DOCSLIB.ORG

Historic Facilities BMP Retrofit Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Historic Facilities BMP Retrofit Environmental Assessment United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Historic Facilities BMP Retrofit Environmental Assessment Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, El Dorado County, California. May 2014 1940’s aerial photo of the Tallac Historic Site. For More Information Contact: Ashley Sommer Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit 35 College Dr. South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Phone: (530) 543-2600 Fax: (530) 543-2693 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) To File an Employment Complaint If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency's EEO Counselor (PDF) within 45 days of the date of the alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information can be found online at www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html. To File a Program Complaint If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at www.ascr.usda.gov/ complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632‐9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250‐9410, by fax (202) 690‐ 7442 or email at [email protected]. Persons with Disabilities Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877‐8339 or (800) 845‐6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabilities, who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact us by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720‐2600 (voice and TDD). Historic Facilties BMP Retrofit Project Environmental Assessment i Contents Chapter 1 - Introduction Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... iii 1.1 Document Structure ...................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Proposed Project Location ............................................................................................ 8 1.3 Background & Overview of the Existing Condition ................................................. 10 1.4 Desired Conditions ...................................................................................................... 15 1.5 Purpose and Need for Action ...................................................................................... 15 1.6 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................... 16 1.7 Decision Framework .................................................................................................... 16 1.8 Public Involvement ...................................................................................................... 16 1.9 Issues ............................................................................................................................. 17 1.10 Applicable Laws, Regulations, and Policies .............................................................. 19 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, including the Proposed Action 2.1 Alternative 1: No Action ................................................................................................ 22 2.2 Alternative 2: Proposed Action ..................................................................................... 22 Changes from the Original Proposed Action presented during public Scoping ............... 22 Proposed Action/Alternative 2 ......................................................................................... 23 2.3 Alternative 3 .................................................................................................................... 31 Issues Identified during Scoping that Alternative 3 responds to ...................................... 31 Alternative 3 ..................................................................................................................... 31 2.4 Alternative 4 .................................................................................................................... 34 Issues Identified during the Comment Period to which Alternative 4 responds .............. 34 2.5 Summary of Actions by Alternative ............................................................................. 37 2.6 Summary of Environmental Effects by Alternative .................................................... 39 2.7 Alternatives Considered, but not in further detail ...................................................... 40 Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 42 3.0.1 Organization of Chapter 3 ................................................................................................ 42 3.0.2 Projects Considered for Cumulative Effects .................................................................... 43 3.1 Recreation ....................................................................................................................... 46 3.1.1 Affected Environment ...................................................................................................... 46 3.1.2 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................................ 49 3.1.3 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ...................................................................................... 50 3.1.4 Alternative 3 ..................................................................................................................... 53 3.1.5 Alternative 4 ..................................................................................................................... 55 3.1.5 Analytical Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 56 3.2 Heritage Resources ......................................................................................................... 58 3.2.1 Introduction and Affected Environment ........................................................................... 58 3.2.2 Alternative 2 ..................................................................................................................... 59 3.2.3 Alternative 3 ..................................................................................................................... 62 3.2.4 Alternative 4 ..................................................................................................................... 63 3.2.5 Analytical Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 63 Historic Facilties BMP Retrofit Project Environmental Assessment ii 3.3 Circulation ...................................................................................................................... 66 3.3.1 Introduction and Affected Environment ........................................................................... 66 3.3.2 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................................ 72 3.3.3 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ...................................................................................... 72 3.3.4 Alternative 3 ..................................................................................................................... 76 3.3.5 Alternative 4 ..................................................................................................................... 78 3.3.6 Analytical Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 78 3.4 Botanical Resources ....................................................................................................... 80 3.4.1 Introduction and Analysis Methodology .......................................................................... 80 3.4.2 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................................ 84 3.4.3 Alternative 2 and 4 ........................................................................................................... 84 3.4.4 Alternative 3 ..................................................................................................................... 88 3.4.5 Other Botanical Resources ............................................................................................... 88 3.4.6 Analytical Conclusions ....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan
    Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan El Dorado and Placer Counties, California and Douglas and Washoe Counties, and Carson City, Nevada September 2007 Prepared by: Lake Tahoe Response Plan Area Committee (LTRPAC) Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan September 2007 If this is an Emergency… …Involving a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other contaminants impacting public health and/or the environment Most important – Protect yourself and others! Then: 1) Turn to the Immediate Action Guide (Yellow Tab) for initial steps taken in a hazardous material, petroleum product, or other contaminant emergency. First On-Scene (Fire, Law, EMS, Public, etc.) will notify local Dispatch (via 911 or radio) A complete list of Dispatch Centers can be found beginning on page R-2 of this plan Dispatch will make the following Mandatory Notifications California State Warning Center (OES) (800) 852-7550 or (916) 845-8911 Nevada Division of Emergency Management (775) 687-0300 or (775) 687-0400 National Response Center (800) 424-8802 Dispatch will also consider notifying the following Affected or Adjacent Agencies: County Environmental Health Local OES - County Emergency Management Truckee River Water Master (775) 742-9289 Local Drinking Water Agencies 2) After the Mandatory Notifications are made, use Notification (Red Tab) to implement the notification procedures described in the Immediate Action Guide. 3) Use the Lake Tahoe Basin Maps (Green Tab) to pinpoint the location and surrounding geography of the incident site. 4) Use the Lake and River Response Strategies (Blue Tab) to develop a mitigation plan. 5) Review the Supporting Documentation (White Tabs) for additional information needed during the response.
    [Show full text]
  • BOTANICAL FIELD RECONNAISSANCE REPORT Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit
    BOTANICAL FIELD RECONNAISSANCE REPORT Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit Project: Burke Creek Highway 50 Crossing and Realignment Project FACTS ID: Location: portions of SEC 22 and SEC 23 T13 N R18 E UTM: Survey Dates:5/13/, 6/25, 8/12/2015 Surveyor/s: Jacquelyn Picciani for Wood Rodgers Directions to Site: Access to the west portion of Burke Creek is gained by turning west on Kahle Drive, and parking in the defined parking lot. Access to the east portion of Burke Creek is gained by turning east on Kahle Drive and parking to the north in the adjacent commercial development parking area. USGS Quad Name: South Lake Tahoe Survey type: General and Intuitive Controlled Describe survey route taken: Survey area includes all road shoulders and right –of –way within the proposed project boundaries, a commercial development on east side of US Highway 50 just north of Kahle Drive, and portions of the Burke Creek/Rabe Meadows complex (Figure 1). Project description: The project area includes open space administered by Nevada Tahoe Conservation District and the USFS, and commercial development, with the majority of the project area sloping west to Lake Tahoe. The Nevada Tahoe Conservation District is partnering with USFS, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), Douglas County and the Nevada Division of State Lands to implement the Burke Creek Highway 50 Crossing and Realignment Project (Project). The project area spans from Jennings Pond in Rabe Meadow to the eastern boundary of the Sierra Colina Development in Lake Village. Burke Creek flows through five property ownerships in the project area including the USFS, private (Sierra Colina and 801 Apartments LLC), Douglas County and NDOT.
    [Show full text]
  • Fallen Leaf Lake Fishing Report
    Fallen Leaf Lake Fishing Report Thaddeus is inflexibly tinned after cislunar Jimmie craving his plashes motherless. Wry and spermophytic Nelsen still crimps his Waldheim hurryingly. Unextinguishable and calendric Gershom costuming some boa so centrically! Big and baits, peripheral vascular surgery for them up on our boat launch boat and small Desolation Wilderness. Are usually near Fallen Leaf area between Emerald Bay and Echo Lakes. Vertically fishing guide of both the many visitors, how to withstand an eye of commerce, and should know how many coves around fallen leaf lake fishing report covers water. From brown and rainbow to cutthroat and golden, here are the lakes Babbit recommends to get your trout on in the Sierra Nevada backcountry. Rollins Lake is located in Marinette County, Wisconsin. Plus Le Conte and Jabu according to US Forest Service reports Nevertheless fish still populate most of Desolation's lakes including rainbow. Hot spring: The parking around Fallen Leaf score is limited, so somehow there early. Largemouth bass can also be caught in most of the main lake coves as well as in the state park using spinnerbaits, crankbaits, and Senkos. Lake Toho Fishing Reports on well the Lake Toho for it trophy bass and record distance to Orlando, Florida. Basin once consisted of stable small natural lakes, called Medley Lakes. After losing other one, quiet took hold air we spun around atop the eastern flats back towards the poor Island. Adults are allowed to help children fish, but not allowed to fish themselves. The two body in Lake Tahoe does the freeze The stored heat in town Lake's massive amount off water compared to claim relative new area prevents the match from reaching freezing temperature under the prevailing climatic conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B: Wild and Scenic River Inventory and Evaluation
    Appendices for the FEIS Appendix B: Wild and Scenic River Inventory and Evaluation Introduction This FEIS and Land Management Plan were subject to the objection process under 36 CFR 219 Subpart B (2102). Because the project record documentation for the original inventory could not be located, the Objection Reviewing Official’s instructions included completing and documenting a comprehensive evaluation and systematic inventory of the potential for rivers in the unit to be eligible for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. This appendix fulfills that instruction. River Inventory The following inventory of rivers within the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU) was developed using the National Stream Inventory layer in the LTBMU Geographical Information System (GIS) database1. Each river in that layer was checked against the 7.5’ Quadrangle topographic map (USDA Forest Service Publication R5-RG-172, 2011) to confirm that all named rivers were included in this inventory. One additional river (Eagle Creek) was added to the inventory even though it was not named in either the National Stream Inventory layer or the quadrangle topographic map. Each River is described by its unique identifier in the GIS database GNIS number) and GIS mileage. Table B 1. LTBMU inventory of rivers National Non-National Stream Name GNIS Number Total Miles Forest Miles Forest Miles Angora Creek 26 2.38 1.46 3.84 Big Meadow Creek 21 4.21 0.01 4.23 Blackwood Creek 45 5.76 0.89 6.65 Bliss Creek 9 1.3 0.02 1.32 Burke Creek 22 2.71 0.76 3.48 Burton Creek 15 1.35 3.01 4.36 Cascade Creek 20 2.58 0.79 3.37 Cathedral Creek 4 0.96 0 0.96 Cold Creek 42 5.73 1.35 7.08 Dollar Creek 12 0.31 2.12 2.42 1 The Friends of the River website was also checked to ensure that any rivers identified by that group were included in the eligibility evaluation.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Tahoe Region Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan CALIFORNIA ‐ NEVADA
    Lake Tahoe Region Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan CALIFORNIA ‐ NEVADA DRAFT September 2009 Pending approval by the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force This Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan is part of a multi-stakeholder collaborative effort to minimize the deleterious effects of nuisance and invasive aquatic species in the Lake Tahoe Region. This specific product is authorized pursuant to Section 108 of Division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005, Public Law 108-447 and an interagency agreement between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Tahoe Conservancy. This product was prepared by: Suggested citation: USACE. 2009. Lake Tahoe Region Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan, California - Nevada. 84 pp + Appendices. Cover photo credits: Lake Tahoe shoreline, Toni Pennington (Tetra Tech, Inc.); curlyleaf pondweed, Steve Wells (PSU); Asian clams, Brant Allen (UCD); bullfrog (USGS), zebra mussels (USGS); bluegill and largemouth bass (USACE) ii i Table of Contents Acknowledgements................................................................................................................ iii Acronyms ............................................................................................................................... iv Glossary.................................................................................................................................. vi Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Development and Application of a Geospatial Database of Sierra Nevada Lakes and Reservoirs
    ABSTRACT DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF A GEOSPATIAL DATABASE OF SIERRA NEVADA LAKES AND RESERVOIRS by Molly Gail Mehling High-elevation, mountain regions, such as the Sierra Nevada, are characterized as extremely heterogeneous and ecologically fragile. The Sierra Nevada has been recognized for its high conservation value, but historical and predicted tourism and development threaten the ecological resources of the region. Assessment and monitoring of the Sierra Nevada’s aquatic resources and their catchments is crucial to their balanced management. Using a digital geospatial database, landscape-scale variables of morphometry, land cover and human activities were quantified for 20 assessment sites and their catchments in the most rapidly developing area of the ecoregion, the central Sierra Nevada. Landscape-scale variables revealed ecological and anthropogenic heterogeneity among the sites. These measurements were incorporated into a multi-level index of ecological integrity and were analyzed with multivariate statistical methods to objectively assess similarity among sites. It is expected that these metrics will be incorporated into a multi-level assessment protocol. DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF A GEOSPATIAL DATABASE OF SIERRA NEVADA LAKES AND RESERVOIRS A Practicum Report Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Environmental Science Institute of Environmental Sciences By Molly Gail Mehling Miami University Oxford, Ohio 2006 Advisor: ____________________ Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Rationales for Plant Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern
    Rationales for Plant Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern Sierra National Forest Prepared by: Botanists and Natural Resources Specialists Pacific Southwest Regional Office and Sierra National Forest For: Sierra National Forest June 2019 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft - Potential ORV Table
    Draft - Potential ORV Table Watercourse Name GNIS Number Hydrographic Category Miles Potential Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORV’s) Scale of Importance Free Flowing Recreation - Angora Lakes Resort is located on the shore of one of the Angora Lakes. Angora Creek flows from Angora Lakes. The Resort is Angora Creek 26 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 3.84 Less than Regional dependent on the setting of the lakes but does not depend on the setting of the creek which is downstream. Big Meadow Creek 21 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 4.23 Wildlife - habitat and species diversity - spotted owl PAC and HRCA, multiple goshawk PACs and HRCAs, known goshawk nesting, reports of Blackwood Creek 45 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 6.65 marten use, known FSS bat use, willow flycatcher emphasis habitat and Less than Regional known nests, muledeer habitat, aspen habitat known to be used by a variety of songbirds. Bliss Creek 9 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 1.32 Burke Creek 22 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 3.48 Burton Creek 15 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 4.36 Geo/Hydro - Large waterfall into lake created by geologic faulting and glaciation (Cascade Falls). Very high visitor use to these features - the falls Less than Regional are a popular destination accessed by relatively short hiking trail. Cascade Creek 20 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 3.37 Scenic - Area of falls is highly scenic because of the views of the landscape. Less than Regional Recreation - Waterfalls, unique geology and viewing Less than Regional Cathedral Creek 4 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 0.96 Wildlife - multiple goshawk PACs and nesting, FSS bat use of area, mule Cold Creek 42 Stream/River: Hydrographic Category = Perennial 7.08 Less than Regional deer habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Botanical Studies Open Educational Resources and Data 3-2020 A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California James P. Smith Jr Humboldt State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Smith, James P. Jr, "A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California" (2020). Botanical Studies. 42. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps/42 This Flora of California is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Educational Resources and Data at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Botanical Studies by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A LIST OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS ENDEMIC TO CALIFORNIA Compiled By James P. Smith, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Botany Department of Biological Sciences Humboldt State University Arcata, California 13 February 2020 CONTENTS Willis Jepson (1923-1925) recognized that the assemblage of plants that characterized our flora excludes the desert province of southwest California Introduction. 1 and extends beyond its political boundaries to include An Overview. 2 southwestern Oregon, a small portion of western Endemic Genera . 2 Nevada, and the northern portion of Baja California, Almost Endemic Genera . 3 Mexico. This expanded region became known as the California Floristic Province (CFP). Keep in mind that List of Endemic Plants . 4 not all plants endemic to California lie within the CFP Plants Endemic to a Single County or Island 24 and others that are endemic to the CFP are not County and Channel Island Abbreviations .
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Revised Land and Resource Management Plan
    United States Department of Agriculture Draft Revised Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Service Pacific Southwest Volume III – Region DEIS and Draft Plan Appendices R5-MB-241C June 2012 Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit Cover photo: Eagle Falls Trail located on National Forest System lands on Lake Tahoe’s southwest shore. The trailhead and parking lot kiosk, across US Highway 89 from the Emerald Bay overlook, offer information about hiking into Desolation Wilderness, looking westward toward Eagle Lake, a popular short, but steep, hike (less than half an hour). Credit – all photos, graphs and maps: U.S. Forest Service staff, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit may be duplicated for public use (not for profit) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (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 to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720- 6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
    [Show full text]
  • Angora Fire – Entrapment & Fire Shelter Deployment Accident Prevention Analysis Report
    Angora Fire – Entrapment & Fire Shelter Deployment Accident Prevention Analysis Report Pacific Southwest Region ­ Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit January 17, 2008 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5 Description of the Angora Fire 7 Narrative of the Accident 9 Lessons Learned by Peers 35 Equipment, Environmental, and Human Factors 39 Lessons Learned Analysis 40 Key Issues, Decisions, and Behaviors 41 Summary of All Recommendations (#1­10) 57 Evaluation of Lessons Learned.............................................................................59 Summary 62 Appendix A, Chronology of Events 63 Appendix B, Fire Behavior Summary 73 Appendix C, Briefing Paper: Accident Prevention Analysis 91 Appendix D, Personal Protective Equipment Report 92 Appendix E, Fire Shelter Tech Tip 95 Appendix F, APA Team Members 99 2 Executive Summary On June 26, 2007, two Forest Service firefighters assigned to the Angora Fire were entrapped by fire and forced into their fire shelters. Fortunately, they were uninjured. This report tells what happened and examines the social and organizational causes that led to this outcome. In conducting an investigation, the review team learned of another story—that of a near­ catastrophic tragedy for dozens of other firefighters who were within minutes of also being entrapped. Accidents and near­misses such as this are proof of the high risks of wildland firefighting as well as proof that our firefighting organization could better manage these risks. The review team consisted of two line officers under delegations from the Chief and Regional Forester, a peer subject matter expert (engine captain), local and national NFFE representation, and experts in Fire Safety, Information, Behavior, and Personal Protective Equipment.
    [Show full text]
  • Fallen Leaf Lake Trail Access and Travel Management Proposed Action
    United States Forest Lake Tahoe Basin Management 35 College Drive Department of Service Unit South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Agriculture (530) 543-2600 (530) 543-0956 TTY Proposed Action for Fallen Leaf Lake Trail Access and Travel Management Project US Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit El Dorado County, California Desired Condition The desired condition of the project area is a planned system of interconnected, environmentally sustainable trails to serve the entire spectrum of non-motorized recreational and commuting users. Measures to achieve this desired condition include reduced sediment loads, reduced and controlled stormwater runoff, and construction and/or adopting trail segments to provide trail connections to features and destinations. Implementing these retrofits will increase the quality, safety, and accessibility of the recreation experience for all visitors to the Fallen Leaf Lake trail system and help protect the natural, cultural, and historic resources of the area. Background/Existing Conditions The project area is currently one of the largest recreational usage areas in the Lake Tahoe Basin. It contains one Class I multiuse paved trail (Pope Baldwin Bike Path National Recreation Trail) and numerous authorized and unauthorized native surface trails of varying levels of challenge, maintenance, and environmental sustainability. The existing trail system is a collection of a few planned trails, previously existing roads, and user- created trails. Wildlife, hydrology, and botanical concerns
    [Show full text]