DOCSLIB.ORG

2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region 2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report SCH#2014022018 prepared by Shasta Regional Transportation Agency 1255 East Street, Suite 202 Redding, California, 96001 Contact: Sean Tiedgen, Senior Transportation Planner Phone: (530) 262‐6185 prepared with the assistance of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 4825 J Street, Suite 200 Sacramento, California, 95819 August 2018 2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report SCH#2014022018 prepared by Shasta Regional Transportation Agency 1255 East Street, Suite 202 Redding, California, 96001 Contact: Sean Tiedgen, Senior Transportation Planner Phone: (530) 262‐6185 prepared with the assistance of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 4825 J Street, Suite 200 Sacramento, California, 95819 August 2018 This report prepared on 50% recycled paper with 50% post‐consumer content. Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................ES‐1 Project Synopsis .........................................................................................................................ES‐1 Alternatives ................................................................................................................................ES‐2 Areas of Known Controversy .....................................................................................................ES‐3 Issues to Resolve ........................................................................................................................ES‐3 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ........................................................................ES‐3 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.1 Project Background ......................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Purpose and Legal Authority ........................................................................................... 1‐2 1.3 SEIR Background ............................................................................................................. 1‐3 1.4 SEIR Organization ............................................................................................................ 1‐4 1.5 Baseline and Approach for Impact Analysis .................................................................... 1‐5 1.6 Environmental Review Process ....................................................................................... 1‐5 2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1 Lead Agency Name and Address ..................................................................................... 2‐1 2.2 Project Location .............................................................................................................. 2‐1 2.3 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.4 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................... 2‐6 2.5 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required .................................................... 2‐10 2.6 Relationship with Other Plans and Programs ............................................................... 2‐11 3 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................ 3‐1 3.1 Regional Setting .............................................................................................................. 3‐1 3.2 Regional Transportation System ..................................................................................... 3‐1 3.3 Cumulative Projects Setting ............................................................................................ 3‐3 3.3.1 CEQA Requirements ............................................................................................ 3‐3 3.3.2 Growth Projections in the Region ....................................................................... 3‐3 4 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.1 Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 4.1‐1 4.1.1 Setting .............................................................................................................. 4.1‐1 4.1.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................. 4.1‐7 4.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................................... 4.2‐1 4.2.1 Setting .............................................................................................................. 4.2‐1 4.2.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................. 4.2‐7 4.3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................... 4.3‐1 4.3.1 Setting .............................................................................................................. 4.3‐1 4.3.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................. 4.3‐5 4.4 Transportation and Circulation .................................................................................... 4.4‐1 4.4.1 Setting .............................................................................................................. 4.4‐1 4.4.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................. 4.4‐8 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report i Shasta Regional Transportation Agency 2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region 4.5 Tribal Cultural Resources ............................................................................................. 4.5‐1 4.5.1 Setting .............................................................................................................. 4.5‐1 4.5.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................. 4.5‐2 5 Other CEQA Required Discussions .............................................................................................. 5‐1 5.1 Growth Inducement ........................................................................................................ 5‐1 5.1.1 Economic Growth ................................................................................................ 5‐1 5.1.2 Employment, Household, and Population Growth ............................................. 5‐1 5.1.3 Removal of an Impediment to Growth ............................................................... 5‐2 5.2 Irreversible Environmental Effects .................................................................................. 5‐2 5.3 List of Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ................................................................... 5‐3 6 Alternatives ................................................................................................................................. 6‐1 6.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 6‐1 6.2 Alternatives Considered and Rejected ............................................................................ 6‐2 6.3 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative .............................................................................. 6‐2 6.3.1 Description .......................................................................................................... 6‐2 6.3.2 Impact Analysis .................................................................................................... 6‐2 6.4 Alternative 2: No Project 2015 RTP/SCS Alternative ...................................................... 6‐5 6.4.1 Description .......................................................................................................... 6‐5 6.4.2 Impact Analysis .................................................................................................... 6‐5 6.5 Alternative 3: Increased Infill Alternative ....................................................................... 6‐8 6.5.1 Description .......................................................................................................... 6‐8 6.5.2 Impact Analysis .................................................................................................... 6‐8 6.6 Environmentally Superior Alternative .......................................................................... 6‐11 7 References .................................................................................................................................. 7‐1 7.1 Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 7‐1 7.2 List of Preparers .............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Eastlake Iii Senior Housing Project Ceqa Findings of Fact and Statement of Overri
    SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EASTLAKE III SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS June 7, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1 II. ACRONYMS 2 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6 IV. BACKGROUND 8 V. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 9 VI. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA 11 VII LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS 11 VIII MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM 13 IX. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 14 LAND USE 15 LANDFORM ALTERATION AND AESTHETICS 15 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 15 WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY 15 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC 15 AIR QUALITY 16 NOISE 16 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 16 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 17 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES 17 i X CUMULATIVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 50 XI FEASIBILITY OF POTENTIAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 60 NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE 63 ALTERNATIVE MIX OF LAND USES 65 REDUCED DENSITY ALTERNATIVE 66 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE 68 XII STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 69 ii BEFORE THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL RE: EastLake III Senior Housing Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR); SCH #2005091047; EIR 05-02 FINDINGS OF FACT I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR) prepared for the EastLake III Senior Housing project addresses the potential environmental effects associated with implementation of the project. In addition, the Final SEIR evaluates three alternatives (1) the no development alternative, (2) existing land use designation alternative (commercial tourist), and (3) reduced density alternative (single family residential similar to surrounding development). The Final SEIR represents a second tier EIR, in accordance with CEQA Section 21094, and tiers off the Program EIR prepared for the EastLake Planned Community Master EIR (EIR #81-03).
    [Show full text]
  • C-1 Speces Habitat.Xlsx
    APPENDIX C – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TABLE C-1 SHASTA COUNTY VEGETATION TYPES AND SPECIES SUITABLE HABITAT (IN SQUARE MILES) MOUNTAIN VIRGINIA BEAVER AND CWHR HABITAT TYPE BEAR BOBCAT COYOTE GRAY FOX LION RACCOON SKUNK OPOSSUM MUSKRAT Alpine-dwarf shrub 1 1 1 1 1 Annual grassland 22 192 192 186 192 192 192 192 Aspen 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Barren 65 Bitterbrush 2 2 2 2 2 2 Blue oak woodland 306 306 306 306 306 306 306 Blue oak-foothill pine 73 155 155 152 155 155 155 155 Chamise-redshank chaparral 25 27 27 27 27 27 27 Closed-cone pine-cypress 92 15 11 15 15 15 15 Cropland 9 4 4 36 50 50 50 Douglas fir 258 258 258 258 258 258 258 258 Eastside pine 60 66 66 53 66 66 66 66 Evergreen orchard 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Freshwater emergent wetland 2 2 2 2 2 2 Irrigated field 3 30 30 6 30 30 30 Jeffrey pine 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Juniper 18 18 16 18 18 18 18 Klamath mixed conifer 327 327 327 193 327 327 327 327 Lacustrine 15 Lodgepole pine 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 Low sage 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mixed chaparral 169 211 211 196 211 211 211 211 Montane chaparral 214 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 Montane hardwood 325 349 346 344 346 346 346 346 Montane hardwood-conifer 250 251 251 251 251 251 251 251 Montane riparian 6 6 5 2 6 6 6 6 Pasture 9 19 19 19 19 19 19 Perennial grassland 30 32 32 30 32 32 32 32 Ponderosa pine 279 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 Red fir 47 47 47 46 46 9 46 C-1-1 TABLE C-1 SHASTA COUNTY VEGETATION TYPES AND SPECIES SUITABLE HABITAT (IN SQUARE MILES) MOUNTAIN VIRGINIA BEAVER AND CWHR HABITAT TYPE BEAR BOBCAT COYOTE GRAY FOX LION RACCOON SKUNK OPOSSUM MUSKRAT Rice 1 1 1 Riverine 1 7 7 Sagebrush 39 38 35 39 39 39 39 Sierran mixed conifer 633 633 633 633 633 633 633 633 Subalpine conifer 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Urban 49 49 49 49 49 Valley foothill riparian 1 12 12 12 12 12 12 Valley oak woodland 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Wet meadow 9 11 11 9 11 11 White fir 75 75 75 68 75 75 75 Square Miles 2,842 3,659 3,719 3,394 3,608 3,722 3,655 3,540 Square Kilometers 9,345 Stream Kilometers 4,148 Data Sources Species habitat: CDFW Interagency Wildlife Task Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Distribution in the Forested Region of Northwestern California
    BAT DISTRIBUTION IN THE FORESTED REGION OF NORTHWESTERN CALIFORNIA Prepared by: Prepared for: Elizabeth D. Pierson, Ph.D. California Department of Fish and Game William E. Rainey, Ph.D. Wildlife Management Division 2556 Hilgard Avenue Non Game Bird and Mammal Section Berkeley, CA 9470 1416 Ninth Street (510) 845-5313 Sacramento, CA 95814 (510) 548-8528 FAX [email protected] Contract #FG-5123-WM November 2007 Pierson and Rainey – Forest Bats of Northwestern California 2 Pierson and Rainey – Forest Bats of Northwestern California 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bat surveys were conducted in 1997 in the forested regions of northwestern California. Based on museum and literature records, seventeen species were known to occur in this region. All seventeen were identified during this study: fourteen by capture and release, and three by acoustic detection only (Euderma maculatum, Eumops perotis, and Lasiurus blossevillii). Mist-netting was conducted at nineteen sites in a six county area. There were marked differences among sites both in the number of individuals captured per unit effort and the number of species encountered. The five most frequently encountered species in net captures were: Myotis yumanensis, Lasionycteris noctivagans, Myotis lucifugus, Eptesicus fuscus, and Myotis californicus; the five least common were Pipistrellus hesperus, Myotis volans, Lasiurus cinereus, Myotis ciliolabrum, and Tadarida brasiliensis. Twelve species were confirmed as having reproductive populations in the study area. Sampling sites were assigned to a habitat class: young growth (YG), multi-age stand (MA), old growth (OG), and rock dominated (RK). There was a significant response to habitat class for the number of bats captured, and a trend towards differences for number of species detected.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Cedar Creek Scoped Subwatershed Study
    UPPER CEDAR CREEK SCOPED SUBWATERSHED STUDY Prepared for: THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO AND GRAND RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Prepared by: MATRIX SOLUTIONS INC. WOOD ENVIRONMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTIONS NATURAL RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. SGL PLANNING & DESIGN Version 1.0 October 2019 Guelph, Ontario Unit 7B, 650 Woodlawn Rd. West Guelph, ON, Canada N1K 1B8 T 519.772.3777 F 226.314.1908 www.matrix-solutions.com UPPER CEDAR CREEK SCOPED SUBWATERSHED STUDY Prepared for the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and the Grand River Conservation Authority October 2019 reviewed by Amanda McKay, P.Eng. Sam Bellamy, P.Eng. Water Resources Engineer Principal Water Resources Engineer Matrix Solutions Inc. Matrix Solutions Inc. reviewed by Aaron Farrell, M.Eng., P.Eng., CPM Ron Scheckenberger, M.Eng., P.Eng. Associate Principal Consultant Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions Contributors Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions Natural Resource Solutions Inc. SGL Planning & Design Paul Martin, Aqua Insight Inc DISCLAIMER We certify that this report is accurate and complete and accords with the information available during the site investigation. Information obtained during the site investigation or provided by third parties is believed to be accurate but is not guaranteed. We have exercised reasonable skill, care, and diligence in assessing the information obtained during the preparation of this report. This report was prepared for the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and Grand River Conservation Authority. The report may not be relied upon by any other person or entity without our written consent and that of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and Grand River Conservation Authority. Any uses of this report by a third party, or any reliance on decisions made based on it, are the responsibility of that party.
    [Show full text]
  • Across Watersheds in the Klamath Mountains
    Diversity 2013, 5, 657-679; doi:10.3390/d5030657 OPEN ACCESS diversity ISSN 1424-2818 www.mdpi.com/journal/diversity Article Genetic Diversity of Black Salamanders (Aneides flavipunctatus) across Watersheds in the Klamath Mountains Sean B. Reilly 1,*, Mitchell F. Mulks 2, Jason M. Reilly 3, W. Bryan Jennings 4, and David B. Wake 1 1 Museum of Vertebrate Zoology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, 3101 Valley Life Sciences Building, Berkeley, CA 94720-3160, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 3 Bureau of Land Management, Medford Interagency Office, Medford, OR 97504, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 4 Museu Nacional, Departamento de Vertebrados, Universidade Federal Do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ 20940-040, Brazil; E-Mail: [email protected] * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-510-642-3567; Fax: +1-510-643-8238. Received: 31 May 2013; in revised form: 2 August 2013 / Accepted: 8 August 2013 / Published: 29 August 2013 Abstract: Here we characterize the genetic structure of Black Salamanders (Aneides flavipunctatus) in the Klamath Mountains of northwestern California and southwestern Oregon using mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. We hypothesized that the Sacramento, Smith, Klamath, and Rogue River watersheds would represent distinct genetic populations based on prior ecological results, which suggest that Black Salamanders avoid high elevations such as the ridges that separate watersheds. Our mitochondrial results revealed two major lineages, one in the Sacramento River watershed, and another containing the Klamath, Smith, and Rogue River watersheds.
    [Show full text]
  • 9691.Ch01.Pdf
    © 2006 UC Regents Buy this book University of California Press, one of the most distinguished univer- sity presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2006 by The Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sawyer, John O., 1939– Northwest California : a natural history / John O. Sawyer. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-520-23286-0 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Natural history—California, Northern I. Title. QH105.C2S29 2006 508.794—dc22 2005034485 Manufactured in the United States of America 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 10987654321 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum require- ments of ansi/niso z/39.48-1992 (r 1997) (Permanence of Paper).∞ The Klamath Land of Mountains and Canyons The Klamath Mountains are the home of one of the most exceptional temperate coniferous forest regions in the world. The area’s rich plant and animal life draws naturalists from all over the world. Outdoor enthusiasts enjoy its rugged mountains, its many lakes, its wildernesses, and its wild rivers. Geologists come here to refine the theory of plate tectonics. Yet, the Klamath Mountains are one of the least-known parts of the state. The region’s complex pattern of mountains and rivers creates a bewil- dering set of landscapes.
    [Show full text]
  • Summitpost.Org
    Print This Page from SummitPost.org Page Type: Area/Range Location: Califo rnia, United States, No rth America Latitude/Longitude: 41.00020°N / 123.048°W Season: Spring, Summer, Fall Elevation: 9002 ft / 2744 m Creation Date: Jul 3, 2007 7:41 pm Last Edited Date: Jan 3, 2010 2:12 am Primary Image ID: 538315.jpg Last Edited By: Bubba Suess Created By: Bubba Suess Unique Page ID: 307625 Hits: 17673 Page Score: 91.1% Table of Contents Overview History Located deep in the heart of northern California's Geographic Context Klamath Mountains, the Trinity Alps are a mysterious mountain paradise that offers up The Trinity Alps Wilderness some of the western United States' most Trinity Alps Subranges spectacular, rugged and wild terrain. From Trinity Alps unusual red peaks to vast stands of virgin timber The Scott Mountains to jagged granite turrets, the Trinity Alps are at The Salmon Mountains once reminiscent of the more well known regions like the Sierra Nevada, yet are distinctly unique, Trinity Alps Regions with incomparable spectacles. Indeed, this is one Green Trinities of the great American wilderness regions. Few White Trinities places offer such limitless vistas, spectacular Red Trinities peaks, rugged landscapes, varieties of terrain Peaks and biodiversity and sense of vastness as the Trinities. Yet, despite the superlatives, the Trinity Lakes Alps receive relatively few visitors. It is not Waterfalls unusual to arrive at one of the more popular Trailheads destinations in the Trinities and find no one Trailhead Map present. The unsung back country is isolation Getting There personified. However, whatever intangible qualities the Trinity Alps may have to recommend Camping them, it is the alpine scenery, the ever seductive Red Tape combination of conifer and meadow, rock and ice Pacific Crest Trail and the serene, frightening siren of falling water Trinity Alps Names that will define the Trinities.
    [Show full text]
  • SOLAS 2018 Consolidated Edition
    SOLAS 2018 Consolidated Edition CHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS PART A-APPLICATION, DEFINITIONS, ETC. Regulation 1 Application* * Refer to MSC-MEPC.5/Circ.8 on Unified interpretation of the application of regulations governed by the building contract date, the keel laying date and the delivery date for the requirements of the SOLAS and MARPOL Conventions. (a) Unless expressly provided otherwise, the present Regulations apply only to ships engaged on international voyages. (b) The classes of ships to which each Chapter applies are more precisely defined, and the extent of the application is shown, in each Chapter. Regulation 2 Definitions For the purpose of the present regulations, unless expressly provided otherwise: (a) Regulations means the regulations contained in the annex to the present Convention. (b) Administration means the Government of the State whose flag the ship is entitled to fly. (c) Approved means approved by the Administration. (d) International voyage means a voyage from a country to which the present Convention applies to a port outside such country, or conversely. (e) A passenger is every person other than: 1 (i) the master and the members of the crew or other persons employed or engaged in any capacity on board a ship on the business of that ship and (ii) a child under one year of age. (f) A passenger ship is a ship which carries more than twelve passengers. (g) A cargo ship is any ship which is not a passenger ship. (h) A tanker is a cargo ship constructed or adapted for the carriage in bulk of liquid cargoes of an inflammable* nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Descriptions NORTH COAST and MONTANE ECOLOGICAL PROVINCE
    Vegetation Descriptions NORTH COAST AND MONTANE ECOLOGICAL PROVINCE CALVEG ZONE 1 December 11, 2008 Note: There are three Sections in this zone: Northern California Coast (“Coast”), Northern California Coast Ranges (“Ranges”) and Klamath Mountains (“Mountains”), each with several to many subsections CONIFER FOREST / WOODLAND DF PACIFIC DOUGLAS-FIR ALLIANCE Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is the dominant overstory conifer over a large area in the Mountains, Coast, and Ranges Sections. This alliance has been mapped at various densities in most subsections of this zone at elevations usually below 5600 feet (1708 m). Sugar Pine (Pinus lambertiana) is a common conifer associate in some areas. Tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus var. densiflorus) is the most common hardwood associate on mesic sites towards the west. Along western edges of the Mountains Section, a scattered overstory of Douglas-fir often exists over a continuous Tanoak understory with occasional Madrones (Arbutus menziesii). When Douglas-fir develops a closed-crown overstory, Tanoak may occur in its shrub form (Lithocarpus densiflorus var. echinoides). Canyon Live Oak (Quercus chrysolepis) becomes an important hardwood associate on steeper or drier slopes and those underlain by shallow soils. Black Oak (Q. kelloggii) may often associate with this conifer but usually is not abundant. In addition, any of the following tree species may be sparsely present in Douglas-fir stands: Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Ponderosa Pine (Ps ponderosa), Incense Cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), White Fir (Abies concolor), Oregon White Oak (Q garryana), Bigleaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), California Bay (Umbellifera californica), and Tree Chinquapin (Chrysolepis chrysophylla). The shrub understory may also be quite diverse, including Huckleberry Oak (Q.
    [Show full text]
  • WEST WEAVER CREEK Assessment and Action Planning
    WEST WEAVER CREEK Assessment and Action Planning Prepared for August 2012 Trinity County Resource Conservation District WEST WEAVER CREEK Assessment and Action Planning Prepared for August 2012 Trinity County Resource Conservation District 2600 Capitol Avenue Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95816 916.564.4500 www.pwa-ltd.com Los Angeles Oakland Olympia Petaluma Portland San Francisco San Diego Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills D211670.00 WEST WEAVER CREEK ASSESSMENT AND ACTION PLANNING TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overview of the Assessment 1 1.2 Goals 2 1.3 Objectives 2 1.4 Conclusions 2 2 Setting 4 2.1 Geography and Land Ownership/Management 4 2.2 Infrastructure 5 2.3 Topography and Land Cover 5 2.4 Geology, Soils and Hillslope Processes 6 2.5 Hydrology 7 2.5.1 Climate 7 2.5.2 Basin characteristics 7 2.5.3 Flows 7 3 Watershed History 9 3.1 Land Use Practices 9 3.2 Recent Fire History 9 3.3 Past Stream Assessments 10 3.3.1 West Weaver Creek Fish Habitat Assessment (1990 Ebasco) 10 3.3.2 Weaverville Watershed Analysis (2004 USFS) 10 3.4 Past Stream Restoration Efforts 11 4 Existing Channel Conditions 12 4.1 Water Quality 12 4.2 Stream Classification 12 4.3 Riparian Vegetation 13 4.4 Fish Ecology and Habitat 13 5 Field Reconnaissance and Assessment 15 5.1 Field Reconnaissance 15 5.1.1 Initial Reconnaissance 15 5.1.2 Detailed Reconnaissance 16 5.2 Analysis 19 5.2.1 Examination of Profile 19 5.2.2 Analysis of Cross Sections 19 5.2.3 Analysis of Culvert Hydraulics for Fish Passage 22 5.3 Summary of Field Assessment, Modeling and Analysis
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2021 Huntalaskamagazine.Com 1
    Summer 2021 HuntAlaskaMagazine.com 1 Volume 13 | Issue 2 Features Summer 2021 26 Five for Five at Seventy-Five Contents by Dave Grover A remote, do-it-yourself (DIY) moose hunt isn’t for everyone. However, with the right team, the right attitude, the right gear and the willingness to persevere, it’s doable for many. 75-year- old Dave Grover and four partners took fve bulls on their recent DIY adventure. 32 2021 Editors’ Choice Awards by Hunt Alaska Staf Te sixth annual Hunt Alaska Editors’ Choice Awards showcase the best gear we tested in 2020/21. Categories for this year’s awards include Guns and Ammunition; Optics; Packs and Cases; Field Accessories; Knives, Cutting Tools and Sharpeners; Game Processing and Cooking; and Apparel. 54 42 2021 New Gear by Hunt Alaska Staf Now is the time to start gearing up for hunting season! Here’s a short list of some promising new items to consider taking to the feld with you in 2021. Rest assured, we’ll be testing many of these ourselves this fall. Departments 4 Hunt Alaska Online 6 Hunting for a Compliment 46 Grit in Hunters 10 The Hunt by Larry Bartlett and Peggy Keiper For remote hunting trips, grit is often what separates 14 Trip Tips the successful from the unsuccessful. Some have it. Life on the Ledge Some, not so much. What is it, and how does it relate 18 to hunter success? Larry Bartlett and Peggy Keiper tell 22 Red Gold us, along with things we can do to become more gritty.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Sports
    List of sports The following is a list of sports/games, divided by cat- egory. There are many more sports to be added. This system has a disadvantage because some sports may fit in more than one category. According to the World Sports Encyclopedia (2003) there are 8,000 indigenous sports and sporting games.[1] 1 Physical sports 1.1 Air sports Wingsuit flying • Parachuting • Banzai skydiving • BASE jumping • Skydiving Lima Lima aerobatics team performing over Louisville. • Skysurfing Main article: Air sports • Wingsuit flying • Paragliding • Aerobatics • Powered paragliding • Air racing • Paramotoring • Ballooning • Ultralight aviation • Cluster ballooning • Hopper ballooning 1.2 Archery Main article: Archery • Gliding • Marching band • Field archery • Hang gliding • Flight archery • Powered hang glider • Gungdo • Human powered aircraft • Indoor archery • Model aircraft • Kyūdō 1 2 1 PHYSICAL SPORTS • Sipa • Throwball • Volleyball • Beach volleyball • Water Volleyball • Paralympic volleyball • Wallyball • Tennis Members of the Gotemba Kyūdō Association demonstrate Kyūdō. 1.4 Basketball family • Popinjay • Target archery 1.3 Ball over net games An international match of Volleyball. Basketball player Dwight Howard making a slam dunk at 2008 • Ball badminton Summer Olympic Games • Biribol • Basketball • Goalroball • Beach basketball • Bossaball • Deaf basketball • Fistball • 3x3 • Footbag net • Streetball • • Football tennis Water basketball • Wheelchair basketball • Footvolley • Korfball • Hooverball • Netball • Peteca • Fastnet • Pickleball
    [Show full text]