DOCSLIB.ORG

4 Hoopa-Yurok Indian Reservation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
4 Hoopa-Yurok Indian Reservation 4 I HOOPA-YUROK INDIAN RESERVATIONS. HRG. 100—949 HEARING BEFORE THE SELECT COM~MITTEEON INDIAN AFFAIRS uNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDREDTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION TO PARTITION CERTAIN RESERVATION LANDS BETWEEN THE HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE AND THE YUROK INDIANS, TO CLARIFY THE USE OF TRIBAL TIMBER PROCEEDS SEPTEMBER 14, 1988~ WASHINGTON, DC S U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1989 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 SELECT COMMI~~EEON INDIAN AFFAIRS DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman DANIEL J. EVANS, Washington, Vice Chairman JOHN MELCHER, Montana FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, Alaska DENNIS DECONCINI, Arizona JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona QUENTIN N. BURDICK, North Dakota THOMAS A. DASCHLE, South Dakota AI~NR. PARKER, Staff Director PATRICIA M. Zzu~,Chief Counsel JOE MENTOR, Jr., Minority Counsel (II) rn CONTENTS Page S. 2723, text of 3 Statements: I - Abbott, Charles, Yurok Indian 54 Bosco, Hon. Douglas H., U.S. Congressman from California 29 Colegrove, Wilfred K., chairman, Hoopa Valley Tribal Business Council .... 60 Haberman, Dorothy, Kiamath River Yurok Indian, Hoopa Valley Reser- vation 40 Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, chairman, Select Committee on Indian Affairs I James, Jimmie 58 Jones, Sam, Hoopa Valley Reservation 43 Lyall, Roanne, Klamath River Yurok Indian, Hoopa Valley Reservation.... 37 McCoy, Robert, Yurok Indian 53 Parker, Rodney R., Deputy Associate Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice 31 Risling, Dale, council member, Hoopa Valley Tribal Business Council 64 Short, Jessie, Yurok Indian 46 Sundberg, Lisa, Yurok Indian 47 Supahan, Terry, business manager, Karuk Tribe, California 69 Swimmer, Ross, Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior 33 Theiroif, Richard, attorney for the Puzz plaintiffs 72 APPENDIX Prepared statements: Abbott, Charles 141 Bosco, Hon. Douglas H., U.S. Congressman from California 78 Colegrove, Wilfred K 143 Cranston, Hon. Alan, U.S. Senator from California 75 Haberman, Dorothy (with attachments) 109 Jones, Sam 121 Lyall, Roanne (with attachments) 99 McCoy, Robert 139 Parker, Rodney R 82 Risling, Dale 150 Short, Jessie 127 Sundberg, Lisa 129 Supahan, Terry (with attachments) 155 Swimmer, Ross (with attachments) 87 Additional material submitted for the record: Harjo, Suzan, executive director, National Congress of American Indians, letter with resolution dated September 12, 1988 125 Prepared statements of various Hoopa tribal members with resolution 190 (III) HOOPA-YUROK INDIAN RESERVATION j WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 U.S. SENATE, SELECT COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:12 a.m., in room 485, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye (chair- man of the committee) presiding. Present: Senator Inouye. STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII, CHAIRMAN, SELECT COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS The CHAIRMAN. The committee will please come to order. I am pleased to announce that we will now conduct a hearing on S. 2723, a bill introduced by my esteemed colleague, the senior Sen- ator from California, Senator Alan Cranston, to partition certain reservation lands between the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Yurok Tribes and to clarify the use of tribal timber proceeds. This measure which is now before us is the result of a claim brought in 1963 against the United States by a number of non- members of the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe who claimed entitle- ment to a share of the proceeds of timber sales on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. The case is known as Jessie Short v. United States in the U.S. Court of Claims. It was 9 years before a decision was reached in this original case. In that decision, the court concluded that the Hoopa Square and the Hoopa or Kiamath Extension constituted one reservation and that the reservation was established for the benefit o~all Indians settled on the reservation. • The decision overturned a legal decision of the solicitor of the Department of the Interior and conflicted with an administrative practice of long standing regarding the governance of the reserva- tion, particularly as it related to the recognition of the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe as the governing body on the Hoopa Square. The Short case generated at least three companion cases, and liti- gation continues to this day in the Short and related cases. S. 2723 proposed to resolve the continuing conflict that embroils the Hoopa Valley Reservation by partitioning the one reservation into two reservations, the Square being set aside for the use and benefit of the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe and the Extension being set aside for the use and benefit of an organized Yurok Indian Tribe. Escrow funds which have accumulated from the sale of timber on the Hoopa Square and which now total about $65 million (1) 2 will be used to establish a settlement fund to compensate individ- ual claimants. Some claimants will be eligible to become members of the Hoopa I Valley Indian tribe. Those who elect to become members of the newly organized Yurok Tribe will receive compensation at the rate of $3,000 per person. Finally, if a claimant does not wish to become a member of the organized Yurok Tribe, he or she may elect to receive a cash pay- ment of $20,000 and shall no longer have any interest in either the Hoopa or the Yurok reservation or the tribe. There are two principal issues raised in this legislation. Number j one, does the legislation constitute a Fifth Amendment taking of -- property rights? The answer to this question appears to rest on whether individual Indians have a vested property right in tribal -~ assets before they are individualized or whether the waivers and releases of claims provided for in this legislation are satisfactory. The second principal issue is whether this legislation is fair and comports with the history of this area. So, the purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on both of these issues as well as other issues presente4 by the bill. [Text of S. 2723 follow:] 4 ‘k I A 3 II 100TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. 2723 To partition certain reservation lands between the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Yurok Indians, to clarify the use of tribal timber proceeds, and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE TJNITED STATES AUGUST 10, 1988 - Mr. CRANSTON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Select Committee on Indian Affairs A BILL To partition certain reservation lands between the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Yurok Indians, to clarify the use of tribal timber proceeds, and for other purposes. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- It 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND DEFINITIONS. (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ~ “Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act”. 6 (b) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of. this Act, the 7 term— 8 (1) “Escrow funds” means the moneys derived 9 from the joint reservation which are held in trust by 10 the Secretary in the accounts entitled— 4 2 1 (A) “Proceeds of Labor-Hoopa Valley mdi- 2 ans-California 70 percent Fund, account number 3 352—561—7197”; j - 4 (B) “Proceeds of Labor-Hoopa Valley mdi- -1 5 ans-California 30 percent Fund, account number 1 6 352—561—7236”; 1 7 (0) “Proceeds of Kiamath River Reserva- 8 tion, California, account number 352—562—7056”; 1 9 (D) “Proceeds of Labor-Yurok Indians of -~ 10 Lower Kiamath River, (Jaliforma, account number -~ 11 J52—562—7153”; 12 (E) “Proceeds of Labor-Yurok Indians of 4 13 Upper Klamath River, California, account number 1 14 J52—562—7 154”; 1 15 (F) “Proceeds of Labor-Hoopa Reservation 1 16 for Hoopa Valley and Yurok Tribes, account J 17 number J52—575—7256”; and 18 (G) “Kiamath River Fisheries, account 1 19 number 5628000001”; 20 (2) “Hoopa Indian blood” means that degree of 21 ancestry derived from an Indian of the Hunstang, 22 Hupa, Miskut, Redwood, Saiaz, Sermalton, Tish-Tang- 23 Atari, South Fork, or Grouse Creek Bands of Indians; 24 (3) “Hoopa Valley Reservation” means the reser- 25 vation described in section 2(b) of this Act; •S 2723 IS 5 3 1 (4) “Hoopa Valley Tribe” means the Hoopa 2 Valley. Tribe, organized under the - constitution and 3 amendments approved by the Secretary on Novem- 4 ber 20, 1933, September 4, 1952, August 9, 1963, 5 and August 18, 1972; 6 (5) “Indian of. the Reservation” shall mean any 7 person who meets the criteria to qualify as an Indian 8 - of the Reservation as established by the United States 9 Court of Claims in its March 31, 1982, May 17, 1987, 10 and March 1, 1988, decisions in the case of Jesse 11 Short et al. v. United States, (Cl. Ct. No. 102—63); 12 (6) “Joint reservation” means the area of land de- 13 fined as the Hoopa Valley Reservation in section 2(b) 14 and the Yurok Reservation in section 2(c) of this Act. 15 (7) “Karuk Tribe” means the Karuk Tribe of 16 California, organized under its constitution after -a spe- 17 cial election conducted by the United States Depart- 18 ment of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, on 19 April 18, 1985; 20 (8) “Secretary” means the Secretary of the 21 Interior; 22 (9) “Settlement Fund” means the Hoopa-Yurok 23 Settlement Fund established pursuant to section 4; iS 2728 IS 6 4 1 (10) “Settlement Roll” means the final roll pre- 2 pared and published in the Federal Register by the 3 Secretary pursuant to section 5; 4 (11) “Short cases” means the cases entitled Jesse 5 Short et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix A: Project Partners
    Humboldt County Coastal Trail Implementation Strategy Technical Appendix JANUARY 2011 Prepared for: State of California Coastal Conservancy Project team: Natural Resources Services Division of Redwood Community Action Agency Alta Planning + Design Planwest Partners Streamline Planning Consultants Humboldt County Coastal Trail Implementation Strategy TECHNICAL APPENDICES Thank you to the community members and agency staff who provided input during public meetings and advisory team workshops throughout the planning process. Your participation and contributions are key to this and future efforts to bring the CCT to fruition. Peter Jarausch Project Manager State of California Coastal Conservancy [email protected] This plan was made possible through Proposition 40 funding Photo credits: Kids on bicycles, N. Wynne; Trail horses, U. Driscoll; Eureka boardwalk, J. Kalt All other photos by project team Appendix A: Project Partners Primary Partners ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Federal Agencies .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) ....................................................................................................................... 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing Tribal Cultural Landscapes, Volume II: Tribal Case
    OCS Study BOEM 2017-001 Characterizing Tribal Cultural Landscapes Volume II: Tribal Case Studies US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Pacific OCS Region This page intentionally left blank. OCS Study BOEM 2017-001 Characterizing Tribal Cultural Landscapes Volume II: Tribal Case Studies David Ball Rosie Clayburn Roberta Cordero Briece Edwards Valerie Grussing Janine Ledford Robert McConnell Rebekah Monette Robert Steelquist Eirik Thorsgard Jon Townsend Prepared under BOEM-NOAA Interagency Agreement M12PG00035 by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 1305 East-West Highway, SSMC4 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Makah Tribe Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon Yurok Tribe National Marine Sanctuary Foundation US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of National Marine Sanctuaries US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Pacific OCS Region December 31, 2017 This page intentionally left blank. DISCLAIMER This study was funded, in part, by the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Pacific Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Region, Camarillo, CA, through Interagency Agreement Number M12PG00035 with the US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM and it has been approved for publication. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the US Government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. REPORT AVAILABILITY This report can be downloaded from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s Recently Completed Environmental Studies – Pacific webpage at https://www.boem.gov/Pacific-Completed-Studies/.
    [Show full text]
  • March 23-26, 2011 in San Luis Obispo
    29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference Holding the Line on Species Decline March 23-26, 2011 in San Luis Obispo 2011 Conference Co-sponsors Alnus Ecological, Balance Hydrologics, Inc., California Department of Fish and Game, California Department of Water Resources, Cachuma Conservation Release Board, Cal Trout – North Coast, California Conservation Corps, CalTrans, Cardno Entrix, Casitas Municipal Water District, cbec, inc., Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, City of San Luis Obispo, City of Santa Barbara – Creeks Project, CONTECH, Fred Euphrat, McBain and Trush, Michael Love and Associates, Morro Bay National Estuary Program, NOAA Fisheries, Northern California Council of Federation of Fly-Fishers, Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, Pacifi c Coast Fish, Wildlife and Wetlands Restoration Association, Pacifi c States Marine Fisheries Commission, Pacifi c Watershed Associates, Pacifi c Gas & Electric Company, Philip Williams and Associates, Inc., Prunuske Chatham, Inc., Restoration Design Group, San Lorenzo Valley Water District, Solano County Water Agency, Sonoma County Water Agency, Stillwater Sciences, The Bay Institute, The Nature Conservancy, Trees Foundation, Trout Unlimited, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – CA/NV Fisheries, Winzler and Kelly Restoring Salmonids—Holding the Line on Species Decline SRF is pleased to be returning to San Luis Obispo for the 29th annual Salmonid Restoration Conference. Since last holding the conference in SLO in 2003, we’ve been to Davis, Fortuna, Santa Barbara, Santa Rosa, Lodi, Santa Cruz, and Redding. At each location, we focus on the issues in the local watersheds while including topics of wide ranging interest among the fi sheries restoration community. Each locale gives us an opportunity to consider a theme appropriate for the state of salmon fi sheries and the location of the conference.
    [Show full text]
  • County Profile
    FY 2020-21 PROPOSED BUDGET SECTION B:PROFILE GOVERNANCE Assessor County Counsel Auditor-Controller Human Resources Board of Supervisors Measure Z Clerk-Recorder Other Funds County Admin. Office Treasurer-Tax Collector Population County Comparison Education Infrastructure Employment DEMOGRAPHICS Geography Located on the far North Coast of California, 200 miles north of San Francisco and about 50 miles south of the southern Oregon border, Humboldt County is situated along the Pacific coast in Northern California’s rugged Coastal (Mountain) Ranges, bordered on the north SCENERY by Del Norte County, on the east by Siskiyou and Trinity counties, on the south by Mendocino County and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. The climate is ideal for growth The county encompasses 2.3 million acres, 80 percent of which is of the world’s tallest tree - the forestlands, protected redwoods and recreational areas. A densely coastal redwood. Though these forested, mountainous, rural county with about 110 miles of coastline, trees are found from southern more than any other county in the state, Humboldt contains over forty Oregon to the Big Sur area of percent of all remaining old growth Coast Redwood forests, the vast California, Humboldt County majority of which is protected or strictly conserved within dozens of contains the most impressive national, state, and local forests and parks, totaling approximately collection of Sequoia 680,000 acres (over 1,000 square miles). Humboldt’s highest point is sempervirens. The county is Salmon Mountain at 6,962 feet. Its lowest point is located in Samoa at home to Redwood National 20 feet. Humboldt Bay, California’s second largest natural bay, is the and State Parks, Humboldt only deep water port between San Francisco and Coos Bay, Oregon, Redwoods State Park (The and is located on the coast at the midpoint of the county.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.D.A. Forest Service
    KRIS edition Lower-Middle Klamath Watershed Analysis United States Department of Agriculture Six Rivers National Forest Forest Service Orleans Ranger District Pacific Version 1.0 Southwest Region R5-MB-011 March 2003 Early Forest Service fire patrol plane. The first plane to land in Orleans, California circa 1920. This page intentionally left blank. Lower-Middle Klamath Watershed Analysis Version 1.0 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Six Rivers National Forest Orleans Ranger District Located within Humboldt County, Klamath Province, CA March 2003 Cover Photo: This photo was taken during a 4th of July celebration in the town of Orleans at the heart of the Lower-Middle Klamath Analysis area. In showing a group of Karuk elders and other townspeople posed in front of what was then the most modern piece of fire fighting equipment, it depicts several features related to the historical or reference condition of the Lower-Middle Klamath area. Within the photo are individuals who likely knew the time before Europeans arrived in Orleans and who witnessed the start of the modern fire suppression era. For Additional Information Contact: Six Rivers National Forest 1330 Bayshore Way Eureka, CA 95501 707-442-1721 Text (TTY) 707-442-1721 Voice http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sixrivers The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, 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).
    [Show full text]
  • Yurok and the Klamath River
    Yurok and the Klamath River: Yurok Historical Context and Data for Assessing Current Conditions and the Effects of the proposed Klamath Restoration Project on Yurok Tribal Trust Assets and Yurok Resources of Cultural and Religious Significance Report Prepared for the Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs For Use in the Secretarial Determination Overview Report and NEPA/CEQA Analysis Under Grant # 81333AG053 from US Fish and Wildlife Service Prepared by: Dr. Kathleen Sloan Yurok Tribe Environmental Program February 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction: Purpose of Report 3 II. Yurok Tribe: Overview of Yurok History 7 III. Yurok Traditional Knowledge and the Klamath River 25 IV. Yurok Resources of Cultural and Religious Significance 43 V. Yurok Fishing Sites and Fishing Rights 47 VI. Yurok Beneficial Uses of the Klamath River and Tributaries 56 VII. Environmental Justice 70 VIII. Tribal Trust and Potentially Impacted Trust Assets 110 IX. Conclusions and Recommendations 120 X. References Cited 125 XI. Attachments 130 A. 1851 Treaty with the Poh-lik-lah B. 1973 USC 412 US 481 Mattz v. Arnett C. 1993 DOI Solicitors Opinion: Fishing Rights of the Yurok and Hoopa Valley Tribes D. 2006 DOI Cooperative Agreement: Cooperative Management of Tribal and Federal Lands and Resources in the Klamath River Basin in California 2 I. Introduction: Purpose of Report This report has been prepared under contract with the US Fish and Wildlife Service for the purpose of providing information to the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Secretary of the Interior, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and all federal agencies involved in the Secretarial Determination and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Policy Act (CEQA) currently underway for the purposes of evaluating the proposed action of removing four Klamath River dams and implementing provisions set forth in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA).
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Pedestrian Plan 2008
    HUMBOLDT COUNTY REGIONAL PEDESTRIAN PLAN PREPARED BY: Alta Planning + Design Redwood Community Action Agency SHN Consultant Engineers PREPARED FOR: Humboldt County Association of Governments June 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1. Project Setting..................................................................................................................................................1-1 1.2. Overview of the Study Area..........................................................................................................................1-1 1.3. Plan Contents ..................................................................................................................................................1-2 II. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN.............................................................................................................................2-1 2.1. Need for Pedestrian Facilities in Humboldt County.................................................................................2-1 2.2. Previous Pedestrian Plans..............................................................................................................................2-1 2.3. Goals and Objectives......................................................................................................................................2-1 III. STUDY PROCESS................................................................................................................................................3-1
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 100-580 102 Stat. 2924 Date Enacted: October 31, 1988
    http://sorrel.humboldt.edu/~nasp/hoopa.html Public Law 100-580 102 Stat. 2924 Date Enacted: October 31, 1988 SYNOPSIS: An Act, To partition certain reservation lands between the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Yurok Indians, to clarify the use of tribal timber proceeds, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Section 1. Short Title and Definitiions (a) Short Title--This Act may be cited as the "Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act". (b) Definitions--For the purposes of this Act, the term-- (1) "Escrow funds" means the moneys derived from the joint reservation which are held in trust by the Secretary in the accounts entitled-- (A) "Proceeds of Labor- Hoopa Valley Indians-California 70 percent Fund, account number J52-561-7197"; (B) "Proceeds of Labor-Hoopa Valley Indians-California 30 percent Fund, account number J52-561-7236"; (C) "Proceeds of Klamath River Reservation, California, account number J52-562-7056"; (D) "Proceeds of Labor-Yurok Indians of Lower Klamath River, California, account number J52-562-7153"; (E) "Proceeds of Labor-Yurok Indians of Upper Klamath River, California, account number J52-562-7154"; (F) "Proceeds of Labor- Hoopa Reservation for Hoopa Valley and Yurok Tribes, account number J52-575-7256"; and (G) "Klamath River Fisheries, account number 5628000001"; (2) "Hoopa Indian blood" means that degree of ancestry derived from an Indian of the Hunstang, Hupa, Miskut, Redwood, Saiaz, Sermalton, Tish-Tang-Atan, South Fork, or Grouse Creek
    [Show full text]
  • Gold Mining INFORMATION: to Further Minimize Mercury Exposure on the Yurok Indian Recycle Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs (CFL Cal EPA Dept
    What you can do: WHERE TO GET MORE Historic Gold Mining INFORMATION: To further minimize mercury exposure on the Yurok Indian Recycle compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL Cal EPA Dept. of Toxics Substances Reservation or curly bulbs) Control If a CFL breaks: http://dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste/Mer Do not vacuum or sweep. cury/index.cfm Open a window and leave room for 15 minutes. Clean with damp paper towels & dispose of Got Mercury? bulb & towels in a sealed jar or sealed bag. Mercury Calculator Recycle CFL’s at Home Depot or at the Eureka www.gotmercury.org Transfer Station. If you find toxins in your home What is YTEP doing? contact: 1-800-CLEANUP (1-800-253-2687) YTEP is currently testing numerous aquatic species http://ccelearn.csus.edu/mercurylamp/c such as sturgeon, salmon, eels and many others on ontent/resources5.htm the Yurok Indian Reservation for numerous toxins or www.earth911.org including mercury and methyl mercury with fund- Some Information used: ing from YTEP’s EPA STAR grant. Results of this testing will be shared with the tribal membership WHAT TRIBAL MEMBERS NEED California Indian Environmental once the results are collected & finalized. TO KNOW TO PROTECT THEIR Alliance (CIEA) www.cieaweb.org HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT WHERE TO GET MORE University of Wisconsin Extensions INFORMATION: www.mercuryinschools.uwex.edu/curri Gold mining was once prevalent on the Yurok Tribe Environmental Program (YTEP) culum/hg_in_env.htm Yurok Indian Reservation. (as seen in the (707) 482-1822 photo above.) The picture above is www.yuroktribe.org/departments/ytep USGS Mercury Contamination from “Lord’s Hydraulic Mine” on Weitchpec Historical Gold Mining in California bar.
    [Show full text]
  • County Profile
    FY 2019-20 ADOPTED BUDGET SECTION B:PROFILE GOVERNANCE Assessor County Counsel Auditor-Controller Human Resources Board of Supervisors Measure Z Clerk-Recorder Other Funds County Admin. Office Treasurer-Tax Collector Demographics County Comparison Population Infrastructure Education Agriculture Employment DEMOGRAPHICS Geography Located on the far North Coast of California, 200 miles north of San Francisco and about 50 miles south of the southern Oregon border, Humboldt County is situated along the Pacific coast in Northern California’s rugged Coastal (Mountain) Ranges, bordered on the north by Del Norte County, on the east by Siskiyou and Trinity SCENERY counties, on the south by Mendocino County and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. The county encompasses 2.3 million acres, 80 percent The climate is ideal for growth of which is forestlands, protected redwoods and recreational areas. of the world’s tallest tree - the A densely forested, mountainous, rural county with about 110 miles coastal redwood. Though these of coastline, more than any other county in the state, Humboldt trees are found from southern contains over forty percent of all remaining old growth Coast Redwood Oregon to the Big Sur area of forests, the vast majority of which is protected or strictly conserved California, Humboldt County within dozens of national, state, and local forests and parks, totaling contains the most impressive approximately 680,000 acres (over 1,000 square miles). Humboldt’s collection of Sequoia highest point is Salmon Mountain at 6,962 feet. Its lowest point is sempervirens. The county is located in Samoa at 20 feet. Humboldt Bay, California’s second largest home to Redwood National natural bay, is the only deep water port between San Francisco and and State Parks, Humboldt Coos Bay, Oregon, and is located on the coast at the midpoint of the Redwoods State Park (The county.
    [Show full text]
  • M:\Fisheries\Fish Kill\Causative Factors 11
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Klamath River Fish Die-off September 2002 Causative Factors of Mortality Report Number AFWO-F-02-03 Executive Summary This report provides information describing the biological, hydrological, meteorological, and water quality conditions associated with the die-off of an estimated 34,056 fish in the Klamath River, California in September 2002. The proximate cause of death was heavy infections of two fish pathogens, Ich and columnaris. However, given that these ubiquitous pathogens are normally found in the Klamath River, additional factors must have played a role for them to have become lethal. It is our conclusion based on multiple lines of evidence that the fish die-off in the lower Klamath River in 2002 was a result of a combination of factors that began with an early peak in the return of a large run of fall Chinook salmon. Low river discharges apparently did not provide suitable attraction flows for migrating adult salmon, resulting in large numbers of fish congregating in the warm waters of the lower River. The high density of fish, low discharges, warm water temperatures, and possible extended residence time of salmon created optimal conditions for parasite proliferation and precipitated an epizootic of Ich and columnaris. Based on a review of available literature and historical records, this was the largest known pre-spawning adult salmonid die-off recorded for the Klamath River and possibly the Pacific coast. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1 METHODS .................................................................. 1 Literature Review ....................................................... 1 Fish Mortality Assessment ................................................. 1 Supplemental Field Observations ........................................... 2 Fish Pathology.........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mental Health Branch Cultural Competence Plan June 2011
    Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services Mental Health Branch Mental Health Branch Cultural Competence Plan June 2011 California Department of Mental Health Cultural Competence Plan Requirements CCPR Modification COVER SHEET An original, three copies, and a compact disc of this report (saved in PDF [preferred] or Microsoft Word 1997-2003 format) due March 15, 2011, to: Department of Mental Health Office of Multicultural Services 1600 9th Street, Room 153 Sacramento, California 95814 Name of County: Humboldt Name of County Mental Health Director: Karolyn Rim Stein, RN Name of Contact: Jaclyn Culleton Contact’s Title: Ethnic Services Manager/Program Manager Contact’s Unit/Division: Mental Health Branch Contact’s Telephone: 707 268-2923 Contact’s Email: [email protected] CHECKLIST OF THE CULTURAL COMPETENCE PLAN REQUIREMENTS MODIFICATION (2010) CRITERIA X CRITERION 1: COMMITMENT TO CULTURAL COMPETENCE X CRITERION 2: UPDATED ASSESSMENT OF SERVICE NEEDS CRITERION 3: STRATEGIES AND EFFORTS FOR REDUCING RACIAL, ETHNIC, CULTURAL, AND LINGUISTIC MENTAL HEALTH DISPARITIES CRITERION 4: CLIENT/FAMILY MEMBER/COMMUNITY COMMITTEE: INTEGRATION OF THE COMMMITTEE WITHIN THE COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM X CRITERION 5: CULTURALLY COMPETENT TRAINING ACTIVITIES CRITERION 6: COUNTY’S COMMITMENT TO GROWING A MULTICULTURAL WORKFORCE: HIRING AND RETAINING CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY COMPETENT STAFF CRITERION 7: LANGUAGE CAPACITY CRITERION 8: ADAPTATION OF SERVICES Table of Contents Criterion 1: Commitment to Cultural Competence . 1 Criterion 2: Updated Assessment of Service Needs. 9 Criterion 3: Strategies and Efforts for Reducing Racial, Ethnic, Cultural and Linguistic Mental Health Disparities. 23 Criterion 4: Client/Family Member/Community Committee: Integration of the Committee within the County Mental Health System .
    [Show full text]