultural Resource Studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada (Monograph) Item Type Monograph Authors Stoffle, Richard W.; Halmo, David; Olmsted, John; Evans, Michael Publisher Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan Download date 06/10/2021 14:34:02 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/271453 Native American Cultural Resource Studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Richard W. Stoffle David B. Halmo John E. Olmsted Michael J. Evans The Research Report Series of the Institute for Social Research is composed of significant reports published at the completion of a research project. These reports are generally prepared by the principal research investigators and are directed to selected users of this information. Research Reports are intended as technical documents which provide rapid dissemination of new knowledge resulting from ISR research. Native American Cultural Resource Studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Richard W. Stoffle David B. Halmo John E. Olmsted Michael J. Evans Institute for Social Research The University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 1990 This volume was originally prepared for Science Applications International Corporation of Las Vegas, Nevada (work performed under Contract No. DE- AC08- 87NV10576). Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Unites States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 September 1992 Judgment
    11 SEPTEMBER 1992 JUDGMENT LAND, ISLAh D AND MARITIME FRONTIER DISPUTE (EL SALVADClR/HONDURAS: NICARAGUA intervening) DIFFÉREND FRONTALIER TERRESTRE, INSULAIRE ET MARITIME (EL SALVADOR/HONDURAS; NICARAGUA (intervenant)) 11 SEPTEMBRE 1992 ARRÊT INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE 1992 YEAR 1992 Il September General List No. 75 Il September 1992 CASE CONCERNING THE LAND, ISLAND AND MARITIME FRONTIER DISPUTE (EL SALVADOR/HONDURAS: NICARAGUA inte~ening) Case brought by Special Agreement - Dispute involving six sectors of interna- tional land frontier, legal situation of islands and of maritime spaces inside and outside the Gulfof Fonseca. Land boundaries - Applicability and meaning of principle of uti possidetis juris - Relevance of certain "titles" - Link between disputed sectors and adjoin- ing agreed sectors of boundary - Use of topographical features in boundary-mak- ing - Special Agreement and 1980 General Treaty of Peace between the Parties - Provision in Treaty for account to be taken by Chamber of "evidenceand argu- ments of a legal, historical, human or any other kind, brought before it by the Par- ties and admitted under international law" - Significance to be attributed to Spanish colonial titulos ejidales - Relevance ofpost-independence land titles - Role of effectivités - Demographic considerations and inequalities of natural resources - Considerations of "effective control" of territory - Relationship between titles and effectivités - Critical date. First sector of land boundary - Interpretation of Spanish colonial land titles - Effect of grant by Spanish colonial authorities to community in one province of rights over land situate in another - Whether account may be taken ofproposals or concessions made in negotiations - Whether acquiescence capable of modifying uti possidetis juris situation - Interpretation of colonial documents - Claims based solely on effectivités - Relevance of post-independence Iand titles - Sig- nificance of topographically suitable boundary line agreed ad referendum.
    [Show full text]