DOCSLIB.ORG

DRAFT GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lassen Volcanic National Park August, 2000

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DRAFT GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lassen Volcanic National Park August, 2000 DRAFT GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lassen Volcanic National Park August, 2000 This document presents a proposed plan and three alternatives for the management and use of Lassen Volcanic National Park over the next 15 years. Alternative A: No Action, assumes that physical facilities would remain largely unchanged and that staffing and operational funding would remain constant over the planning period. Alternative B: Resource Preservation & Basic Visitor Service, provides a program for preserving, and where necessary, restoring significant park resources. It includes significant staffing and funding increases for the park’s resource management functions, restores key elements of the park’s infrastructure, provides for restoration of several specific sites with natural system conflicts, establishes a standards-based management zoning system, and proposes designation of approximately 25,000 acres as part of the National Wilderness System. The plan also includes program increases and visitor facility improvements to provide for quality basic visitor service. Alternative C: Resource Protection and Enhanced Visitor Experience. This alternative is the proposed General Management Plan for Lassen Volcanic National Park. It includes all the features of Alternative B, and provides enhancement to visitor experience by making more facilities available during winter months, and increasing interpretive services, facilities, and information. Alternative D: Resource Protection and Expanded Visitor Opportunities, includes all of the features of Alternative C and in addition, provides for expansion of family and group campgrounds at several locations. It also expands winter access at the north entrance by plowing the park road an additional nine miles to the Devastated Area, and keeping one loop of the campground open for winter camping. Significant adverse environmental impacts would be expected to result from Alternative A as a number of environmental resources are undergoing deterioration under current conditions. All of the action alternatives include programs to arrest the deterioration of resources. The period of availability for this document will end 60 days after the Environmental Protection Agency has published a notice of its availability in the Federal Register. Any comments on the document should be addressed to the Superintendent, Lassen Volcanic National Park, P.O. Box 100, Mineral, California 96063-0100. i TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................................ 1 PURPOSE OF THE GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN .............................................................................................. 1 NEED FOR THE GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................................................................................. 2 AN OVERVIEW OF LASSEN VOLCANIC NATIONAL PARK .................................................................................... 5 ALTERNATIVE PLANS ................................................................................................................................ 15 MANAGEMENT ZONES AND PRESCRIPTIONS .................................................................................................... 15 ALTERNATIVE A: NO ACTION ........................................................................................................................ 21 ALTERNATIVE B: RESOURCE PRESERVATION AND BASIC VISITOR SERVICE.................................................... 27 ALTERNATIVE C: RESOURCE PROTECTION AND ENHANCED VISITOR EXPERIENCE........................................... 38 ALTERNATIVE D: RESOURCE PROTECTION AND EXPANDED VISITOR OPPORTUNITIES...................................... 45 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED .................................................................................................. 51 THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT.............................................................................................................. 57 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE.......................................................................................................................... 57 WATER RESOURCES....................................................................................................................................... 58 GEOLOGIC AND SOIL RESOURCES................................................................................................................... 59 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................................................ 61 CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................. 61 VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE ...................................................................................................................... 63 CONCESSION FACILITIES ................................................................................................................................ 69 LOCAL ECONOMY.......................................................................................................................................... 69 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSAL AND ALTERNATIVES.......................... 71 METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYZING CONSEQUENCES.......................................................................................... 71 FUTURE COMPLIANCE AT IMPLEMENTATION STAGE........................................................................................ 71 ALTERNATIVE A: NO ACTION ........................................................................................................................ 73 ALTERNATIVE B: RESOURCE PRESERVATION AND BASIC VISITOR SERVICE ..................................................... 79 ALTERNATIVE C: RESOURCE PROTECTION AND ENHANCED VISITOR SERVICE................................................ 84 ALTERNATIVE D: RESOURCE PROTECTION AND ENHANCED VISITOR EXPERIENCE........................................... 87 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION.................................................................................................. 89 SCOPING........................................................................................................................................................ 89 REVIEW OF DRAFT GMP/EIS......................................................................................................................... 89 PLANNING TEAM AND CONSULTANTS............................................................................................................. 90 APPENDIX: PROCLAMATION AND LEGISLATION............................................................................... 90 PROCLAMATION ............................................................................................................................................ 91 LEGISLATION................................................................................................................................................. 95 INDEX ........................................................................................................................................................... 101 iii MAPS MAP 1. REGIONAL MAP ....................................................................................................................................... 7 MAP 2. PHYSICAL FEATURES................................................................................................................................ 8 MAP 3. BUTTE LAKE UNIT ................................................................................................................................... 9 MAP 4. JUNIPER LAKE UNIT ................................................................................................................................10 MAP 5. MANZANITA LAKE UNIT .........................................................................................................................11 MAP 6. WARNER VALLEY UNIT...........................................................................................................................12 MAP 7. HEADQUARTERS UNIT.............................................................................................................................13 MAP 8: AREAS CONSIDERED FOR WILDERNESS EXPANSION..................................................................................28 MAP 9. SUMMER ZONING—ALTERNATIVES B, C, AND D .....................................................................................35 MAP 10. WINTER ZONING—ALTERNATIVE B.......................................................................................................36 MAP 11. RESTORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS—ALTERNATIVE B............................................................37 MAP 12. WINTER ZONING—ALTERNATIVE C.......................................................................................................43 MAP 13. RESTORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS—ALTERNATIVE C............................................................44 MAP 14: WINTER ZONING—ALTERNATIVE D ......................................................................................................49 MAP 15: RESTORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS—ALTERNATIVE D ...........................................................50 FIGURES FIGURE 1. ANNUAL VISITATION 1980-1999 .........................................................................................................64
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lassen Volcanic National Park Visitor Study
    U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Social Science Program Visitor Services Project Lassen Volcanic National Park Visitor Study [Insert image here] OMB Control Number:1024-0224 Current Expiration Date: 8/31/2014 2 Lassen Volcanic National Park Visitor Study United States Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Lassen Volcanic National Park P.O. Box 100 Mineral, CA 96063 IN REPLY REFER TO: January/June 2012 Dear Visitor: Thank you for participating in this study. Our goal is to learn about the expectations, opinions, and interests of visitors to Lassen Volcanic National Park. This information will assist us in our efforts to better manage this park and to serve you. This questionnaire is only being given to a select number of visitors, so your participation is very important! It should only take about 20 minutes to complete. Please complete this questionnaire. Seal it in and return it to us in the postage paid envelope provided. If you have any questions, please contact Margaret Littlejohn, NPS VSP Director, Park Studies Unit, College of Natural Resources, P.O. Box 441139, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83844-1139, phone: 208-885-7863, email: [email protected]. We appreciate your help. Sincerely, Darlene M. Koontz Superintendent Lassen Volcanic National Park Visitor Study 3 DIRECTIONS At the end of your visit: 1. Please have the selected individual (at least 16 years old) complete this questionnaire. 2. Answer the questions carefully since each question is different. 3. For questions that use circles (O), please mark your answer by filling in the circle with black or blue ink.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Desert Calendar Has Been Connecting People Throughout Oregon and Beyond to Our Incredible Wild Desert for Nearly 15 Years
    2018 WILD DESERT OregonCALENDAR Natural Desert Association OREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION: WE KEEP OREGON’S DESERT WILD From petroglyphs to panoramic vistas, Oregon’s high desert offers much to love. ONDA’s thousands of hard-working volunteers, dedicated donors and passionate advocates know the desert well and love this remarkable region deeply. Our vibrant community is dedicated to ensuring that Oregon’s high desert treasures are protected for future generations to know and love just as we do today. An all-volunteer effort, the Wild Desert Calendar has been connecting people throughout Oregon and beyond to our incredible wild desert for nearly 15 years. We invite you to visit the places you see in these pages. Then join us in taking action to conserve Oregon’s stunning rivers, wild lands and wildlife. Visit www.ONDA.org/getinvolved. row 1 (l–r): A hiker gazes into the depths of the Owyhee Canyonlands, photo: Adam McKibben; ONDA volunteers get goofy after a work trip on Bridge Creek, John Day River Basin, photo: Nathan Wallace; ONDA volunteers count Greater sage-grouse on a particularly snowy spring morning, Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge, photo: David Beltz. row 2 (l–r) The weather breaks and a rainbow emerges in the uplands of the Owyhee Canyonlands region, photo: Adam McKibben; Fun for the whole family! 2017 Annual General Meeting, John Day River Basin, photo: Allison Crotty; An ONDA volunteer serves up a good meal after a long day working to restore Oregon’s high desert, John Day River Basin, photo: Sage Brown. row 3 (l–r): An ONDA volunteer retrofits protective caging to give this cottonwood room to grow, John Day River Basin, photo: Greg Burke; Paddlers explore the wild Owyhee River, photo: Levi VanMeter; An ONDA volunteer protects a willow planting from browsers like deer, John Day River Basin, photo: Nathan Wallace.
    [Show full text]
  • GRIM Commission Burno
    GRIMcommission BuRno Vol. V PORTLAND, OREGON, SEPTEMBER, 1950 No. 9 Western Game Conference qcotteir a/riateitRetatida Well Attended The thirtieth annual conference of the By FREDERICK A. WILLIAMS, Graduate Student, Oregon State College Western Association of State Game and Fish Hunter-farmer relationship problems are demanding attention from sportsmen's Commissioners held in Portland August 14, clubs and State Game Commissions throughout the nation. Modern methods of 15 and 16, had a high attendance of represent- farming, the increasing interest in hunting, and demands from a recreation minded atives from state fish and game departments public are creating problems heretofore receiving little attention from farmers, as well as other interested groups. The official sportsmen, and wildlife administrators. registration list totalled approximately 300. One need only drive through a few miles of impatient with the abuses heaped upon him- C. A. Lockwood, Oregon state game director farming country to observe the presence of a self and his property by a small percentage of and 1950 president of the Association, will be great number of "No Hunting or Trespassing" the vast number of present day hunters. succeeded as president by Thomas L. Kimball, signs. The posting of farm land against tres- For the past several years, a combination of Arizona game director who will be host for passing was unusual a decade or so ago but factors has focused attention to this problem the 1951 convention in Phoenix. R. H. Lam- has now become the standard practice of in Oregon. Trends toward clean farming have beth of Montana was elected vice president farmers who have tried but failed to find removed thousands of acres of game habitat; and Ben Glading of California re-elected other satisfactory methods of protecting their sub-marginal land has been brought under secretary.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Native Fishes of the Warner Basin and Alkali Subbasin
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for the Threatened and Rare Native Fishes of the Warner Basin and Alkali Subbasin Warner Sucker (Castostom us ‘warmeren sir) I ‘=1W’~ Hutton Thi Chub Foskett Speckled Dace (Gila. bicolor ssp.) (Ril inichthys osenins ssp.) RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE NATIVE FISHES OF THE WARNER BASIN AND ALKALI SUBBASIN: Warner sucker (Threatened) Catostomus warnerensis Hutton tui chub (Threatened) Gila bicolor ssp. Foskett speckled dace (Threatened) Rhinichthys osculus ssp. Prepared By U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Oregon State Office) for Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon Appoved: “I Date: DISCLAIMER PAGE Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Plans are reviewed by the public and submitted to additional peer review before they are adopted by the Service. Objectives will be attained and any necessary finds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Costs indicated for task implementation and/or time of achievement ofrecovery are estimates and subject to change. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor official positions or approval ofany individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position ofthe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved.
    [Show full text]
  • High Desert Region Deer and Elk DEER Mid-Columbia District
    High Desert Region Deer and Elk DEER Mid-Columbia District (Hood, White River, Maupin, West Biggs) The West Biggs Unit has good numbers of deer and a strong component of mature bucks. Much of the unit is private. The Deschutes and John Day canyons are great public places to find weary bucks, especially later in the season. The Maupin Unit has great buck ratios and should provide good opportunities at older bucks for those hunters with access to private lands. There is some limited public access within the Deschutes canyon. Having a good map to ensure you know where you are is essentiall. Buck numbers in the White River are on the rebound, and good recruitment over the past couple years should continue to increase hunter success. For the best chance at harvesting a mature buck, hunters should expect to get away from roads and focus on higher elevation habitats. Hunters headed for the Hood unit should pay close attention to fire restrictions. Last year, most of the private timber companies in the valley closed their lands due to extreme fire conditions, and this summer may be even worse if fall rains are delayed. Finding open areas with good browse is key to hunter success. Deer activity is typically highest during first and last light. DEER MIGRATION STUDY: ODFW is conducting a buck deer study in the southern portion of the White River Unit to improve its knowledge of local deer herds. ODFW would appreciate if hunters could report any sightings of these deer. Radio-collared deer in this unit are legal to shoot but return collar and identify location of the kill to The Dalles District office (3701 W 13th Street, The Dalles, OR 97058, tel.
    [Show full text]
  • MARKERS and MONUMENTS of WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH List Gathered and Prepared by Daughters of Utah Pioneers (2010)
    MARKERS AND MONUMENTS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH List Gathered and Prepared by Daughters of Utah Pioneers (2010) The Daughters of Utah Pioneers (DUP) is committed to preserving the heritage of our Pioneer ancestors who settled in Washington County, Utah. Part of preserving that heritage is in identifying historical locations and activities of those early settlers. The DUP has actively participated, along with many other groups, in establishing monuments and/or plaques designating specific communities, people, buildings, etc. This list has been compiled from up-dated information gathered during two Eagle Scout Projects, from data received from other organizations, and from various websites. It is not expected to be a final project, but is intended to be complete enough that it can be added to, or corrected as necessary, to become a comprehensive and current listing of all the wonderful monuments available for descendants as well as visitors to the area to see and enjoy, and to remember the legacy left to us in providing this beautiful area called “Dixie”. BLOOMINGTON 1. WC MONUMENT #1 – Off Man-o-War Road (location unidentified) Sponsored by Daughters of Utah Pioneers #505 ENTERPRISE 1. WC MONUMENT #2 LITTLE RED BRICK CHURCH (MUSEUM): Main and Center Streets, 84725 Monument Open to Public, Museum Open by Appointment Erected by: Daughters of Utah Pioneers, 1955 (Marker #210) Free-standing, stone structure w/metal plaque: 30”x 48”x18” Etched graphics of Beehive, Oxen, Yoke Marker Text Daughters of Utah Pioneers No 210 Erected 1955 ENTERPRISE Enterprise is a continuation of Hebron. Located on Shoal Creek, a short distance up the mountain.
    [Show full text]
  • ELK CONSERVATION and MANAGEMENT PLAN December 2018 CONTENTS
    ELK CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN December 2018 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I. INTRODUCTION 10 A. Goals and Objectives 13 B. Taxonomy and Historical Distribution 15 C. Life History and Habitat 18 D. Distribution and Population Status Since 1970 22 E. Historical and Ongoing Management Efforts by the Department and California Tribes 30 II. CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT 32 A. Adaptive Management 32 B. Population Monitoring 33 C. Population Viability and Genetic Diversity 36 D. Disease Surveillance 38 E. Co-Management with California Federally Recognized Tribes & Tribal Traditional Uses and Knowledge 40 F. Hunting 41 G. Depredation Response and Alleviation 43 H. Human Dimensions 44 2 III. UNRESOLVED MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND INFORMATION NEEDS 45 A. Key Uncertainties 45 B. Research Needs to Inform Management 49 IV. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 53 A. Strategy for Implementation and Evaluation 53 B. Priority Actions 53 V. PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION 54 VI. LITERATURE CITED 55 VII. GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS 66 VIII. LIST OF FIGURES and TABLES 67 IX. APPENDICES 68 3 FROM OUR DIRECTOR It is remarkable that in a state with nearly 40 million people, one of the largest, most iconic land mammals in North America is one of our most successful conservation stories. Elk, or Wapiti, meaning “ghost kings” as named by the Shawnee Indians due to the animals’ elusive behavior are coming back from a precipitous population decline. The Department of Fish and Wildlife is proud to present this adaptive, scientifically based management plan that considers the many challenges facing elk in the most populous state in the nation. We’ve come a long way.
    [Show full text]
  • West Beatys Butte Controlled Antelope Hunt
    R. 22 E R. 23 E R. 24 E R. 25 E R. 26 E R. 27 E R. 28 E R. 29 E BLACK CAP Orejana Canyon Monument ReservoirBuckhorn Canyon 395 A Geospatial PDF of this map is available to view your ¤£ Chrome Reservoir Cyclane Reservoir Mikes Draw Dent Draw location, even when you do not have cell service, when West BeatysSpine ButteCob Butte Duhaime Flat using apps such as Avenza Maps or Paper Maps. Download PDFs forBlack controlled Cap hunts sorted by Controlled AntelopeBuffalo Reservoir Hunt South Creek Reservoir 32 S T. Wildlife Management Unit at: â â â â â https://www.dfw.state.or.us/maps HuntUnit ReservoirArea Boundary CORN LAKE RD WARNER VALLEY RD SAGEBRUSH KNOLL RD Middle Lake Waterhole US Bureau of LandBlack Management Rim SPINE COBSPINE BUTTE Flint Hills COBSPINE BUTTE Oreana Waterhole SHERLOCK GULCH RD US Fish and Wildlife Service High Rim Waterhole SUNSTONE RD Buckhorn Canyon BLUEJOINT RD State Land Poindexter Place Gray Buttes Rabbit Hills NW Bluejoint Private Land . Sixmile Draw Feather Bed Lake Lake 33 S T. This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this informationROCK CREEK should LNreview or consult Rabbit Creek the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of this Rockinformation. Creek Reservoir Foley Creek SIX MILE DRAW RD SEE OREGON BIG GAME REGULATIONSSIX MILE DRAW FOR LEGAL HUNT DESCRIPTIONS LOWER RABBIT CREEK RD Outside Waterhole RABBIT BASIN RD Oregon DepartmentSnyder Canyon of Fish and Wildlife Turpin Lake 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE 0 2 4 Miles Canterbury Reservoir Salem, OR 97302 Twin Lakes (503) 947-6000 revised 4/2021 RABBIT HILLS RD Corral Waterhole Flook Ranch Rabbit Hills Stone Reservoir Lake Binkey Lake COX BUTTE RD 34 S T.
    [Show full text]
  • Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge More Than 30 Million Pronghorn Antelope Once Roamed North America
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge More than 30 million pronghorn antelope once roamed North America. By the turn of the 20th century, only a few small bands were left. Hart Mountain was one of the Photo: Bill Stormont, FWS last strongholds of this fleet-footed species. Set aside as a home for pronghorn, the refuge is renowned as a dramatic landscape rich in wildlife diversity. Photo: Bill Stormont, FWS The Refuge Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge (NAR) was established in 1936 to provide range for remnant antelope herds. Refuge management practices have since been broadened to include conservation of all wildlife and native plant species characteristic of this high-desert habitat. Public enjoyment, education, and appreciation for the species and habitat found here is encouraged. Hart Mountain NAR is one of over 520 National Wildlife Refuges located throughout the country. The blue goose insignia represents this network of lands established for the conservation and management of fish, wildlife, and plant resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Photo: Bill Stormont, FWS The Landscape Looming high above the surrounding rangelands, Hart Mountain NAR is a massive fault block ridge that rises to an elevation of 8,065 feet. The west side ascends abruptly some 3,600 feet from the floor of the Warner Valley in a series of rugged cliffs, steep slopes, and knifelike ridges. Photo: Ruth Miller, FWS The east side of the mountain is less precipitous, descending in a series of hills and low ridges to the sagebrush- grass ranges typical of southeastern Oregon and the Great Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Harney Area Cultural Resources Class I Inventory
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1980 Harney area cultural resources class I inventory Ruth McGilvra Bright Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Cultural Resource Management and Policy Analysis Commons, and the Geography Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation McGilvra Bright, Ruth, "Harney area cultural resources class I inventory" (1980). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 3264. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.3255 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Ruth McGilvra Bright for the Master of Arts in Anthropology presented August 7, 1980. Title: Harney Area Cultural Resources Class I Inventory. APPROVED BY MEMBERS OF THE THESIS COMMITTEE: Daniel Scheans Gordon ;OoB ~i ,_,,I This document presents the Cultural Resources Overview for the Harney Area in southeastern Oregon. The Harney Area combines three of the four planning units in the Burns Bureau of Land Management District. Most of the land in the Harney Area is located in Harney County, although a few parcels are just outside the county line in Lake and Malheur Counties. Almost all of Harney County is included. There are approximately 3,320,000 acres of Bureau administered public land within the Harney Area, as well as other public and private lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Authentic Adventures Explore!
    LAKE COUNTY HOT SPRINGS & GEYSERS Spending three nights in Lake County is an opportunity Thank You Authentic Explore!H to enjoy three unique hot spring experiences, or to enjoy a thermal experience with a little more altitude & As the sun rises over the horizon, there is a glint when the rocks are cut and polished. Just like Lake Sponsors attitude. Hart Mountain Hot Springs and Campground, Adventures under the sagebrush. That twinkle in the high County, if you scratch beneath the surface, there is located on the Sheldon-Hart Mountain National LAKEVIEW Gipson's Warner Valley desert dawn is Oregon’s State Gem - the Sunstone! something extraordinary waiting to be discovered! For the curious at heart, some of the best Wildlife Refuge Complex managed by the U.S. Fish and Lodging Treasured all the way back to the area’s first Ace Hardware adventures involve learning, observing and Wildlife Service, has scenic views and nighttime skies Dust Devil Mining inhabitants. The stones were picked up by curious so dark that you can enjoy relaxing under a blanket of Base Camp RV Park a few hands-on activities. Lake County’s Friends of Hart Mountain pioneers and today can be found in jewelry millions of stars. Hunters Hot Springs Resort offers Burger Queen phenomenal geology offers opportunities for True Hospitality Awaits Hart Mountain Store produced by area artisans. For those wanting to True Hospitality Awaits lodging and a pool. Summer Lake Hot Springs outside Cornerstone Minerals the inquisitive adventurer! Mountain ranges, capture a little piece of the sun, visit Lakeview Paisley features ancient artesian mineral hot springs Dinner Bell Café The Wee House volcanic features, the highest and longest District Bureau of Land Management Sunstone with cabins and spectacular views of Winter Rim.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior National Park Service
    NFS Form 10-900a OMB No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES CONTINUATION SHEET Section ___ Page __ SUPPLEMENTARY LISTING RECORD NRIS Reference Number: 06000525 Date Listed: 6/23/2006 Manzanita Lake Naturalist 7 s Services Historic District Shasta CA Property Name County State Lassen Volcanic National Park MPS Multiple Name This property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation. Signature at the Keeper Date of Action --__ — ___=^ _ =z_ _ _ ________________________________________ Amended Tterns in Nomination: Historic Function: The functions are amended to read: Domestic/Institutional Housing; Education/Research facility; and Recreation/Museum, Outdoor Recreation. These clarifications were confirmed with the NFS FPO office DISTRIBUTION: National Register property file Nominating Authority (without nomination attachment) NPS Form 10-900 OMBNo. 1024-0018 (Rev 10-90) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM 1. Name of Property historic name: Manzanita Lake Naturalist's Services Historic District other name/site number: 2. Location street & number: 39489 Highway 44 not for publication, n/a vicinity: Northwest Entrance, Lassen Volcanic National Park city/town: Shingletown state: California code: CA county: Shasta code: 089 zip code: 96088 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination _ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
    [Show full text]