DOCSLIB.ORG

November 2015 Tule River Basin Irwmp Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
November 2015 Tule River Basin Irwmp Group INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT OF STAKEHOLDERS WITHIN THE TULE RIVER BASIN NOVEMBER 2015 TULE RIVER BASIN IRWMP GROUP TABLE OF CONTENTS INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN TULE RIVER BASIN IRWMP GROUP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 - PLAN DOCUMENT 1.1 Purpose .................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Cooperating Partners ................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Acknowledgements ..................................................................... 1-4 1.4 Acronyms/Abbreviations ............................................................ 1-5 CHAPTER 2 - HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 2.1 Background of the Tule River Basin IRWMP ............................ 2-1 2.1.1 Governance .................................................................. 2-1 2.1.2 Historical Plan .............................................................. 2-3 2.1.3 Consistency with the State of California Planning Efforts and Statutory Requirements ........................... 2-9 2.2 Development of a Formal, Written Plan 2.2.1 Stakeholder Advisory Group ....................................... 2-10 2.2.2 Memorandum of Understanding Group ....................... 2-10 2.2.3 Coordination with Kaweah River Basin Plan Development ................................ 2-11 2.2.4 Coordination with Tulare Basin JPA Development ..... 2-12 2.2.5 Coordination with Southern Sierra Plan Development ................................ 2-13 2.2.6 Technical Analysis ....................................................... 2-14 2.3 Governance Structure 2.3.1 Memorandum of Understanding/Cooperative Agreements .............................................................. 2-22 2.3.2 Governance Structure Evaluation ................................ 2-22 2.3.3 Relationship to Future Tulare Basin Joint Powers Authority Governance Structure ......... 2-23 2.4 Funding 2.4.1 IRWMP Funding .......................................................... 2-24 2.4.2 Funding of Project Applications .................................. 2-24 2.4.3 Projects Funding .......................................................... 2-25 TOC - 1 CHAPTER 3 - PLAN INTRODUCTION 3.1 Plan Objectives 3.1.1 Work Toward Achievement of Sustainable Balanced Surface and Groundwater Supplies. ................ 3-2 3.1.2 Protect and Improve Water Resources through Land Use Practices .......................................... 3-3 3.1.3 Protection of Life, Structures, Equipment and Property from Flooding ................................... 3-4 3.1.4 Provide Multiple Benefits of Management of Water Resources and Related Diversion and Conveyance Infrastructure ............................. 3-4 3.1.5 Reduction of Contamination of Surface and Groundwater Resources .................................. 3-5 3.1.6 Meet Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan Objectives........................... 3-6 3.1.7 Management of Recreational Activities to Minimize Impacts on Water Resources ........................... 3-6 3.1.8 Conserve, Enhance and Regenerate Riparian Habitats ......................................................... 3-7 3.1.9 Reduce Impacts and Optimize Benefits from Assisting Other Drought-Related Areas with Basin-to-Basin Transfers of Water ................ 3-7 3.1.10 Evaluation of the Need for Supplemental Water Management Strategies Related to the Effects of Climate Change ............................. 3-8 3.1.11 Optimize Efficient Use, Conservation and Recycling of Water Resources ....................... 3-9 3.1.12.. Identify and Promote Strategies for Hydroelectric Generation Facilities ..................................... 3-10 3.1.13 Evaluate and Modify Water Diversion and Conveyance Infrastructure ............................. 3-10 3.1.14 Promote City, Community and Regional Storm Water Management Plans ............................... 3-11 3.1.15 Increase Knowledge Regarding Groundwater Related Conditions and Establish Groundwater Management Practices ................................... 3-11 3.1.16 Conserve and Restore Native Species and Related Habitats ............................................. 3-12 3.1.17 Sustain Agricultural and Urban Viability through Effective Water Management ....................... 3-13 TOC - 2 3.2 Plan Scope 3.2.1 Water Resources Management Strategies ..................... 3-14 3.2.2 Evaluation of Water Supplies ...................................... 3-15 3.2.3 Water Quality Protection and Improvement ................ 3-15 3.2.4 Flood Control Planning ................................................ 3-16 3.2.5 Planning Process, Public Education and Administration............................................. 3-17 3.3 Regional Planning Process 3.3.1 Resource Management Strategies ................................ 3-18 3.3.2 Integration .................................................................... 3-18 3.3.3 Study Grants ................................................................. 3-19 3.3.4 IRWMP’s Relationship to Existing Water Management Plans ............................................ 3-19 3.3.5 Consulting Team .......................................................... 3-20 3.3.6 Stakeholder Participation ............................................. 3-21 3.4 Report Organization .................................................................... 3-23 CHAPTER 4 – DESCRIPTION OF PLAN AREA 4.1 General Description .................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Related County Study Areas .................................................... 4-6 4.3 Basis For Non-Agricultural Water Demands ............................ 4-7 4.4 Topography ............................................................................... 4-8 4.5 Climate .................................................................................... 4-9 4.6 Land Use ................................................................................... 4-10 4.7 Ancillary watersheds ................................................................. 4-12 4.8 Geology 4.8.1 Basement Complex ...................................................... 4-16 4.8.2 Marine Rocks ............................................................... 4-16 4.8.3 Unconsolidated Deposits ............................................. 4-17 4.8.4 Lacustrine and Marsh Deposits .................................... 4-19 4.8.5 Reduced Older Alluvium ............................................. 4-21 4.8.6 Oxidized Older Alluvium ............................................ 4-22 4.8.7 Younger Alluvium ....................................................... 4-22 TOC - 3 4.9 Geohydrology 4.9.1 Aquifer Characteristics 4.9.1.1 Availability of Data ................................................. 4-26 4.9.1.2 Aquifer Numerical Values ...................................... 4-28 4.9.1.3 Water Level Fluctuations ....................................... 4-30 4.10 Ecological Processes and Environmental Resources 4.10.1 Aquatic Sensitive Species .......................................... 4-33 4.10.2 Freshwater Habitats.................................................... 4-33 4.10.3 Areas of Special Biological Significance ................... 4-34 4.11 Natural Hazards Requiring Emergency Planning 4.11.1 Severe Storms and Flooding ...................................... 4-35 4.11.2 Earthquakes ................................................................ 4-35 4.11.3 Fire ............................................................................. 4-36 4.11.4 Drought ...................................................................... 4-36 CHAPTER 5 - HISTORY OF WATER AND WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 5.1 Key Water Management Milestones 5.1.1 Success Reservoir ........................................................ 5-1 5.1.2 Friant Division – CVP ................................................. 5-2 5.1.3 State Water Project ..................................................... 5-6 5.2 History of Wastewater Management 5.2.1 Cities ............................................................................ 5-7 5.2.2 Rural Areas ................................................................. 5-10 5.3 History of Integrated Regional Water Resource Management 5.3.1 Interagency Planning and Integrated Water Supply Development ....................................... 5-11 5.3.2 Integrated Management of Resources and Operational Systems ....................................... 5-12 5.3.3 Integrated Management of Emergency Operations ...... 5-13 5.3.4 Interagency Adaptive Management Response to Changing Circumstances ............................ 5-14 TOC - 4 CHAPTER 6 – RESPONSIBLE ENTITIES, MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND WATER SUPPLIES 6.1 Water Service Providers 6.1.1 Domestic Water Service Providers .............................. 6-1 6.1.2 Irrigation Water Suppliers ............................................ 6-3 6.1.3 Recreational Pools ....................................................... 6-5 6.2 Other Water Management Agencies 6.2.1 Downstream Kaweah and Tule Rivers Association ..... 6- 6 6.2.2 County of Tulare .......................................................... 6-6 6.2.3 County of Kings ........................................................... 6-7 6.2.4 Friant Water Authority ................................................. 6-8 6.3 Wastewater Service Providers 6.3.1 City Wastewater System .............................................. 6-9 6.3.2 Rural Wastewater Systems ..........................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4.3 Water Resources 4.3 Water Resources
    4.3 WATER RESOURCES 4.3 WATER RESOURCES This section describes the existing hydrological setting for the County, including a discussion of water quality, based on published and unpublished reports and data compiled by regional agencies. Agencies contacted include the United States Geological Survey, the California Department of Water Resources, and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. This section also identifies impacts that may result from the project. SETTING CLIMATE The local climate is considered warm desert receiving approximately six to eight inches of rainfall per year (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1986). Rainfall occurs primarily in the winter months, with lesser amounts falling in late summer and fall. Kings County would also be considered a dry climate since evaporation greatly exceeds precipitation.1 A common characteristic of dry climates, other than relatively small amounts of precipitation, is that the amount of precipitation received each year is highly variable. Generally, the lower the mean annual rainfall, the greater the year-to-year variability (Lutgens and Tarbuck, 1979). SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY The County is part of a hydrologic system referred to as the Tulare Lake Basin (Figure 4.3- 1). The management of water resources within the Tulare Lake Basin is a complex activity and is critical to the region’s agricultural operations. The County can be divided into three main hydrologic subareas: the northern alluvial fan and basin area (in the vicinity of the Kings, Kaweah, and Tule rivers and their distributaries), the Tulare Lake Zone, and the southwestern uplands (including the areas west of the California Aqueduct and Highway 5) (Figure 4.3-2).
    [Show full text]
  • From Yokuts to Tule River Indians: Re-Creation of the Tribal Identity On
    From Yokuts to Tule River Indians: Re-creation of the Tribal Identity on the Tule River Indian Reservation in California from Euroamerican Contact to the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 By Kumiko Noguchi B.A. (University of the Sacred Heart) 2000 M.A. (Rikkyo University) 2003 Dissertation Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Native American Studies in the Office of Graduate Studies of the University of California Davis Approved Steven J. Crum Edward Valandra Jack D. Forbes Committee in Charge 2009 i UMI Number: 3385709 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3385709 Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Kumiko Noguchi September, 2009 Native American Studies From Yokuts to Tule River Indians: Re-creation of the Tribal Identity on the Tule River Indian Reservation in California from Euroamerican contact to the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 Abstract The main purpose of this study is to show the path of tribal development on the Tule River Reservation from 1776 to 1936. It ends with the year of 1936 when the Tule River Reservation reorganized its tribal government pursuant to the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 78 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 45A–1 Kaweah River and The
    § 45a–1 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 78 Kaweah River and the headwaters of that branch Fork Kaweah River to its junction with Cactus of Little Kern River known as Pecks Canyon; Creek; thence easterly along the first hydro- thence southerly and easterly along the crest of graphic divide south of Cactus Creek to its the hydrographic divide between Pecks Canyon intersection with the present west boundary of and Soda Creek to its intersection with a lateral Sequoia National Park, being the west line of divide at approximately the east line of section township 16 south, range 29 east; thence south- 2, township 19 south, range 31 east; thence erly along said west boundary to the southwest northeasterly along said lateral divide to its corner of said township; thence easterly along intersection with the township line near the the present boundary of Sequoia National Park, southeast corner of township 18 south, range 31 being the north line of township 17 south, range east of the Mount Diablo base and meridian; 29 east, to the northeast corner of said township; thence north approximately thirty-five degrees thence southerly along the present boundary of west to the summit of the butte next north of Sequoia National Park, being the west lines of Soda Creek (United States Geological Survey al- townships 17 and 18 south, range 30 east, to the titude eight thousand eight hundred and eighty- place of beginning; and all of those lands lying eight feet); thence northerly and northwesterly within the boundary line above described are in- along the crest of the hydrographic divide to a cluded in and made a part of the Roosevelt-Se- junction with the crest of the main hydro- quoia National Park; and all of those lands ex- graphic divide between the headwaters of the cluded from the present Sequoia National Park South Fork of the Kaweah River and the head- are included in and made a part of the Sequoia waters of Little Kern River; thence northerly National Forest, subject to all laws and regula- along said divide now between Horse and Cow tions applicable to the national forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Sequoia National Monument Management Plan 2012 Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision Sequoia National Forest
    United States Department of Agriculture Giant Sequoia Forest Service Sequoia National Monument National Forest August 2012 Record of Decision The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Giant Sequoia National Monument Management Plan 2012 Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision Sequoia National Forest Lead Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Responsible Official: Randy Moore Regional Forester Pacific Southwest Region Recommending Official: Kevin B. Elliott Forest Supervisor Sequoia National Forest California Counties Include: Fresno, Tulare, Kern This document presents the decision regarding the the basis for the Giant Sequoia National Monument selection of a management plan for the Giant Sequoia Management Plan (Monument Plan), which will be National Monument (Monument) that will amend the followed for the next 10 to 15 years. The long-term 1988 Sequoia National Forest Land and Resource environmental consequences contained in the Final Management Plan (Forest Plan) for the portion of the Environmental Impact Statement are considered in national forest that is in the Monument.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 4. Basin Setting
    Eastern Tule GSA Draft GSP | Section 4 Section 4. Basin Setting Table of Contents SECTION 4. BASIN SETTING ............................................................................................................................... 4-I TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................................................... 4-I 4.1 INTRODUCTION [23 CCR § 354.12] ........................................................................................................ 4-1 4.2 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL [23 CCR § 354.14(A)] ..................................................................... 4-1 4.2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING [23 CCR § 354.14(B)(1), (C), (D)(1)(2)(3)] ............................................................. 4-2 4.2.2 LATERAL BASIN BOUNDARY [23 CCR § 354.14 (B)(2)] .......................................................................... 4-3 4.2.3 BOTTOM OF BASIN [23 CCR § 354.14 (B)(3)] ....................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.4 SURFACE WATER FEATURES [23 CCR § 354.14 (D)(5)] ......................................................................... 4-4 4.2.4.1 Lake Success ................................................................................................................................................. 4-4 4.2.4.2 Tule River ..................................................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.4.3
    [Show full text]
  • KINGS RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA High Sierra Ranger District
    PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REGION Restoring, Enhancing and Sustaining Forests in California, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands Sierra National Forest KINGS RIVER SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA High Sierra Ranger District Welcome to the Kings River Special Manage- Kings River at the end of Garnet Dike Road. It ment Area. Congress has given special designa- follows the river east for three miles to Spring tion to this area to enhance its recreational oppor- Creek, ascends northeast to Garlic Meadow tunities. It is located two hours east of Fresno in Creek, and continues to Rough Creek. the upper Kings River canyon. The Special Man- agement Area (SMA) includes 49,000 acres Bear Wallow interpretive trail is also located on within the Sierra and Sequoia National Forests. It the north side of the Kings River. Interpretive is the third such area nationwide to be given spe- signs provide information on: Cultural heritage, cial recognition and protection. The other two wildflowers, grasses, California Mule Deer mi- special management areas are Lake Tahoe Basin gration, Blue Oak Woodland and a description of and Mono Lake. Noteworthy characteristics of the scenic overlook. The trail is approximately 2 the SMA include a wild trout fishery, Garlic miles long and gradually climbs the foothill Falls, and the Boole Tree, which is the largest slopes. John Muir Wilderness, Monarch Wilder- Sequoia tree found in any National Forest in the ness, Kings Canyon National Park and the Kings United States. River area all on display at the beautiful scenic overlook. RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES The SMA offers a wide variety of recreational On the south side of the river, another trail be- opportunities: gins at Mill Flat Creek and follows the Kings Camping: There are four developed camp- River upstream 5 miles to Converse Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Salinity Impared Water Bodies and Numerical Limits
    Surface Water Bodies Listed as Impaired by Salinity or Electrical Conductivity on the 303(d) List1 Salinity Del Puerto Creek Hospital Creek Ingram Creek Kellogg Creek Knights Landing Ridge Cut Mountain House Creek Newman Wasteway Old River Pit River, South Fork Ramona Lake Salado Creek Sand Creek Spring Creek Tom Paine Slough Tule Canal Electrical Conductivity Delta Waterways (export area) Delta Waterways (northwestern portion) Delta Waterways (southern portion) Delta Waterways (western portion) Grassland Marshes Lower Kings River Mud Slough North Salt Slough San Joaquin River Temple Creek 1 List adopted by the Central Valley Water Board in June 2009. This list has not been approved by the State Water Board or U.S. EPA. Central Valley Water Bodies With Numerical Objectives for Electrical Conductivity or Total Dissolved Solids SURFACE WATERS GROUNDWATER Sacramento River Basin Tulare Lake Basin Hydrographic Units Sacramento River Westside Feather River Kings River American River Tulare Lake and Kaweah River Folsom Lake Tule River and Poso Goose Lake Kern River San Joaquin River Basin San Joaquin River Tulare Lake Basin Kings River Kaweah River Tule River Kern River Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Sacramento River San Joaquin River So. Fork Mokelumne River Old River West Canal All surface waters and groundwaters Delta-Mendota Canal designated as municipal and domestic Montezuma Slough (MUN) water supplies must meet the Chadbourne Slough numerical secondary maximum Cordelia Slough contaminant levels for salinity in Title Goodyear Slough 22 of the California Code of Intakes on Van Sickle and Chipps Regulations. Islands .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Description of Contractors and Exchange Partners
    Final EA-15-022 Appendix A Description of Contractors and Exchange Partners Summary of Cross Valley Contractors The following description characterizes each Cross Valley Contractor and associated subcontractor: County of Fresno The County of Fresno has a water service contract (Contract No. 14-06-200-8292A-IR15) for up to 3,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) that is provided for municipal and industrial (M&I) uses to specific developments within its CVP service area. The County draws its water directly from Millerton Lake after its Delta supply has been exchanged for Friant supplies with Arvin-Edison Water Storage District (Arvin-Edison). The County’s CVP water supplies have been administered by Arvin-Edison for the last 20 years pursuant to an agreement between the County and Arvin-Edison. County of Tulare The County of Tulare has a water service contract (Contract No. 14-06-200-8293A-IR15) for up to 5,308 AFY of water. The County of Tulare is comprised of 10 subcontractors (both agricultural and M&I) and all are located in the same geographical area as the Friant Division Contractors. Of the 10 subcontractors, only five have routinely taken water deliveries via the County of Tulare’s contract in recent years. The County of Tulare’s CVP contract supply is divided among the 10 subcontractors as shown below: Alpaugh Irrigation District (Alpaugh) – up to 100 AFY (agricultural) Atwell Island Water District (Atwell Island) – up to 50 AFY (agricultural) City of Lindsay – up to 50 AFY (M&I) City of Visalia – up to 300 AFY (M&I) Fransinetto Farms LLC – up to 400 AFY (agricultural) Hills Valley Irrigation District (Hills Valley) – up to 2,913 AFY (agricultural) Saucelito Irrigation District (Saucelito) – up to 100 AFY (agricultural) Stone Corral Irrigation District (Stone Corral) – up to 950 AFY (agricultural) Strathmore Public Utility District (Strathmore) – up to 400 AFY (M&I) Styro-Tek, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Pamphlet Accompanying Microcopy No. 234 LETTERS RECEIVED BY
    NATIONAL ARCHIVES MICROFILM PUBLICATIONS Pamphlet Accompanying Microcopy No. 234 LETTERS RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, 1824-80 THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON: 1966 LETTERS RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS 182^-80 On the 962 rolls of this microfilm publication is reproduced the greater part of the correspondence re- ceived by the central office of the Bureau of Indian Af- fairs during the years 182^ through l880« The corre- spondence not included consists of letters and documents organized by the Bureau into various special series, which are discussed in more detail below. The Bureau of Indian Affairs was established within the War Department on March 11, l82lj, by order of Sec- retary of War John C. Calhoun (H. Doc. lU6, 1st sess., 19th Cong., p. 6). From 1789 until 182^ the administration of Indian Affairs had been under the direct supervision of the Secretary of War with the exception of the Government-, operated system of factories for trade with the Indians* From 1806 to 1822, the year of its abolition, this sys- tem was administered by a Superintendent of Indian Trade who was responsible to the Secretary of War. Six volumes of letters relating to Indian Affairs sent by the Sec- retary of War, l800-2lj, have been reproduced as Micro- film Publication 15- Letters sent by the Superintendent of Indian Trade from 1807 to 1822, also recorded in six volumes, with a seventh volume covering the office in liquidation after 1822, are reproduced as Microfilm Publication l6. The incoming letters of the Secretary of War relating to Indian affairs from 1800 to 182*4 are divided into three series.
    [Show full text]
  • Westlands Water District – Warren Act Contract for Conveyance of Kings River Flood Flows in the San Luis Canal
    Final Environmental Assessment Westlands Water District – Warren Act Contract for Conveyance of Kings River Flood Flows in the San Luis Canal EA-11-002 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region South-Central California Area Office Fresno, California January 2012 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Table of Contents Page Section 1 Purpose and Need for Action ....................................................... 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................. 1 1.3 Scope ..................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Reclamation’s Legal and Statutory Authorities and Jurisdiction Relevant to the Proposed Federal Action.............................................. 2 1.5 Potential Issues...................................................................................... 3 Section 2 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action............................... 5 2.1 No Action Alternative ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Section Q – Stormwater/Flooding Study
    Tule River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Section Q – Stormwater/Flooding Study Section Q – Stormwater/Flooding Study Q.1 Introduction Q.1.1 An Integrated Approach to Stormwater Management Stormwater management is an often-overlooked component of resource planning, however effective stormwater management can be used to meet a range of objectives. While traditional stormwater management typically occurs within a single agency on a local scale, an integrated approach to stormwater management focuses on facilitating collaboration between utility districts, land use agencies, and environmental interest groups to develop comprehensive stormwater management solutions. Q.1.2 What is Stormwater? Stormwater is defined by the US EPA as runoff that is generated form rain and snowmelt events that flow over land or impervious surfaces and does not soak into the ground. When water is not able to percolate into the ground, it is moved downhill by gravity until it reaches a common low point such as a stream, lake, or storm drain. The journey of stormwater from the point where precipitation hits the ground to the point it enters into local water bodies provides great opportunity for pollutants to be picked up and distributed into local surface water. Common pollutants found in storm sewers and creeks include motor oil, pesticides, brake dust, animal wastes, paint, and household chemicals. Because stormwater is not treated prior to being discharged, it can be a significant contributor to surface water pollution. In addition to degraded water quality, improper management of stormwater can result in increased flooding. Water that is unable to infiltrate into the soil runs off and ultimately accumulates in low lying areas where flooding occurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 01/01/2012 to 03/31/2012 Sequoia National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 01/01/2012 to 03/31/2012 Sequoia National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring Nationwide Gypsy Moth Management in the - Vegetation management In Progress: Expected:03/2012 01/2013 Noel Schneeberger United States: A Cooperative (other than forest products) DEIS NOA in Federal Register 610-557-4121 Approach 09/19/2008 [email protected]. EIS Est. FEIS NOA in Federal us Register 12/2011 Description: The USDA Forest Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service are analyzing a range of strategies for controlling gypsy moth damage to forests and trees in the United States. Web Link: http://www.na.fs.fed.us/wv/eis/ Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. Nationwide. Land Management Planning - Regulations, Directives, In Progress: Expected:12/2011 12/2011 Larry Hayden Rule Orders DEIS NOA in Federal Register 202-205-1559 EIS 02/25/2011 [email protected] Est. FEIS NOA in Federal Register 11/2011 Description: The Department of Agriculture proposes to promulgate a new planning rule, which will set out the process for development, revision, and amendment of National Forest System land management plans. Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/planningrule Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. Agency-wide Rule. Nationwide Aerial Application - Regulations, Directives, In Progress: Expected:12/2011 01/2012 Glen Stein of Fire Retardant on National Orders DEIS NOA in Federal Register 208-869-5405 Forest System Lands.
    [Show full text]