DOCSLIB.ORG

I I I I I I I I I Don Allan I NATURAL RESOURCES SERVICES REDWOOD COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I I I I I I I I I Don Allan I NATURAL RESOURCES SERVICES REDWOOD COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY I I -,... ""· I ·~ ·-' \ I SOUTH FORK TRINITY RIVER ' I .- • ~: "•;"tr••• ,.~ . r .. I , ,.. • J ~ 1• FINAL REPORT J• pt-, .I' ' ' I :1: ) ' \ - -·-- -·· '""' -~~ ··-011 s..~\ .~~/Y. I ACTION PLAN for PRIVATE LANDS EROSION CONTROL - ~-.-r- L~ I I ~1k.l.- -- __ .... \ - -· L- -- - ---·· ·\ (APPLE Eltapom) -- --·-·'r·------·-·1---\ '.__ ,.. ---·---·-\ . .I 1---1 I in the ~l ;:<', i . -~ - I ELTAPOM CREEK WATERSHED I I I I I I I I I Don Allan I NATURAL RESOURCES SERVICES REDWOOD COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY I 904 G. ST., EUREKA, CA 95501 I DECEMBER, 1998 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ......... ........................... ...................... .. .. .......................... ... .. ........................... 3 INTRODUCTION ................... ................................................................... ............... .. ......... 3 I BACKGROUND ... .............. ........ ............. ................. .. ... ......................................... ............ .4 LOCATION ........................... ... ............................... ....................................................... .... .4 FIGURE 1. LOCATION MAP ........................................................ .................................... ..5 FIGURE 2. Road Survey Sites Map ................ ....................................................... .... ...... .. ..6 I OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................... 7 WATERSHED LAND USE ...................... ..... ................................ ........................................ 7 ELTAPOM CREEK FISHERIES .............................. .. ...................... .. ... ... ............................ 7 WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS .... .. ................................. ...... .......... .......... .................. 8 I WATERSHED DISTURBANCES ......................................................................................... 11 PROCEDURES .......................................... ........... ... ........................................................... 12 RESULTS ........................ .... ......................................... .............. ... ...................... ........... .. .. 12 Road Related Erosion Surveys ................................................................................. 12 I Roads Accessing Private Lands ............................... ....... ........................................... 13 4N09 Road (Power line Road), west of 5N60 .................................................. 13 4N09 Road (Power line Road), east of 5N60 .................... ............................... 20 Sierra Pacific Roads ............ ...... .. ................................................................. 24 I Trinco Investment Company Roads ............................................................... 24 Skunk Ranch Road ......................................................................... ............. 25 USFS Roads ....... ............................................ .. .... ........................................... ... ..... 26 4N09/ Mi. 1.65 Spur Rd ............................................................................... 26 I 4Nll ....................................... ....................................... ... ........ ................. 26 4N11G ............ .............................. ..... ...... ... ................................................ 26 4N24 ...................................... ... ................................................................. 27 4N24B ........................................................................................................27 I 4N25 ........... ... .... ............. .. ... .. .............. .................. .... .......................... .... ..27 4N25B ...................................................................................... ... ............... 28 4N25C ... .. ........................ ..................................................... ...................... 28 4N25D ... ... ................................ ......................................... ........... .............. 28 I 4N25E ........ ..................... ................. ................................ ......... ................. 28 4N27 ................. .. ... .......... ................................. ........................ .... ............. 28 4N27A ........................................................................................................ 29 4N34 ... ............................................................ ...... .......... .. ......................... 29 I 4N34A ........... ......... ... ........... ... .. ............................. .... : ........................ ....... 29 4N41 .......................................................................................................... 30 4N41A .......... ........ ..... ..................... ...... ...................................................... 30 4N43, 4N43A, 4N43B ......................................... .......................................... 30 I 4N47 ....... .. ... ... .. ........... .......... .......... .................. .. ............... .................. .. ...30 4N49 ....... ............................................... .................................................... 30 5N09 .. .. ............................................ .............. .. .......................................... 31 5N60 .. .. ......................... ........ ... ... ...... ............. ... ..................................... .... 31 I 5N60G ............ .. .......................................................................................... 31 5N60H ............................................... ... ... ..... .................... ... .............. .... ... ..31 COST ESTIMATES and PRIORITY LIST ............................................................................. 32 SUMMARY ........................................... .............................................................................. 33 I REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 35 APPENDIX 1 ........................................................................... ........................................... 37 Culvert Sizing Procedures ................................ ............................. .......................... 37 Culvert Sizing - 4N09 Rd ............................ .... ..................................... .................... 38 I TABLE 1. Eltapom Watershed Roads .......................................................... .44 TABLE 2. Precipitation at Hyampom, Hayfork, and Big Bar ...................... ... .45 TABLE 3. Precipitation Duration - Frequency for Hayfork and Hyampom ............ .. .... ............................... .... .. ... ........ .. ..... ..... .. ................... .46 I TABLE 4. Annual Flow Extremes, South Fork Trinity River below Hyampom ......... ... ....................................................................................... .47 I APPENDIX 2, Eltapom Creek Road Survey Photos .................................................... ........... .49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ABSTRACT I I A project to reduce sediment input to Eltapom Creek from private lands and their access roads was funded by the Trinity River Restoration Program. In Phase I, road-related I sediment sources were identified, treatments were prescribed, and sites were prioritized for treatment. Phase II of the project was to be the implementation of erosion control treatments at priority sites. Due to a lack of funds, only Phase I was implemented. Based I on information gathered in Phase I, an application t o fund Phase II was submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game's SB 271 program. This report presents the I fi ndings, priority site list , and action plan based on the erosion source survey. I I INTRODUCTION On March 17, 1998, Redwood Community Action Agency (Natural Resources Services division) entered into Agreement No. TFG 97-03A, a watershed improvement project in the I Eltapom Creek watershed in the South Fork Trinity River basin, aimed at identifying and treating road related erosion problems on private land. This project was funded by the I Trinity River Fish and Wildlife Restoration Grant Program and administered by Trinity County. One objective of the restoration grant program is to fund projects which address I measures to reduce and prevent erosion in tributaries of the Trinity River in order to facilitate stable ecosystems and recovery of declining stocks of salmon and steelhead. I While public lands have funding through government appropriations to maintain roads, albeit at reduced levels in recent years, private landowners often lack the necessary funds I and/ or means to maintain roads. The APPLE Eltapom project was intended to identify erosion problems on private lands and their access roads, and to assist landowners in I treating those problems. While the focus of the project was erosion problems on private lands and their access roads, Forest Service roads were reviewed to assess the relative I contribution of sediment from public versus private roads. One road stood out as having the most significant erosion problems - the 4N09 or Power Line Road. This road received the I most detailed surveys and is the main source of controllable sediment production in the watershed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Water Temperatures in the South Fork Trinity River Watershed in Northern California
    Water Temperatures in the South Fork Trinity River Watershed in Northern California PREPARED FOR: The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board for their consideration during the development of the South Fork Trinity River TMDL. PREPARED BY: Stuart Farber Timber Products Company Mt. Shasta, California Darrel Rankin USFS - Shasta Trinity National Forest Redding, California Tim Viel Natural Resource Conservation Service Weaverville, California October 1, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS .................................................................................................. 5 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC RANGE ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 TOPOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................ 5 2.3 CLIMATE ................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.4 LANDSCAPE VEGETATION ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Bibliography of Klamath Mountains Geology, California and Oregon
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY A bibliography of Klamath Mountains geology, California and Oregon, listing authors from Aalto to Zucca for the years 1849 to mid-1995 Compiled by William P. Irwin Menlo Park, California Open-File Report 95-558 1995 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards (or with the North American Stratigraphic Code). Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. PREFACE This bibliography of Klamath Mountains geology was begun, although not in a systematic or comprehensive way, when, in 1953, I was assigned the task of preparing a report on the geology and mineral resources of the drainage basins of the Trinity, Klamath, and Eel Rivers in northwestern California. During the following 40 or more years, I maintained an active interest in the Klamath Mountains region and continued to collect bibliographic references to the various reports and maps of Klamath geology that came to my attention. When I retired in 1989 and became a Geologist Emeritus with the Geological Survey, I had a large amount of bibliographic material in my files. Believing that a comprehensive bibliography of a region is a valuable research tool, I have expended substantial effort to make this bibliography of the Klamath Mountains as complete as is reasonably feasible. My aim was to include all published reports and maps that pertain primarily to the Klamath Mountains, as well as all pertinent doctoral and master's theses.
    [Show full text]
  • Final CESA NC Summer Steelhead Petition
    FRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER Working for the recovery of our Wild & Scenic River, its fisheries and communities. Friday, September 28, 2018 California Fish and Game Commission P.O. Box 944209 Sacramento, CA 94244-2090 Dear Commissioners, This is a petition to list Northern California summer steelhead under the California Endangered Species Act, (CESA, FGC § 2050 et seq.), as an endangered species. Under CESA, “Endangered species” means a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease. (F&GC § 2062) Northern California summer steelhead (NC summer steelhead) are a native subspecies of fish in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all of its range due to causes including loss of habitat and change in habitat. These extraordinary fish are superlative in many ways. They include the largest adult steelhead, as well as fish capable of handling the highest water velocities and of jumping the highest barriers of any salmonids. NC summer steelhead include the southernmost summer steelhead. They are able to tolerate water temperatures higher than any other anadromous salmonids. In their recent comprehensive review of the status and threats to salmonids in California, Moyle et al assessed the status of NC summer steelhead as being of Critical Concern, with a Status Score of 1.9 out of 5.0: Northern California (NC) summer steelhead are in long-term decline and this trend will continue without substantial human intervention on a broad scale.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 3 Trinity River Fish and Wildlife Background
    TRINITY RIVER FLOW EVALUATION - FINAL REPORT CHAPTER 3 Trinity River The life histories of anadromous species have two Fish and Wildlife distinct phases, one in freshwater and the other in salt Background water. Newly hatched young remain in the river of their birth for months to years before migrating to the ocean to grow to their adult size. Adult salmonids 3.1 Fish Resources return from the ocean to their natal rivers to spawn. Although steelhead, coho salmon, and chinook salmon Commercial, Tribal, and sport fisheries depend on healthy require similar instream habitats for spawning, egg populations of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), coho incubation, and salmon (O. kisutch), and chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha). rearing, the The following sections describe the habitat requirements Commercial, Tribal, and timing of their and life histories of these fish species and document their sport fisheries depend on life history decline. Any recommended measures to restore and healthy populations of events varies maintain the Trinity River fishery resources must consider steelhead (Oncorhynchus (Figure 3.1). these life histories and habitat requirements. mykiss), coho salmon Published values (O. kisutch), and chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha). 13 CHAPTER 3: TRINITY RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE BACKGROUND JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC Chinook Spring-run Chinook Fall-run Chinook Adult Coho Coho Migration and Holding Steelhead Summer-run Steelhead Fall-run Steelhead Winter-run Steelhead Steelhead Half pounders Steelhead Steelhead Chinook Spring-run Chinook Fall-run Chinook Spawning Coho Coho Coho Steelhead All runs Steelhead Chinook Chinook Chinook Egg incubation Coho Coho Coho Steelhead Steelhead Chinook Chinook Fry Emergence Coho Coho Steelhead Steelhead Chinook Chinook Coho Juvenile age 0 Coho Rearing age 1 Coho Steelhead age 0 Steelhead age 1, age 2 Steelhead Chinook Chinook Smolt Out- Coho Coho migration Steelhead Steelhead * A small percentage of chinook in the Trinity River overwinter and outmigrate at age 1, similar to coho age 1 life history.
    [Show full text]
  • For the South Fork Trinity River Watershed
    BENTHIC INDEX OF BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY (B-IBI) FOR THE SOUTH FORK TRINITY RIVER WATERSHED By Julia Lynn Remmenga Everta A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts In Biological Sciences December, 2006 BENTHIC INDEX OF BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY (B-IBI) FOR THE SOUTH FORK TRINITY RIVER WATERSHED by Julia Lynn Remmenga Everta Approved by the Master's Thesis Committee: Michael A. Camann, Major Professor Date Sean F. Craig, Committee Member Date Frank J. Shaughnessy, Committee Member Date William L. Bigg, Committee Member Date Michael R. Mesler, Graduate Coordinator Date Chris Hopper, Dean for Research and Graduate Studies Date ABSTRACT Benthic Index of Biological Integrity (B-IBI) for the South Fork Trinity River Watershed Julia Lynn Remmenga Everta The South Fork Trinity River is an undammed river in Northern California that drains a watershed with a long history of varied anthropogenic uses including mining, logging, cattle grazing, and associated road construction. These activities modify riparian and aquatic habitats by contributing sediment to rivers and altering basic environmental processes on a watershed scale. Aquatic biota respond to and integrate the effects of anthropogenic habitat alterations, many of which are generally not detected by chemical toxicity tests. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) is charged with fulfilling the mandates of the Clean Water Act of 1972, which are to maintain and restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of surface waters. Indexes that use biotic indicators of stream health, such as the Benthic Index of Biological Integrity (B- IBI), meet these goals of the US EPA.
    [Show full text]
  • South Fork Trinity River and Tributaries PROPOSED WILD
    Management Agency: South Fork Trinity River and Tributaries U.S. Forest Service ~ Shasta-Trinity National Forests PROPOSED WILD & SCENIC RIVERS Six Rivers National Forests Location: The South Fork Trinity River is one of the largest undammed river Trinity & Humboldt Counties systems in California. The river and its tributaries support important CA 2nd Congressional District populations of threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead Watershed: Trinity River and old-growth forest dependent wildlife species. The river and tributaries also offer outstanding outdoor recreation opportunities. Wild & Scenic River Miles: South Fork Trinity River – 68.5 East Fork South Fork Trinity River – 11.8 South Fork Trinity River – The South Fork Trinity River flows north Rattlesnake Creek – 5.9 from its spring-fed sources in the Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel Wilderness Butter Creek – 7 to the Trinity River. The river provides critical habitat for spring Eltapom Creek – 3.4 Grouse Creek – 11.3 Chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead trout. It flows through Madden Creek – 8.4 diverse forests that shelter spotted owl, goshawk, bald eagle, fisher, Hayfork Creek – 16.4 marten, and several rare plants. The South Fork National Recreation Rusch Creek – 3.2 Trail parallels much of the upper river and several other trails Olsen Creek – 2.8 provide access to the lower river segments. The entire river is Outstanding Values: recommended for protection by the Forest Service. Anadromous fisheries, wildlife, ecological, botanical, scenery, recreation. East Fork South Fork Trinity River – Fish biologists identified the East Fork South Fork to be a high priority watershed for the For More Information: Steve Evans—CalWild recovery of depressed South Fork fish stocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D DEIS/EIR List of Commentors, Thematic Responses
    Appendix D DEIS/EIR List of Commentors, Thematic Responses, Comments and Responses to Comments APPENDIX D DEIS/EIR List of Commentors, Thematic Responses, and Comments and Responses to Comments This appendix consists of three sections: (D1) a listing of the commentors responding to the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration DEIS/EIR, (D2) thematic responses, and (D3) public comments and the agencies’ responses to those comments. The public comment period for the DEIS/EIR began on October 19, 1999, and was scheduled to end on December 8, 1999 (64 FR 56364). However, the Service extended the comment period until December 20, 1999 (64 FR 67584). On December 27, 1999, the Service reopened the public comment period until January 20, 2000 (64 FR 72357). A complete listing of the agencies, organizations, and individuals who received the DEIS/EIR is shown in Appendix D1. Appendix D2 contains the thematic responses to comments. After analyzing a number of comments, the agencies determined that numerous organizations and individuals were submitting comments that were substantially similar in their subject matter and the concerns they raised. As a result, the agencies developed thematic responses to specifically address those comments and to avoid repetition of responses and cumbersome text duplication. While the vast majority of comments came from California, comments were also received from Washington D.C. and states including, but not limited to, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Wyoming. Appendix D3 contains a complete list of the comments received and the agencies’ responses to public comments. A total of 1,009 letters and 5,436 preprinted postcards were received during the public comment period.
    [Show full text]
  • 9.0 Investigation of Anadromous Fish Genetics in the Klamath Hydroelectric Project Area
    9.0 INVESTIGATION OF ANADROMOUS FISH GENETICS IN THE KLAMATH HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AREA 9.1 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE The life history variation and existing population genetic studies of coho and Chinook salmon, coastal steelhead, and nonandromous Oncorhynchus mykiss (O. mykiss) spp. in the Upper and Lower Klamath River basins were reviewed. The primary goals of this section are to assess the evidence of reproductive isolation (genetic distinctiveness) between populations or groups of populations of salmonids throughout the Project area and evaluate whether there is sufficient evidence to determine if resident trout populations above Iron Gate dam are genetically similar to anadromous trout downstream of the Project. Additional information on the genetic impacts from operation of Iron Gate fish hatchery and disease-related information is presented. This information, along with comments from interested stakeholders, were used to identify genetic data gaps and additional questions necessary for making scientifically informed management decisions about restoring anadromous runs above Iron Gate dam. Restoring salmonid runs in the Project area will require significant additional genetic studies, as well as an evaluation of the ecological factors underlying the feasibility of establishing self-sustaining salmonid populations above Iron Gate dam. Further genetic studies are necessary to identify (1) if independent lineages of O. mykiss are found in the Upper Klamath River basin, and (2) areas that will be opened to migration, if restoring steelhead is planned above Iron Gate dam. Long-term genetic monitoring of all anadromous salmon runs above Iron Gate dam will be critical to managing these new populations, given the potential for inbreeding depression (reduction in fitness) and for effective population sizes to drop below levels that can support viable salmonid populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Steelhead Demonstration Project Prepared By: Stephen T. Kucas, Jr. Editorial Associates: Mary E. Bacon J:Bnald M. Haskins
    Model Steelhead Demonstration Project Situation Report April 1983 Prepared by: Stephen T. Kucas,- Jr. Editorial Associates: Mary E. Bacon J:bnald M. Haskins Richard A. Irizarry ABSTRACT This report is predominantly a summation of existing information concerning the anadromous fish populations and their habitats within the South Fork Trinity River. Its purpose is to provide the South Fork Trinity River Hodel Steel head Advisory Q:lmmittee with a concise overview of known data and point to the areas where additional data collection is required. This report will be used as a primer in the developnent of a manage:nent plan to restore the quality of the fish habitat and reclaim the potential for steelhead production in the river. It is also anticipated that value will be accrued for salmon from most of the work done for steelhead. The history of the South Fork Trinity River geology, especially the events surrounding the 1964 flood, is discussed. Geology is placed into context with the anadromous fishery habitat changes and the subsequent decline in steelhead and salmon populations. Fisheries data is compiled frorn past surveys and sunmarized. Migration dates, population counts, habitat preferences, and stocking records are included. Recommendations on additional survey requirements, rehabilitation projects, and an implementation scheme conclude the report. i .·. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT • • i INTRODUCTION • • . .. Purpose Model Steelhead Stream Demonstration Project 1 Acknowledg ements • • • 1 Background •••••• 2 WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS 2 Study Area • • • • • • • • • • 2 Sedimentation Problems • 4 Fisheries Habitat 5 FISHERY RESOURCES 5 Fish Populations 5 Steelhead Trout 5 Chinook Salmon 6 Q:, ho Salmon • • 10 Rainbow Trout • 10 Stocking History • 10 WATER QUALITY 15 PROPOSED SMALL HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT • 16 WATERSHED REHABILITATION 16 Riffle Sifting ••• 16 Side Cllannel Developnent .
    [Show full text]
  • NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS T O F C E N O M M T M R E A R P C E E D JUNE 2006 U N A I C T I E R D E M ST A AT E S OF HISTORICAL POPULATION STRUCTURE OF COHO SALMON IN THE SOUTHERN OREGON/NORTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTS EVOLUTIONARILY SIGNIFICANT UNIT Thomas H. Williams Eric P. Bjorkstedt Walt G. Duffy Dave Hillemeier George Kautsky Tom E. Lisle Mike McCain Mike Rode R. Glenn Szerlong Robert S. Schick Matthew N. Goslin Aditya Agrawal NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-390 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Fisheries Science Center NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), organized in 1970, has evolved into an agency which establishes national policies and manages and conserves our oceanic, coastal, and atmospheric resources. An organizational element within NOAA, the Office of Fisheries is responsible for fisheries policy and the direction of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). In addition to its formal publications, the NMFS uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible. Documents within this series, however, reflect sound professional work and may be referenced in the formal scientific and technical literature. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS ATMOSPH ND E This TM series is used for documentation and timely communication of preliminary results, interim reports, or special A RI C C I A N D purpose information. The TMs have not received complete formal review, editorial control, or detailed editing.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Hayfork Creek Watershed Inventory Hayf Ork Ranger District 1991-92 Lower Hayfork Creek Watershed Lnventorv,, 1991-92
    Lower Hayfork Creek Watershed Inventory Hayf ork Ranger District 1991-92 Lower Hayfork Creek Watershed lnventorv,, 1991-92 Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service P.O. Box 159 Hayfork, California 96041 (91 6) 628-5227 Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Responsible Official: Karyn Wood, District Ranger Hayfork Ranger District For Further Information Call: Annetta Mankins, Watershed Specialist Hayfork Ranger District Prepared by: /'Ji Fi'ZJ ' --- ... -~e~---··- 1cfl.'L Forestry Technician ...__/ Oate Reviewed uy: Reviewed by: Date Approved by: Date INTRODUCTION This is a final report that summarizes assessment work by the Hayfork Ranger District on erosional problems on the Lower Hayfork Creek Subbasin of the South Fork Trinity River Basin. It includes descriptions of inventory work, data analysis, prioritization of specific problems, and recommendations on specific enhancement and restoration work projects. The Trinity River Basin project began in 1984 with Public Law 98-541. The goal was to assist in the restoration of fisheries resources to conditions that existed prior to implementation of the Central Valley Project. The Shasta-Trinity National Forests contracted with the U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a basinwide watershed assessment of the South Fork Trinity River Basin. This basin falls under Action Item #6 of the annually updated Trinity River Basin Three-Year Action Plan. The South Fork Trinity River is located in Northern California in Trinity and Humboldt Counties. The Federal Government, principally the U.S. Forest Service, administers approximately 79% of the total basin area of 970 square miles. The balance, approximately 21%, is in private ownership.
    [Show full text]
  • Hyampom Watershed
    Watershed Analysis Hyampom Watershed Shasta-Trinity National Forest South Fork Management Unit April 2011 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 The Purpose of Watershed Analysis ........................................................................................................... 1 Focus of this Watershed Analysis ................................................................................................................ 1 Format of the Document .............................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 1 - WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS ............................................ 3 Physical Setting ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Location ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Climate ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 Terrestrial................................................................................................................................................... 5 Soils ..........................................................................................................................................................23
    [Show full text]