DOCSLIB.ORG

EAST ALPINE RANGELAND PROJECT Agriculture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EAST ALPINE RANGELAND PROJECT Agriculture Environmental Assessment United States Department of EAST ALPINE RANGELAND PROJECT Agriculture Forest Service CARSON RANGER DISTRICT Intermountain Region HUMBOLDT-TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST September 2012 Alpine County, California and Douglas County, Nevada USDA NONDISCRIMINATION STATEMENT The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, 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). To file a complaint of discrimination write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Table of Contents Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Area .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Background ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................. 7 1.5 Management Direction.......................................................................................................... 8 1.6 Rangeland Capability and Suitability ................................................................................. 12 1.7 Decisions to be Made .......................................................................................................... 13 1.8 Public Involvement ............................................................................................................. 13 1.9 Tribal Involvement.............................................................................................................. 14 1.10 Identification of Issues ...................................................................................................... 14 1.10.1 Soil and Watershed Resources ................................................................................... 15 1.10.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................. 15 1.10.3 Wildlife and Aquatic Resources ................................................................................ 15 1.10.4 Wilderness.................................................................................................................. 15 1.10.5 Recreation .................................................................................................................. 16 1.10.6 Sensitive and Rare Plants ........................................................................................... 16 1.10.7 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................... 16 1.10.8 Other Issues and Concerns Not Being Analyzed ....................................................... 16 1.11 Federal and State Permit Requirements ............................................................................ 17 Chapter 2 – Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 19 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Development of Alternatives .............................................................................................. 19 2.3 Alternatives Considered in Detail ....................................................................................... 19 2.3.1 Alternative 1 – Proposed Action .................................................................................. 19 2.3.2 Alternative 2 – No Action/No Grazing ........................................................................ 45 2.3.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study .................................... 45 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives ................................................................................................ 46 Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects ................................................... 55 3.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 55 East Alpine Rangeland Project i 3.1 Soil and Watershed Resources ............................................................................................ 58 3.1.1 Scope of the Analysis................................................................................................... 58 3.1.2 Desired Condition ........................................................................................................ 61 3.1.3 Current Condition ........................................................................................................ 62 3.1.4 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................... 64 3.1.5 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments ................................................................ 66 3.1.6 Forest Plan Consistency ............................................................................................... 66 3.1.7 Specialist Report .......................................................................................................... 66 3.2 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................... 66 3.2.1 Scope of the Analysis................................................................................................... 67 3.2.2 Desired Condition ........................................................................................................ 69 3.2.3 Current Condition ........................................................................................................ 69 3.2.4 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................... 89 3.2.5 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments ................................................................ 99 3.2.6 Forest Plan Consistency ............................................................................................... 99 3.2.7 Specialist Report ........................................................................................................ 100 3.3 Wildlife and Aquatic Resources ....................................................................................... 100 3.3.1 Scope of the Analysis................................................................................................. 101 3.3.2 Desired Condition ...................................................................................................... 103 3.3.3 Wildlife Species Analyzed in Detail .......................................................................... 104 3.3.4 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments .............................................................. 153 3.3.5 Forest Plan Consistency ............................................................................................. 153 3.3.6 Specialist Report ........................................................................................................ 153 3.4 Wilderness......................................................................................................................... 153 3.4.1 Scope of the Analysis................................................................................................. 154 3.4.2 Desired Condition ...................................................................................................... 155 3.4.3 Current Condition ...................................................................................................... 155 3.4.4 Environmental Consequences .................................................................................... 156 3.4.5 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments .............................................................. 159 3.4.6 Forest Plan Consistency ............................................................................................. 159 3.4.7 Specialist Report ........................................................................................................ 160 3.5 Recreation ......................................................................................................................... 160 3.5.1 Scope of the Analysis................................................................................................. 160 ii East Alpine Rangeland Project 3.5.2 Desired Condition ...................................................................................................... 160 3.5.3 Current Condition ...................................................................................................... 160 3.5.4 Environmental Consequences
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Attachment a ‐ Forest Service Wildfire, NEPA, and Salvage Summary
    Attachment A ‐ Forest Service Wildfire, NEPA, and Salvage Summary Fiscal Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2007‐2016 Number of Fires 1 63 64 53 33 66 79 56 56 127 110 707 Total fire acres on NFS 2 1,751,118 1,326,893 549,108 211,327 1,489,029 2,411,413 1,141,353 741,465 1,587,843 1,038,686 12,248,235 High severity acres on NFS 3 842,658 368,595 268,944 76,192 619,020 809,720 513,957 265,045 489,668 397,654 4,651,453 Number of NEPA decisions identified 4 129 Acres of salvage planned in NEPA 5 218 17,255 2,134 14,010 22,761 28,937 13,809 13,264 112,388 Number of NEPA decisions litigated 6 125110332422 Litigation cases won by USFS 7 013110131112 Litigation cases lost by USFS 8 1120001011 7 Litigation cases pending 9 0000001002 3 Acres of salvage reported accomplished 10 328 2,665 8,125 3,464 8,774 6,916 11,672 19,792 16,926 21,234 99,896 1 Fires burning more than 1,000 acres on NFS land 10 Salvage harvest activity records identified as awarded in Forest Service Activity 2 Total acres inside fire perimeter on NFS land Tracking System (FACTS) by GIS analysis of fire perimeters. 3 Classified as greater than 75% mortality using Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG) 4 Identified by fire salvage keyword search in PALS (Planning Appeals and Disclaimer: Only the litigation data is believed to be 100% complete and Litigation System) or reported with sale activity records in Forest Service systems accurate.
    [Show full text]
  • AN ANALYSIS of WILDFIRE IMPACTS on CLIMATE CHANGE By
    AN ANALYSIS OF WILDFIRE IMPACTS ON CLIMATE CHANGE By: Taylor Gilson Mentor: Dr. Elaine Fagner 1 Abstract Abstract: The western United States (U.S.). has recently seen an increase in wildfires that destroyed communities and lives. This researcher seeks to examine the impact of wildfires on climate change by examining recent studies on air quality and air emissions produced by wildfires, and their impact on climate change. Wildfires cause temporary large increases in outdoor airborne particles, such as particulate matter 2.5 (PM 2.5) and particulate matter 10(PM 10). Large wildfires can increase air pollution over thousands of square kilometers (Berkley University, 2021). The researcher will be conducting this research by analyzing PM found in the atmosphere, as well as analyzing air quality reports in the Southwestern portion of the U.S. The focus of this study is to examine the air emissions after wildfires have occurred in Yosemite National Park; and the research analysis will help provide the scientific community with additional data to understand the severity of wildfires and their impacts on climate change. Project Overview and Hypothesis This study examines the air quality from prior wildfires in Yosemite National Park. This research effort will help provide additional data for the scientific community and local, state, and federal agencies to better mitigate harmful levels of PM in the atmosphere caused by forest fires. The researcher hypothesizes that elevated PM levels in the Yosemite National Park region correlate with wildfires that are caused by natural sources such as lightning strikes and droughts. Introduction The researcher will seek to prove the linkage between wildfires and PM.
    [Show full text]
  • A Water Year to Remember: Fire to Flood Reflections
    A Water Year to Remember: Fire to Flood Reflections Panelists: Jeremy Lancaster Supervising Engineering Geologist California Geological Survey Rachael Orellana Flood Risk Program Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tom Fayram Deputy Director County of Santa Barbara Pubic Works Department Moderator: Melissa Weymiller Jon Frey Project Manager Engineering Manager Flood Risk Management Program Santa Barbara County U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Control District A Water Year to Remember: Fire and Flood Reflections Floodplain Management Association Annual Conference Reno, Nevada Wednesday, 2018 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Jeremy Lancaster – Sup. Engineering Geologist California Geological Survey 2017 Wildfires – Historic Context California Wildfires Years over 1 million acres since 1987 Year Fires Acres 2017 9,133 1,248,606 2008 6,255 1,593,690 2007 6,043 1,520,362 1999 11,125 1,172,850 1987‐2016 average: 555,700 acres Source: CAL FIRE http://www.cnrfc.noaa.gov/radarArchive.php Post‐Wildfire Hazards to Life and Property PHYSICAL HAZARD EXPOSURE CHEMICAL HAZARD EXPOSURE • Flooding – 2 to 3 Times the • Incinerated household and Water industrial waste • Debris Flow – 20 Foot thick • Runoff laden with toxic soil boulder laden surge fronts • Degradation of water quality • Rockfall – Can be triggered by wind after a fire! • Hazard Trees – They fall on things! Public knowledge of these hazards generally lacking! Atlas Fire Napa/Solano Counties January 9, 2018; 5pm 2.6 inches, January 8‐ 10 • 1 Death ‐ debris slide/debris flow on CA‐121 ~5pm at Wooden Valley Road • CA‐121 Closed for one day Detwiler Fire March 22, 2018; 6:15p Mariposa County • 2 Deaths • 2 Residences flooded • High School flooded • Elementary School flooded • 11 Roadway Crossings Flooded Slinkard Fire May 21, 2018; 6:27p Mono County • U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Categorical Exclusion Record
    1 Decision Memorandum on Action and for Application of: Categorical Exclusion 1.12 Evaluation of Pinyon Removal Effects Typical of a Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fuels Reduction Project Mono Basin, CA CER Number: CA-170-05-35 U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management Bishop Field Office Mono County, California Purpose and Need for the Action The BLM Bishop Field Office has identified a critical resource management need to develop ecologically sound and cost-effective fuel treatment prescriptions for areas where pinyon-juniper woodlands have expanded into sagebrush steppe during the 1900s (Miller et al. 1999, Miller 2000). The vegetative fuels of such areas, including the Mono Basin, are now well outside their natural range of variability for the current climate conditions, thus making these areas highly susceptible to large, high-intensity wildland fires. Many of these encroaching pinyon stands are also within designated Wildland/Urban Interface (WUI) areas, placing residents, homesites, and other structures at significant risk. In just the past five years, several large, high-intensity wildland fires have burned through pinyon – juniper areas of the eastern Sierra, most notably in the Walker – Coleville area of northern Mono County. The fuels conditions (Fire Regime/Condition Class 2 and 3) associated with this proposed project are similar to those that existed in the Walker – Coleville area and other areas of the eastern Sierra prior to these recent large, high-intensity wildland fires. The management of these pinyon-juniper fuels, especially where communities and homesites are threatened, is one of the top priorities for the BLM and other agencies in the southwestern Great Basin and the eastern Sierra Nevada mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • BOARD PACKET ~ Page 1 of 72 GREAT BASIN UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
    GREAT BASIN UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING INFORMATION Meeting Date & Time Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 10:00 am Meeting Location Town of Mammoth Lakes Council Chambers 437 Old Mammoth Road (Suite Z) Mammoth Lakes, California 93546 District Board John Wentworth, Town of Mammoth Lakes, Chair David Griffith, Alpine County, Vice Chair Ron Hames, Alpine County Dan Totheroh, Inyo County Fred Stump, Mono County Matt Kingsley, Inyo County Larry Johnston, Mono County Phillip L. Kiddoo, Air Pollution Control Officer 157 Short Street, Bishop, California 93514 (760) 872-8211 E-mail: [email protected] Phillip L. Kiddoo Air Pollution Control Officer GREAT BASIN UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 157 Short Street, Bishop, California 93514‐3537 Tel: 760‐872‐8211 www.gbuapcd.org GOVERNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING AGENDA THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2017 AT 10:00 AM Town of Mammoth Lakes Council Chambers 437 Old Mammoth Road (Suite Z) Mammoth Lakes, California 93546 Assistance for those with disabilities: If you have a disability and need accommodation to participate in the meeting, please call Tori DeHaven, Board Clerk, at (760) 872-8211 for assistance so the necessary arrangements can be made. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District is a California regional government agency that works to protect the people and the environment of Alpine, Mono and Inyo Counties from the harmful effects of air pollution. 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance 2. Public Comment on Matters Not on the Agenda (No Action) 3. Consent Items (Action) a. Approval of the September 14, 2017 Regular Governing Board Meeting Minutes .........1 b.
    [Show full text]
  • Antelope Valley Fire Protection District Mono County, California
    Municipal Service Review And Sphere of Influence Recommendation Antelope Valley Fire Protection District Mono County, California February 2009 Prepared By: Mono County Local Agency Formation Commission P.O. Box 347 Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546 phone (760) 924-1800; fax (760) 924-1801 [email protected] Antelope Valley Fire Protection District -- Municipal Service Review TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary........................................................................................................................................ 1 Municipal Service Review Determinations .............................................................................. 1 Sphere of Influence Findings....................................................................................................4 Sphere of Influence Recommendation...................................................................................... 4 Reorganization Recommendation............................................................................................. 4 I. Introduction............................................................................................................................. 6 Municipal Service Reviews ...................................................................................................... 6 Relationship Between Municipal Service Reviews and Spheres of Influence ......................... 6 II. Antelope Valley Fire Protection District............................................................................... 7 District Overview.....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 248-18 State of Nevada Commission on Homeland Security
    248-18 2017 STATE OF NEVADA COMMISSION ON HOMELAND SECURITY ANNUAL REPORT OF GOVERNOR NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 OVERVIEW AND COMMISSION ACTIVITIES REPORT ....................................... 2 COMMISSION MEETING OVERVIEW ................................................................................... 2 APPROVED PRIORITIES 2017 ................................................................................................................3 FFY 2017 HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM (HSGP) FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS ............4 NEVADA OFFICE OF CYBER DEFENSE COORDINATION (OCDC) ..........................................................5 COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES REPORT .......................................................................... 8 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE (CIC) ................................................................ 8 NEVADA CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION PLAN (NCIPP) SUBCOMMITTEE ..........................9 CYBER SECURITY COMMITTEE (CSC) ................................................................................ 9 APPROVED HSGP RANKING RECOMMENDATIONS (CYBER) 2017 .....................................................10 FINANCE COMMITTEE ....................................................................................................... 12 LEGISLATIVE AND BYLAWS COMMITTEE.........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bishop Paiute Tribal Council Update
    Bishop Paiute Tribal Council Update To help improve our communication to our Tribal Community the Bishop Pai- ute Tribal Council will begin publishing updates on current matters of interest in our monthly Tribal Newsletters. The Council will also pursue other avenues of communication such as our Radio Station 96.1 KBPT, Website, and scheduling more community meetings, starting with our next General Council Meeting scheduled for November 18th. To continue our efforts of informing our community of Tribal Business, we will be listing all Resolutions that are adopted the month prior. As always, If you have any suggestions or comments to assist us in these efforts please contact Brian Poncho @ 760-873-3584 Ext.1220. Law Enforcement - The Bishop Paiute Tribal Council has recently reinstated the Tribal Law Enforcement Com- mittee, which consists of: Bishop Paiute Tribal Council, Bishop Tribal Court, Inyo County Sheriffs Department, Bishop City Police Department, District Attorneys Office, Inyo County Board of Supervisors Rep, Probation, and California Highway Patrol. The meetings began in September and will be monthly or as needed. The group will focus on topics that include re-establishing the Bishop Paiute Tribal Police Department, and develop- ing MOU’s with local law enforcement agencies that will better improve the safety on the Bishop Paiute Tribe. The Bishop Paiute Tribe has also be appointed a Tribal Liaison by the ICSO, Lieutenant Juan Martinez. We will be contacting Lieutenant Martinez as needed. Toiyabe Update - On Monday October 9, 2017 the BPTC had a meeting with CIRHB CEO Mark LeBeau. Dur- ing this meeting Mr. LeBeau gave an update on how they will be assisting Toiyabe in rebuild- ing their Management team and making sure the requirements of the USDA Loan are being met.
    [Show full text]
  • Cumulative SBA Set-Aside Program Analysis
    Date: 10/1/2020 Prepared by: B.Haupt CUMULATIVE SET-ASIDE PROGRAM ANALYSIS Structural Change Period: State: CA Structural Change Share: National Forest: Klamath Small Business Share: 39.0% SChg Carryover Volume: Market Area: Klamath Set-Aside Cumulative New Share New SC Planned SB Share of Small Business Surplus/Deficit Volume Small Following Carry Over Share Semi-Annual Analysis Sales Volume Sold Volume Sold Purchase Volume (+/- Volume Difference) Trigger Trigger Next Business Structural Vol Following Period Dates Volume Period Cumulative in Period Period Cumulative Period Cumulative Volume Yes or No Period Purchase % Change SC (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Carryover from previous 10 periods 0 YES 10/01/2015- 1 03/31/2016 16,027 16,027 6,251 4,695 4,695 -1,556 -1,556 625 YES 10,769 29.3% 39% 04/01/2016- 2 09/30/2016 10,769 26,796 4,200 10,769 15,464 6,569 5,013 420 NO 57.7% 39% 10/01/2016- 3 03/31/2017 8,332 35,128 3,249 0 15,464 -3,249 1,764 325 NO 44.0% 39% 04/01/2017- 4 09/30/2017 16,710 51,838 6,517 0 15,464 -6,517 -4,753 652 YES 29.8% 39% 10/01/2017- 5 03/31/2018 14,268 66,106 5,565 8,580 24,044 3,015 -1,738 557 YES 36.4% 39% 04/01/2018- 6 09/30/2018 30,526 96,632 11,905 17,798 41,842 5,893 4,155 1,191 NO 43.3% 39% 10/01/2018- 7 03/31/2019 47,809 144,441 18,646 0 41,842 -18,646 -14,491 1,865 YES 29.0% 39% 04/01/2019- 8 09/30/2019 10,942 155,383 4,267 0 41,842 -4,267 -18,758 427 YES 26.9% 39% 10/01/2019- 9 03/31/2020 37,240 192,623 14,524 24,617 66,459 10,093 -8,665 1,452 YES 34.5% 39% 04/01/2020- 10 09/30/2020 22,273 214,896 7,127 22,273 88,732 15,146 15,146 713 NO 41.3% 32% 0 32% Sawlog volumes in CCF and percent to the 1/10%.
    [Show full text]
  • State: CA National Forest: Klamath Data Entry Market Area: Klamath All Periods the Number of Sales Or Projects May Range from 0 to 50 Per Period
    VOLUME DISTRIBUTION WORKSHEET FOR FS-2400-31 Ref. FSH 2409.18, Chap 90 State: CA National Forest: Klamath Data Entry Market Area: Klamath All Periods The number of sales or projects may range from 0 to 50 per period. Print this screen with Excel print commands Open Sales Purchased by: Contract Total Large Business Small Business or Set Sawlog Non-Manufacturer Non-Manufacturer Sale Project Aside Size Volume Credited To: Credited To: Bid Date Period Number Sale Name Type Status Purchaser Class CCF Large LB Small LB Large SB Small SB Remarks (1) (2) (3) Y/N (4) (5) (6) (9) (10) (12) (13) Bid Date Period Number Sale Name Type Status Purchaser Class CCF Large LB Small LB Large SB Small SB Remarks 01/05/16 1 074617 Sawyers Bar Roadside Hazard Normal N Siskiyou Cascade Resources, LLC SN 873 873 01/22/16 1 074625 Doolittle SBA Normal Y Cascade Forestry SN 4,695 03/17/16 1 074633 Slinkard Fire Salvage Heli Normal N Siskiyou Cascade Resources, LLC SN 10,459 10,459 03/17/16 1 41502 Whites Fire Salvage Heli No Bid 11,240 03/18/16 1 11508 Tyler Meadows Fire Salvage Heli No Bid 15,270 03/24/16 1 074641 Walker Creek Fire Salvage Heli Excluded N Croman Corp LN 16,812 16,812 No-Bid Sale Awarded 03/25/16 1 51502 Middle Creek Fire Salvage Heli No Bid 6,483 04/04/16 2 41502 Whites Fire Salvage Heli Re-Offer No Bid 9,951 04/21/16 2 51502 Middle Creek Fire Salvage Re-Offer No Bid 1,962 04/18/16 2 074658 Salt Creek Fire Salvage SBA Normal Y CLR Timber Holdings, INC SM 10,769 04/21/16 2 074526 Blue Mountain Fire Salvage Heli Excluded N Siskiyou Cascade Resources,
    [Show full text]
  • Cumulative SBA Set-Aside Program Analysis
    VOLUME DISTRIBUTION WORKSHEET FOR FS-2400-31 Ref. FSH 2409.18, Chap 90 State: CA National Forest: Klamath Data Entry Market Area: Klamath All Periods The number of sales or projects may range from 0 to 50 per period. Print this screen with Excel print commands Open Sales Purchased by: Contract Total Large Business Small Business or Set Sawlog Non-Manufacturer Non-Manufacturer Sale Project Aside Size Volume Credited To: Credited To: Bid Date Period Number Sale Name Type Status Purchaser Class CCF Large LB Small LB Large SB Small SB Remarks (1) (2) (3) Y/N (4) (5) (6) (9) (10) (12) (13) Bid Date Period Number Sale Name Type Status Purchaser Class CCF Large LB Small LB Large SB Small SB Remarks 01/05/16 1 074617 Sawyers Bar Roadside Hazard Normal N Siskiyou Cascade Resources, LLC SN 873 873 01/22/16 1 074625 Doolittle SBA Normal Y Cascade Forestry SN 4,695 03/17/16 1 074633 Slinkard Fire Salvage Heli Normal N Siskiyou Cascade Resources, LLC SN 10,459 10,459 03/17/16 1 41502 Whites Fire Salvage Heli No Bid 11,240 03/18/16 1 11508 Tyler Meadows Fire Salvage Heli No Bid 15,270 03/24/16 1 074641 Walker Creek Fire Salvage Heli Excluded N Croman Corp LN 16,812 16,812 No-Bid Sale Awarded 03/25/16 1 51502 Middle Creek Fire Salvage Heli No Bid 6,483 04/04/16 2 41502 Whites Fire Salvage Heli Re-Offer No Bid 9,951 04/21/16 2 51502 Middle Creek Fire Salvage Re-Offer No Bid 1,962 04/18/16 2 074658 Salt Creek Fire Salvage SBA Normal Y CLR Timber Holdings, INC SM 10,769 04/21/16 2 074526 Blue Mountain Fire Salvage Heli Excluded N Siskiyou Cascade Resources,
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Board of Supervisors, County of Mono State of California
    AGENDA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF MONO STATE OF CALIFORNIA Regular Meetings: The First, Second, and Third Tuesday of each month. Location of meeting is specified just below. MEETING LOCATION Board Chambers, 2nd Fl., County Courthouse, 278 Main St., Bridgeport, CA 93517 Regular Meeting October 3, 2017 TELECONFERENCE LOCATIONS: 1) First and Second Meetings of Each Month: Mammoth Lakes CAO Conference Room, 3rd Floor Sierra Center Mall, 452 Old Mammoth Road, Mammoth Lakes, California, 93546; 2) Third Meeting of Each Month: Mono County Courthouse, 278 Main, 2nd Floor Board Chambers, Bridgeport, CA 93517. Board Members may participate from a teleconference location. Note: Members of the public may attend the open-session portion of the meeting from a teleconference location, and may address the board during any one of the opportunities provided on the agenda under Opportunity for the Public to Address the Board. NOTE: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Shannon Kendall, Clerk of the Board, at (760) 932-5533. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the County to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (See 42 USCS 12132, 28CFR 35.130). Full agenda packets are available for the public to review in the Office of the Clerk of the Board (Annex I - 74 North School Street, Bridgeport, CA 93517). Any writing distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Clerk of the Board (Annex I - 74 North School Street, Bridgeport, CA 93517).
    [Show full text]