Final General Management Plan and Comprehensive River Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Final General Management Plan and Comprehensive River Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement Final National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior General Management Plan and Sequoia and Kings Canyon Comprehensive River Management Plan / National Parks Middle and South Forks of the Environmental Impact Statement Kings River and North Fork of the Kern River Tulare and Fresno Counties California Volume 2: The Affected Environment / Environmental Consequences / Appendixes / Glossary / Selected Bibliography Preparers and Consultants / Index [This page intentionally left blank.] 216 SEQUOIA AND KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARKS and MIDDLE AND SOUTH FORKS OF THE KINGS RIVER AND NORTH FORK OF THE KERN RIVER Tulare and Fresno Counties • California FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE RIVER MANAGEMENT PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Volume 2: The Affected Environment / Environmental Consequences / Appendixes / Glossary / Selected Bibliography / Preparers and Consultants / Index United States Department of the Interior • National Park Service [This page intentionally left blank.] 216 Contents: Volume 2 THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Ecosystem Stressors ................................................................................................................................ 3 Loss of Pre-Euro-American Fire Regimes ...................................................................................... 3 Introduced Species........................................................................................................................... 3 Air Pollution .................................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat Fragmentation ..................................................................................................................... 5 Rapid Anthropogenic Climatic Change........................................................................................... 6 Natural Resources ................................................................................................................................... 8 Caves ............................................................................................................................................... 8 Water Resources.............................................................................................................................. 9 Soils and Vegetation...................................................................................................................... 11 Wildlife.......................................................................................................................................... 16 Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive Species.............................................................................. 16 Air Quality..................................................................................................................................... 19 Wild and Scenic Rivers ......................................................................................................................... 25 Description of Designated River Segments................................................................................... 25 Rivers Being Studied for Inclusion in the System......................................................................... 26 Backcountry / Wilderness ..................................................................................................................... 32 Designated Wilderness .................................................................................................................. 32 Potential Wilderness and Other Areas........................................................................................... 32 Backcountry Areas Managed to Preserve Wilderness Characteristics .......................................... 32 Wilderness Studies ........................................................................................................................ 33 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................................ 34 Historical Overview of the Parks................................................................................................... 34 Archeological Resources ............................................................................................................... 37 Historic Structures, Districts, and Cultural Landscapes ................................................................ 37 Cultural Landscapes ...................................................................................................................... 40 Ethnographic Resources and Landscapes...................................................................................... 41 Museum Collections and Archives................................................................................................ 42 Transportation and Circulation.............................................................................................................. 44 Roadway Network in and around the Parks .................................................................................. 44 Visitor Circulation in the Parks ..................................................................................................... 45 Transportation Service Quality of Park Roads .............................................................................. 45 Parking........................................................................................................................................... 51 Visitor Experience................................................................................................................................. 53 Park Character ............................................................................................................................... 53 Visitation ....................................................................................................................................... 54 Visitor Use Patterns....................................................................................................................... 54 Visitor Profile ................................................................................................................................ 56 Visitor Use Projections.................................................................................................................. 56 Educational Opportunities ............................................................................................................. 58 Recreational Opportunities............................................................................................................ 58 Visitor Services ............................................................................................................................. 61 Private Land and Special Use Permits on Park Land............................................................................ 65 Private Land................................................................................................................................... 65 Special Use Permits on Park Land ................................................................................................66 iii CONTENTS Potential Boundary Adjustments................................................................................................... 68 Park Management, Operations, and Facilities....................................................................................... 69 Staffing .......................................................................................................................................... 69 Partners and Other Entities............................................................................................................ 71 Park Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 71 Concession Facilities..................................................................................................................... 75 Socioeconomic Environment ................................................................................................................ 77 Demographic Characteristics......................................................................................................... 77 Park Budget and Park Employment............................................................................................... 80 Mineral King Special Use Permits on Park Land.......................................................................... 80 Regional Communities .................................................................................................................. 80 Figures Figure 1: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District ................................................................ 19 Figure 2: Air Quality Stations in Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks ............................................ 24 Figure 3: Average Seasonal Daily Traffic (Friday–Sunday)................................................................. 49 Figure 4: Peak-Hour Level of Service................................................................................................... 50 Figure 5: Average Visits by Month to Sequoia and Kings Canyon — 1992–2001 .............................. 55 Figure 6: Actual and Projected Visitation ............................................................................................
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]
  • Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks, However, Went Unnoticed
    • D -1:>K 1.2!;EQUOJA-KING$ Ci\NYON NATIONAL PARKS History of the Parks "''' Evaluation of Historic Resources Detennination of Effect, DCP Prepared by • A. Berle Clemensen DENVER SERVICE CENTER HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEA.'! NATIONAL PAP.K SERVICE UNITED STATES DEPAR'J'}fENT OF THE l~TERIOR DENVER, COLOR..\DO SEPTEffilER 1975 i i• Pl.EA5!: RETUl1" TO: B&WScans TEallillCAL INFORMAl!tll CfNIEil 0 ·l'i «coo,;- OOIVER Sf:RV!Gf Cf!fT£R llAT!ONAL PARK S.:.'Ma j , • BRIEF HISTORY OF SEQUOIA Spanish and Mexican Period The first white men, the Spanish, entered the San Joaquin Valley in 1772. They, however, only observed the Sierra Nevada mountains. None entered the high terrain where the giant Sequoia exist. Only one explorer came close to the Sierra Nevadas. In 1806 Ensign Gabriel Moraga, venturing into the foothills, crossed and named the Rio de la Santos Reyes (River of the Holy Kings) or Kings River. Americans in the San Joaquin Valley The first band of Americans entered the Valley in 1827 when Jedediah Smith and a group of fur traders traversed it from south to north. This journey ushered in the first American frontier as fifteen years of fur trapping followed. Still, none of these men reported sighting the giant trees. It was not until 1833 that members of the Joseph R. 1lalker expedition crossed the Sierra Nevadas and received credit as the first whites to See the Sequoia trees. These trees are presumed to form part of either the present M"rced or Tuolwnregroves. Others did not learn of their find since Walker's group failed to report their discovery.
    [Show full text]
  • Motorized Travel Management
    Inyo National Forest Travel Management EIS – August 2009 Chapter 3: Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3.1 Introduction This Chapter summarizes the physical, biological, social, and economic environments that are affected by the Proposed Action and alternatives and the effects (or consequences) that would result from implementation of those alternatives. The effects disclosed in this Chapter provide the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of the benefits and risks of the alternatives. The Affected Environment Section under each resource topic describes the existing, or baseline, condition against which environmental effects of the alternatives were evaluated and from which progress toward the desired condition can be measured. Environmental consequences form the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of alternatives through compliance with standards set forth in the 1988 Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (also referred to as the Forest Plan or LRMP), as amended, and monitoring required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and National Forest Management Act of 1976. The environmental consequences discussion centers on direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives, including recommended mitigation measures. Effects can be neutral, beneficial, or adverse. These terms are defined as follows: • Direct effects are caused by the action and occur at the same place and time as the action. • Indirect effects are caused by the action and are later in time, or further removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. • Cumulative effects are those that result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.
    [Show full text]
  • CDFW Unpublished Data)
    State of California Natural Resources Agency Department of Fish and Wildlife REPORT TO THE FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FIVE-YEAR SPECIES REVIEW OF SIERRA NEVADA BIGHORN SHEEP (Ovis canadensis sierrae) March 2021 Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Ram, photo by Josh Schulgen Charlton H. Bonham, Director California Department of Fish and Wildlife TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 4 II. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 5 A. Five-Year Species Review ............................................................................................ 5 B. Listing and Review History ............................................................................................ 6 C. Notifications and Information Received ......................................................................... 6 III. BIOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 6 A. Taxonomic and Physical Description ............................................................................. 6 B. Life History and Ecology ............................................................................................... 7 C. Habitat Necessary for Species Survival ........................................................................ 8 i. Vegetation Communities and Foraging Habitat ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information
    2015, Wilderness, Hume Lake RD, Sequoia NF Jennie Lakes & Monarch Wilderness Detailed Trail Reports and Information (trailhead names are in bold type) By: Jeff Duneman, Wilderness Ranger Hume Lake Ranger District, Sequoia National Forest Last updated: August 3rd, 2015 *NOTES: “How long will it take?! Is it a hard hike?!” Difficulty and time required depends on you, the hiker, and your condition. An experienced, strong hiker will cover 3-4 miles (or more!) an hour carrying a full pack, without stopping. Someone who doesn’t hike much (or walk much, for that matter) will cover 1-2 miles (or less!) an hour, without a big pack, with frequent stops. Know your abilities! Always carry water, always check weather conditions, always tell people where you are going, and always familiarize yourself with the area (real maps recommended, not GPS). Pay attention to your surroundings, and enjoy your wilderness! *LEAVE NO TRACE: Please take a look at the seven Leave No Trace wilderness ethics before you head out to the trail – https://lnt.org/learn/7-principles *Never leave trash or toilet paper behind! Pack it all in, pack it all out. *When campfires are allowed (check with the forest service on current fire status), always completely drown your campfire so that it is completely out! Jennie Lakes Wilderness (JLW) 1) Big Meadows Trail (#?)/Weaver Lake Trail (#30E09) Big Meadows trailhead up to Weaver Lake: At about 3.5 miles one-way, this is one of the easiest and most popular hikes in the JLW. The trail winds through Lodgepole Pines near the trailhead, climbs slowly (with a nice view into Kings Canyon) into Red and White Firs, with another slight ascent once you are getting closer to the lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 1 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences
    United States Department of Giant Sequoia Agriculture Forest Service National Monument Giant Sequoia National Monument Draft Environmental Impact Statement August 2010 Volume 1 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, or 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 and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Chapter 4 - Environmental Consequences Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 1 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Volume 1 Giant Sequoia National Monument, Draft Environmental Impact Statement 2 Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Chapter 4 Environmental Consequences Chapter 4 includes the environmental effects analysis. It is organized by resource area, in the same manner as Chapter 3. Effects are displayed for separate resource areas in terms of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects associated with the six alternatives considered in detail. Effects can be neutral, beneficial, or adverse. This chapter also discusses the unavoidable adverse effects, the relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources. Environmental consequences form the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of the alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks
    National Park Service Visitor Guide: Late Spring 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks & Sequoia National Forest/Giant Sequoia National Monument A century of national parks Check for details & hours inside: One hundred years. Not long belts and hatbands of park rangers. Return for more programs and in geologic time, but long enough Activities: programs ............5 At the heart of the park system activities that celebrate 100 years of to embed an idea in the heart of lies stewardship, the commitment national parks, including: America — the national parks. And Bears & food storage ........11 to protect something not only for like our hearts, the park system can • June 18 - The Legacy of the Buf- ourselves but for the future; the Campgrounds .....................4 grow to include more stories, more falo Soldiers: Special walks and willingness to care for something people, more of our treasured talks, and an encampment of histori- Exploring: above and beyond our own lives. landscapes. cal re-enactors take us back to 1903. Sequoia NP ........................6 You play a critical role in steward- Kings Canyon NP & USFS ..7 Nature, history, sacred sites: Like ship here! Your eff orts to protect • August 5-7 - Dark Sky Festival many national parks, Sequoia and your parks not only ensure their (annually): Astronauts, star-gazing Facilities & hours . .............8-9 and photography programs, night Kings Canyon have them all. Se- longevity; they protect the sur- Lodging ...............................5 quoia and the forerunner of Kings rounding areas and towns, as well. walks, telescopes, and more. Canyon, the tiny General Grant Map of park roads ...............8 Get yourself, your children, your • August 25 - NPS Founders Day: National Park, were designated th friends out in these parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Civil Works Program Fy 2020 Work Plan - Operation and Maintenance
    ARMY CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM FY 2020 WORK PLAN - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE STATEMENT OF STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL LINE ITEM OF BUSINESS MANAGERS AND WORK STATE DIVISION PROJECT OR PROGRAM FY 2020 PBUD MANAGERS WORK PLAN ADDITIONAL FY2020 BUDGETED AMOUNT JUSTIFICATION FY 2020 ADDITIONAL FUNDING JUSTIFICATION PROGRAM PLAN TOTAL AMOUNT AMOUNT 1/ AMOUNT FUNDING 2/ 2/ Funds will be used for specific work activities including AK POD NHD ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK $10,485,000 $9,685,000 $9,685,000 dredging. AK POD NHD AURORA HARBOR, AK $75,000 $0 Funds will be used for baling deck for debris removal; dam Funds will be used for commonly performed O&M work. outlet channel rock repairs; operations for recreation visitor ENS, FDRR, Funds will also be used for specific work activities including AK POD CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK $7,236,000 $7,236,000 $1,905,000 $9,141,000 6 assistance and public safety; south seepage collector channel; REC relocation of the debris baling area/construction of a baling asphalt roads repairs; and, improve seepage monitoring for deck ($1,800,000). Dam Safety Interim Risk Reduction measures. Funds will be used for specific work activities including AK POD NHS DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK $875,000 $875,000 $875,000 dredging. Funds will be used for dredging environmental coordination AK POD NHS ELFIN COVE, AK $0 $0 $75,000 $75,000 5 and plans and specifications. Funds will be used for specific work activities including AK POD NHD HOMER HARBOR, AK $615,000 $615,000 $615,000 dredging. Funds are being used to inspect Federally constructed and locally maintained flood risk management projects with an emphasis on approximately 11,750 of Federally authorized AK POD FDRR INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK 3/ $200,000 $200,000 and locally maintained levee systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Frontispiece the 1864 Field Party of the California Geological Survey
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC ROAD GUIDE TO KINGS CANYON AND SEQUOIA NATIONAL PARKS, CENTRAL SIERRA NEVADA, CALIFORNIA By James G. Moore, Warren J. Nokleberg, and Thomas W. Sisson* Open-File Report 94-650 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. * Menlo Park, CA 94025 Frontispiece The 1864 field party of the California Geological Survey. From left to right: James T. Gardiner, Richard D. Cotter, William H. Brewer, and Clarence King. INTRODUCTION This field trip guide includes road logs for the three principal roadways on the west slope of the Sierra Nevada that are adjacent to, or pass through, parts of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks (Figs. 1,2, 3). The roads include State Route 180 from Fresno to Cedar Grove in Kings Canyon Park (the Kings Canyon Highway), State Route 198 from Visalia to Sequoia Park ending near Grant Grove (the Generals Highway) and the Mineral King road (county route 375) from State Route 198 near Three Rivers to Mineral King. These roads provide a good overview of this part of the Sierra Nevada which lies in the middle of a 250 km span over which no roads completely cross the range. The Kings Canyon highway penetrates about three-quarters of the distance across the range and the State Route 198~Mineral King road traverses about one-half the distance (Figs.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequoia & Kings Canyon-Volume 1
    Draft National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior General Management Plan and Sequoia and Kings Canyon Comprehensive River Management Plan / National Parks Middle and South Forks of the Environmental Impact Statement Kings River and North Fork of the Kern River Tulare and Fresno Counties California Volume 1: Purpose of and Need for Action / The Alternatives / Index Page intentionally left blank SEQUOIA AND KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARKS and MIDDLE AND SOUTH FORKS OF THE KINGS RIVER AND NORTH FORK OF THE KERN RIVER Tulare and Fresno Counties • California DRAFT GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE RIVER MANAGEMENT PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Volume 1: Purpose of and Need for Action / The Alternatives / Index This document presents five alternatives that are being considered for the management and use of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks over the next 15–20 years. The purpose of the Draft General Management Plan is to establish a vision for what Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks should be, including desired future conditions for natural and cultural resources, as well as for visitor experiences. The no-action alternative would continue current management direction, and it is the baseline for comparing the other alternatives (it was originally alternative B when the alternatives were first presented to the public in the winter of 2000). The preferred alternative is the National Park Service’s proposed action, and it would accommodate sustainable growth and visitor enjoyment, protect ecosystem diversity, and preserve basic character while adapting to changing user groups. Alternative A would emphasize natural ecosystems and biodiversity, with reduced use and development; alternative C would preserve the parks’ traditional character and retain the feel of yesteryear, with guided growth; and alternative D would preserve the basic character and adapt to changing user groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Land Records Finding
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior FINDING AID PRIVATE LAND RECORDS 1903-1953 (bulk dates: 1914-1941) Prepared by Beth McDonald National Park Service Catalog Number: SEKI 22572 SEKI 22572 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Copyright and Restrictions …………………………………………………………..…ii History ………………………………………………………………………………….1 Scope and Content ……………………………………………………………………...2 File Unit Descriptions …………………………………………………………………..4 SEKI 22572 ii COPYRIGHT AND RESTRICTIONS The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials. The various state privacy acts govern the use of materials that document private individuals, groups, and corporations. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a reproduction if the document does not infringe the privacy rights of an individual, group, or corporation. These specified conditions of authorized use include: • non-commercial and non-profit study, scholarship, or research, or teaching • criticism, commentary, or news reporting • as a NPS preservation or security copy • as a research copy for deposit in another institution If a user later uses a copy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," the user may be personally liable for copyright, privacy, or publicity infringement. This institution's permission to obtain a photographic, xerographic, digital, or other copy of a document doesn't indicate permission to publish, exhibit, perform, reproduce, sell,
    [Show full text]
  • Stock Users Guide to the Wilderness of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks a Tool for Planning Stock-Supported Wilderness Trips
    Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior National Parks Stock Users Guide to the Wilderness of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks A tool for planning stock-supported wilderness trips SEQUOIA & KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARKS Wilderness Office 47050 Generals Highway Three Rivers, California 93271 559-565-3766 [email protected] www.nps.gov/seki/planyourvisit/wilderness.htm Revised May 6th, 2021 EAST CREEK .............................................................................. 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS SPHINX CREEK .......................................................................... 19 INTRO TO GUIDE ........................................................................ 2 ROARING RIVER ....................................................................... 19 LAYOUT OF THE GUIDE............................................................. 3 CLOUD CANYON ....................................................................... 20 STOCK USE & GRAZING RESTRICTIONS: DEADMAN CANYON ................................................................ 20 KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARK .................................... 4 SUGARLOAF AND FERGUSON CREEKS ................................. 21 SEQUOIA NATIONAL PARK ................................................ 6 CLOVER AND SILLIMAN CREEKS .......................................... 23 MINIMUM IMPACT STOCK USE ................................................ 8 LONE PINE CREEK .................................................................... 23 MINIMUM
    [Show full text]