DOCSLIB.ORG

C:\Documents and Settings\Canterbury\My Documents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
C:\Documents and Settings\Canterbury\My Documents Draft Recovery Plan for the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis californiana) May 2003 Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon Approved: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Manager, California/Nevada Operations Office Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: The Draft Recovery Plan for the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep was developed by the State of California, Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in cooperation with: National Park Service U.S. Bureau of Land Management U.S. Forest Service XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Date: Director, California Department of Fish and Game XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Date: Regional Director, National Park Service XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Date: Regional Director, U.S. Bureau of Land Management XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Date: Regional Forester, U.S. Forest Service Primary Author The primary author of this recovery plan is: John D. Wehausen, Ph.D. University of California White Mountain Research Station 3000 East Line St. Bishop, CA 93514 The recovery plan was written with the assistance of the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Recovery Team (see Acknowledgments). i Disclaimer Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions required to recover and/or protect listed species. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, publish recovery plans, sometime preparing them with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State and other Federal agencies, Tribes, and other affected and interested parties involved. Recovery plans do not obligate cooperating or other parties to undertake specific tasks and may not represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than our own. They represent our official position only after they have been signed by the Director, Regional Director, or California/Nevada Operations Manager as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature citation should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Draft Recovery Plan for the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. xiii + 147 pp. An electronic version of this recovery plan is also available at http://www.r1.fws.gov/ecoservices/endangered/recovery/default.htm. ii Acknowledgments This recovery plan was prepared by the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Recovery Team, with important contributions from Mr. Carl Benz, Dr. Vern Bleich, Dr. Walter Boyce, Ms. Paula Brown, Ms. Diana Craig, Dr. Ben Gonzales, Dr. David Graber, Mr. Troy Kelly, Dr. Howard Quigley, Dr. Peter Stine, Mr. Steve Torres, and Dr. John D. Wehausen. The recovery plan benefitted greatly from numerous discussions with Dr. Holly Ernest, Mr. Mike Lawrence, Ms. Kathy Noland, Mr. Christopher Papouchis, Ms. Wendy Philpott, Ms. Lynn Sadler, Mr. Steve Thompson, Mr. John Walter, Mr. Harold Warner, and Dr. David S. Zezulak who also facilitated preparation and compilation of the recovery plan. iii Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Recovery Team Stakeholder Team Members Katie Bellomo, People for Mono Basin Preservation, Lee Vining, California Bob Bissell, Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep Paula Brown, Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Foundation, Bishop, California Deirdre E. Flynn, California Wool Growers Association, Sacramento, California Joe Echenique, Echenique Livestock Company, Bakersfield, California Gary Guenther, Wilderness Watch, Mammoth Lakes, California Debbie House, Department of Water and Power, Bishop, California Mickey Jarvis, California Cattleman’s Association, Bishop, California Ron Keil, Inyo National Forest, U.S. Forest Service, Bishop, California Brenda Lacey, California Wool Growers Association, Bishop, California Mike Lawrence, Bridgeport Ranger District, U.S. Forest Service, Bridgeport, California Ray Lee, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Cody, Wyoming Craig London, Rock Creek Pack Station, Bishop, California Sally Miller, The Wilderness Society, Lee Vining, California Paul McFarland, Friends of the Inyo, Lee Vining, California Kathy Noland, Inyo National Forest, U.S. Forest Service, Bishop, California Chris Papouchis, Animal Protection Institute, Sacramento, California Toni Richards, Bishop Paiute Tribe, Bishop, California Lynn Sadler, Mountain Lion Foundation, Sacramento, California Steve Thompson, Yosemite National Park, National Park Service, California Brian Tillemans, Department of Water and Power, Bishop, California Todd Vogel, Sierra Mountaineering Center, Bishop, California John Walter, The Sierra Club – Range of Light Chapter, Mammoth Lakes, California Harold Werner, Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks, National Park Service, California Stakeholder Meetings were facilitated by Dr. John D. Wehausen and Dr. David S. Zezulak. iv Science Team Members Mr. Carl Benz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura, California Dr. Vern Bleich, California Department of Fish and Game, Bishop, California Dr. Walter Boyce, University of California, Davis, California Ms. Diana Craig, U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Vallejo, California Dr. David M. Graber, Sequoia – Kings Canyon National Park, Three Rivers, California Dr. Howard Quigley, Hornocker Wildlife Institute, Bozeman, Montana Dr. Peter Stine, Sierra Nevada Research Center, Sacramento, California Mr. Steve Torres, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California Dr. John D. Wehausen, University of California, White Mountains Research Station, Bishop, California Science Team Meetings were facilitated by Mr. Troy D. Kelly and Dr. David S. Zezulak. v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Current Species Status: The population of bighorn sheep in the Sierra Nevada of California (Ovis canadensis californiana) was listed as an endangered species on January 3, 2000, following emergency listing on April 20, 1999. In 1995 these bighorn sheep hit a population low of about 100 total individuals, distributed across 5 separate areas of the southern and central Sierra Nevada, and had increased to about 125 in 1999. Since then conditions have been particularly favorable for population growth, with the total number of individuals reaching about 250 in 2001. Habitat Requirements and Limiting Factors: These bighorn sheep use habitats ranging from the highest elevations along the crest of the Sierra Nevada (4,000+ meters [13,120+ feet]) to winter ranges at the eastern base of the range as low as 1,450 meters (4,760 feet). These habitats range from Great Basin sagebrush scrub to alpine. Within this range, primary elements of preferred habitats are visual openness and close proximity to steep rocky escape terrain. Forage resources vary greatly across habitats used by these bighorn sheep, and plant species eaten vary accordingly. Of particular importance to population parameters is the nutrient content of forages eaten. Nutrient quality of diets varies greatly with season and elevation and is limited primarily by effects of temperature and soil moisture on plant growth. Because of the relationship between elevation and temperature, low elevation winter ranges provide an important source of high quality forage early in the growing season. Significant population declines beginning in the late 1980's were associated with these bighorn sheep avoiding low elevation winter ranges. This avoidance behavior has been suggested to be linked to increasing predation pressure from mountain lions on winter ranges during the 1980's. Because of population collapses that have occurred since this winter range avoidance began, some of the herds may now be too small to allow the group sizes necessary to provide bighorn sheep the psychological comfort to make use of winter ranges. Longer-term limiting factors have undoubtedly included contact with domestic sheep leading to pneumonia epizootics in the bighorn sheep; domestic sheep grazing adjacent to bighorn sheep ranges has continued to be a significant threat vi in recent decades. Because almost all bighorn sheep habitat in the Sierra Nevada is in public ownership, loss of habitat to human use has not been a limiting factor. Recovery Objective: The objective of this recovery plan is to attain population sizes and geographic distribution of bighorn sheep in the Sierra Nevada that assure long-term viability of the overall population and thereby allow its delisting as an endangered species. Recovery Priority: The Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep has a recovery priority number of 3. Recovery priorities for listed species range from 1 to 18, with 1 being the highest priority. The priority system uses the criteria of: (1) degree of threat, (2) recovery potential, and (3) taxonomy (level of genetic distinctiveness). A fourth factor, conflict, is a supplementary element characterizing whether or not recovery actions are likely to be in conflict with construction or other development projects. A priority of 3 has been assigned to the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep for the following reasons: (1) there is a high degree of threat because the population is small in size and its distribution is fragmented; (2) there is a high recovery potential; and (3) the listed entity, as described, is a distinct population (which receives the same rating level as a subspecies). Downlisting Criteria: Potential bighorn sheep habitat in the Sierra Nevada was divided into 17 herd units, and those herd units were grouped into 4 recovery units on the basis of natural breaks in habitat distribution.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK O C Y Lu H M Tioga Pass Entrance 9945Ft C Glen Aulin K T Ne Ee 3031M E R Hetc C Gaylor Lakes R H H Tioga Road Closed
    123456789 il 395 ra T Dorothy Lake t s A Bond C re A Pass S KE LA c i f i c IN a TW P Tower Peak Barney STANISLAUS NATIONAL FOREST Mary Lake Lake Buckeye Pass Twin Lakes 9572ft EMIGRANT WILDERNESS 2917m k H e O e O r N V C O E Y R TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST N Peeler B A Lake Crown B C Lake Haystack k Peak e e S Tilden r AW W Schofield C TO Rock Island OTH IL Peak Lake RI Pass DG D Styx E ER s Matterhorn Pass l l Peak N a Slide E Otter F a Mountain S Lake ri e S h Burro c D n Pass Many Island Richardson Peak a L Lake 9877ft R (summer only) IE 3010m F LE Whorl Wilma Lake k B Mountain e B e r U N Virginia Pass C T O Virginia S Y N Peak O N Y A Summit s N e k C k Lake k c A e a C i C e L C r N r Kibbie d YO N C n N CA Lake e ACK AI RRICK K J M KE ia in g IN ir A r V T e l N k l U e e pi N O r C S O M Y Lundy Lake L Piute Mountain N L te I 10541ft iu A T P L C I 3213m T Smedberg k (summer only) Lake e k re e C re Benson Benson C ek re Lake Lake Pass C Vernon Creek Mount k r e o Gibson e abe Upper an r Volunteer McC le Laurel C McCabe E Peak rn Lake u Lake N t M e cCa R R be D R A Lak D NO k Rodgers O I es e PLEASANT EA H N EL e Lake I r l Frog VALLEY R i E k G K C E LA e R a e T I r r Table Lake V North Peak T T C N Pettit Peak A INYO NATIONAL FOREST O 10788ft s Y 3288m M t ll N Fa s Roosevelt ia A e Mount Conness TILT r r Lake Saddlebag ILL VALLEY e C 12590ft (summer only) h C Lake ill c 3837m Lake Eleanor ilt n Wapama Falls T a (summer only) N S R I Virginia c A R i T Lake f N E i MIGUEL U G c HETCHY Rancheria Falls O N Highway 120 D a MEADOW
    [Show full text]
  • Motor Vehicle Use
    350000 360000 370000 380000 118°45'0"W 30E301A 118°37'30"W Continued on Casa Diablo Map 118°30'0"W 118°22'30"W T OPERATOR RESPONSIBILITIES EXPLANATION OF LEGEND ITEMS 04S15B o PINE GROVE 04S15 M Legend PICNIC AREA 3 04S15E a 0 Operating a motor vehicle on National Forest System Roads Open to Highway Legal Vehicles Only: m " LOWER E m Roads Open to Highway Legal Vehicles 5" 3 roads, National Forest System trails, and in areas on 04S15C 9 & 0 o 1 UPPER t PINE h National Forest System lands carries a greater These roads are open only to motor vehicles licensed under Roads Open to All Vehicles 04S18 " 2 9 0 GROVE 3 responsibility than operating that vehicle in a city or other State law for general operation on all public roads within the 04S18B E Trails Open to All Vehicles CAMPGROUND 0 developed setting. Not only must you know and follow all State. 3 applicable traffic laws, you need to show concern for the Trails Open to Vehicles 50" or Less in Width 04S12O 04S18A environment as well as other forest users. The misuse of Roads Open to All Vehicles: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Trails Open to Motorcycles Only 06S08 0 6 motor vehicles can lead to the temporary or permanent S 06S08A G Rock 0 04S12P o Seasonal Designation 6 r closure of any designated road, trail, or area. As a motor These roads are open to all motor vehicles, including smaller 9" Creek g (See Seasonal Designation Table) e 04S12Q vehicle operator, you are also subject to State traffic law, off-highway vehicles that may not be licensed for highway Lake R d including State requirements for licensing, registration, and use (but not to oversize or overweight vehicles under State Highways, US, State 9" 06S06A MOSQUITO FLAT operation of the vehicle in question.
    [Show full text]
  • Ansel Adams by Ross Loeser February 2010
    Ansel Adams By Ross Loeser February 2010 Ansel Adams is one of the most fascinating people of the 20th Century… a photography pioneer whose art captured the imagination of millions of ordinary people. Most of the information in this paper is from his autobiography – written in the last five years of his life. I found the book a joy to read. Adams (1902-1984) was born in San Francisco and lived most of his life in that area. For his last 22 years he lived in Carmel Highlands. Some key formative events in his early life were: In 1916, when he was 14, he influenced his family to go on vacation in Yosemite after reading the book, In the Heart of the Sierras by J.M. Hutchens. During that trip, he received his first camera – a Kodak Box Brownie. He returned to Yosemite every year of his life thereafter.1 He was hired as a “darkroom monkey” by a neighbor who operated a photo finishing business in 1917, which enabled him to learn about making photographic prints. As he grew up, one major focus was music – the piano. “By 1923 I was a budding professional pianist…”2 On a bright spring Yosemite day in 1927, Adams made a photograph that was to “change my understanding of the medium.” The picture was of Half Dome, and titled “Monolith, The Face of Half Dome.” The full story is included later in this paper, but, in a nutshell, he captured how he felt about the scene, not how it actually appeared (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • THE YOSEMITE by John Muir CHAPTER I The
    THE YOSEMITE By John Muir CHAPTER I The Approach to the Valley When I set out on the long excursion that finally led to California I wandered afoot and alone, from Indiana to the Gulf of Mexico, with a plant-press on my back, holding a generally southward course, like the birds when they are going from summer to winter. From the west coast of Florida I crossed the gulf to Cuba, enjoyed the rich tropical flora there for a few months, intending to go thence to the north end of South America, make my way through the woods to the headwaters of the Amazon, and float down that grand river to the ocean. But I was unable to find a ship bound for South America--fortunately perhaps, for I had incredibly little money for so long a trip and had not yet fully recovered from a fever caught in the Florida swamps. Therefore I decided to visit California for a year or two to see its wonderful flora and the famous Yosemite Valley. All the world was before me and every day was a holiday, so it did not seem important to which one of the world's wildernesses I first should wander. Arriving by the Panama steamer, I stopped one day in San Francisco and then inquired for the nearest way out of town. "But where do you want to go?" asked the man to whom I had applied for this important information. "To any place that is wild," I said. This reply startled him. He seemed to fear I might be crazy and therefore the sooner I was out of town the better, so he directed me to the Oakland ferry.
    [Show full text]
  • No Ring Fracture in Mono Basin, California
    No ring fracture in Mono Basin, California Wes Hildreth, Judy Fierstein†, and Juliet Ryan-Davis§ Volcano Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA ABSTRACT influenced its vent pattern. The apparently rhyolite volcanoes. Kistler mapped a shear zone arcuate chain actually consists of three lin- in Mesozoic granitoids that he interpreted as a In Mono Basin, California, USA, a near- ear segments that reflect Quaternary tec- segment of a much broader ring fracture that he circular ring fracture 12 km in diameter was tonic influence and not Cretaceous inheri- postulated to circle beneath the youthful chain proposed by R.W. Kistler in 1966 to have tance. A rhyolitic magma reservoir under of Mono Craters’ rhyolite domes (Fig. 2). The originated as the protoclastic margin of the the central segment of the Mono chain has following critique of Kistler’s ring fracture hy- Cretaceous Aeolian Buttes pluton, to have erupted many times in the late Holocene and pothesis does not diminish our admiration for been reactivated in the middle Pleistocene, as recently as 700 years ago. The ring frac- his pioneering geologic investigation of one of and to have influenced the arcuate trend of ture idea, however, prompted several geo- the more complex and precipitous terrains of the the chain of 30 young (62–0.7 ka) rhyolite physical investigations that sought a much western USA. domes called the Mono Craters. In view of broader magma body, but none identified a Our reinvestigation assembles geologic and the frequency and recency of explosive erup- low-density or low-velocity anomaly beneath geophysical evidence that bears upon the ring tions along the Mono chain, and because the purported 12-km-wide ring, which we fracture hypothesis and Quaternary magmatism.
    [Show full text]
  • Boyhood Days in the Owens Valley 1890-1908
    Boyhood Days in the Owens Valley 1890-1908 Beyond the High Sierra and near the Nevada line lies Inyo County, California—big, wild, beautiful, and lonely. In its center stretches the Owens River Valley, surrounded by the granite walls of the Sierra Nevada to the west and the White Mountains to the east. Here the remote town of Bishop hugs the slopes of towering Mount Tom, 13,652 feet high, and here I was born on January 6, 1890. When I went to college, I discovered that most Californians did not know where Bishop was, and I had to draw them a map. My birthplace should have been Candelaria, Nevada, for that was where my parents were living in 1890. My father was an engineer in the Northern Belle silver mine. I was often asked, "Then how come you were born in Bishop?" and I replied, "Because my mother was there." The truth was that after losing a child at birth the year before, she felt Candelaria's medical care was not to be trusted. The decline in the price of silver, the subsequent depression, and the playing out of the mines in Candelaria forced the Albright family to move to Bishop permanently. We had a good life in Bishop. I loved it, was inspired by its aura, and always drew strength and serenity from it. I have no recollection of ever having any bad times. There weren't many special things to do, but what- ever we did, it was on horseback or afoot. Long hours were spent in school.
    [Show full text]
  • Phil Collh CHAPTER IV
    Phil Collh CHAPTER IV. Management Direction Introduction This chapter documents how the Inyo National Forest vnll be managed during this planning pericd. It provides dj"x'on to Forest land managers and explains to the public the rem why specific areas are managed for specific reasons and how that will be accanplxshed. The chapter is divided into five sections: 1. Forest Goals lists the resources of the Forest with their respective manag-t goals. 2. Forest Objectives lists outputs for each resource that will result fran inplementing the Plan. 3. Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines are the bases for all management activities on the Forest. Each resource has a set of standards and guides to that the resource is protected, maintained or developd in an emimmentally sound and ewnanically cost-effective way. These standards and guides apply to all areas of the Forest. 4. w"t PresQliptiOns prescribe how areas on the Forest will be managed with a specific resource -is. For example, any Wildemess on the Forest no matter where it is located will be managed under Prescription #1 - Designated Wildemess. Each prescription describes the ObJeCtive of manag€inent and the area's resource -is. 5. Manag5wn t Area D-im delineates boundaries of the twenty management areas on the Forest. Each of these has a different mix of prescriptions, but all are managed under the Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines. National Forests are managed under a variety of federal laws rqirg fmthe U.S. Minirq Laws of 1872 to the National Forest Managmt Act of 1976. Forest Semice iVamals and Handbooks and the Pacific southwest Regimal Guide provide additional policy diredion.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper-Crustal Cooling of the Wrangellia Composite Terrane in the Northern St. Elias Mountains, Western Canada
    RESEARCH Upper-crustal cooling of the Wrangellia composite terrane in the northern St. Elias Mountains, western Canada Sarah Falkowski1 and Eva Enkelmann2 1UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN, DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES, 72074 TÜBINGEN, GERMANY 2UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI, DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY, CINCINNATI, OHIO 45221-0037, USA ABSTRACT This study presents the long-term exhumation history of the Wrangellia composite terrane of the remote and ice-covered northern St. Elias Mountains in southwest Yukon, northwest British Columbia, and adjacent Alaska. Detrital zircon and apatite fission-track age distributions are presented from 21 glacial catchments. The detrital sampling approach allows for a large spatial coverage (~30,000 km2) and access to material eroded beneath the ice. An additional five bedrock samples were dated by zircon fission-track analysis for a comparison with detrital results. Our new thermochronology data record the Late Jurassic–mid-Cretaceous accretion of the Wrangellia composite terrane to the former North American margin and magmatism, which reset the older thermal record. The good preservation of the Jurassic–Cretaceous record suggests that Cenozoic erosion must have been limited overall. Nonetheless, Eocene spreading-ridge subduction and Oligocene–Neogene cooling in response to the ongoing Yakutat flat-slab subduction are evident in the study area despite its inboard position from the active plate boundary. The results further indicate an area of rapid exhumation at the northern end of the Fairweather fault ca. 10–5 Ma; this area is bounded by discrete, unmapped structures. The area of rapid exhumation shifted southwest toward the plate boundary and the center of the St. Elias syntaxis after 5 Ma. Integrating the new data with published detrital thermochronology from the southern St.
    [Show full text]
  • Kings Canyon and Sequoia National Parks
    S o k u To Bishop ee t Piute Pass Cr h F 11423ft p o o 3482m r h k s S i o B u B i th G s h L o A p Pavilion Dome Mount C F 11846ft IE Goethe C or r R e k S 3611m I 13264ft a D VID e n 4024m k E J Lake oa q Sabrina u McClure Meadow k r i n 9600ft o F 2926m e l d R d Mount Henry i i Mount v 12196ft e Darwin M 3717m r The Hermit 13830ft South L 12360ft 4215m E 3767m Lake Big Pine C G 3985ft DINKEY O O 1215m O P D Hell for Sure Pass E w o N D Mount V s 11297ft A O e t T R McGee n L LAKES 3443m D U s E 12969ft T 3953m I O C C o A N r N Mount Powell WILDERNESS r D B a Y A JOHN l 13361ft I O S V I R N N 4072m Bi Bishop Pass g P k i ine Cree v I D e 11972ft r E 3649m C Mount Goddard L r E MUIR e 13568ft Muir Pass e C DUSY North Palisade k 4136m 11955ft O BASIN 3644m N 14242ft Black Giant T E 4341m 13330ft COURTRIGHT JOHN MUIR P Le Conte A WILDERNESS 4063m RESERVOIR L I Canyon S B Charybdis A 395 8720ft i D rc 13091ft E Middle Palisade h 2658m Mount Reinstein 14040ft 3990m C r WILDERNESS CR Cre e 12604ft A ek v ES 4279m i Blackcap 3842m N T R Mountain Y O an INYO d s E 11559ft P N N a g c r i 3523m C ui T f n M rail i i H c John K A e isad Creek C N Pal r W T e E s H G D t o D I T d E T E d V r WISHON G a a IL O r O S i d l RESERVOIR R C Mather Pass Split Mountain G R W Finger Pe ak A Amphitheater 14058ft E 12100ft G 12404ft S Lake 4285m 3688m E 3781m D N U IV P S I C P D E r E e R e k B C A SIERRA NATIONAL FOREST E art Taboose r S id G g k e I N Pass r k Tunemah Peak V D o e I 11894ft 11400ft F e A R r C 3625m ree 3475m C k L W n L k O Striped
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Repeat Photographs of Darwin and Dana Glaciers, Sierra Nevada, California
    2008 Repeat Photographs of Darwin and Dana Glaciers, Sierra Nevada, California Hassan Basagic October 2008 I collected repeat photographs of two Sierra Nevada glaciers in September, 2008 to maintain the photographic record of glacier change. This brief report contains the repeat photographs and observations of Darwin and Dana glaciers. Darwin Glacier is located on the north side of Mount Darwin in Kings Canyon National Park. I photographed Darwin Glacier on September 5, 2008. The location of the image was the same location as G.K. Gilbert’s 1908 photograph. Darwin Glacier lost area and mass when compared to 2004 photographs. The glacier had very little snow remaining from the past winter. A bergshrund was present on both lobes of the glacier. A large amount of rock debris was observed on the base of the glacier. One pile of debris, located at the middle of the glacier terminus was several meters high. Several measurements were made along the glacier perimeter with a GPS unit. These points confirmed that the glacier is smaller along the western boundary compared to 2004. Dana Glacier is located on the north side of Mount Dana in the Inyo National Forest. I photographed the Dana Glacier on September 11, 2008. The location of the image was same as I.C. Russell photo in 1883. Dana Glacier lost area when compared to 2004. The glacier boundary had receded along the western boundary. Ice and snow did not reach the top of the couloir. A bergshrund was observed in the upper portion of the glacier and where the couloir joins the glacier.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF Linkchapter
    Index (Italic page numbers indicate major references) Abalone Cove landslide, California, Badger Spring, Nevada, 92, 94 Black Dyke Formation, Nevada, 69, 179, 180, 181, 183 Badwater turtleback, California, 128, 70, 71 abatement districts, California, 180 132 Black Mountain Basalt, California, Abrigo Limestone, Arizona, 34 Bailey ash, California, 221, 223 135 Acropora, 7 Baked Mountain, Alaska, 430 Black Mountains, California, 121, Adams Argillite, Alaska, 459, 462 Baker’s Beach, California, 267, 268 122, 127, 128, 129 Adobe Range, Nevada, 91 Bald Peter, Oregon, 311 Black Point, California, 165 Adobe Valley, California, 163 Balloon thrust fault, Nevada, 71, 72 Black Prince Limestone, Arizona, 33 Airport Lake, California, 143 Banning fault, California, 191 Black Rapids Glacier, Alaska, 451, Alabama Hills, California, 152, 154 Barrett Canyon, California, 202 454, 455 Alaska Range, Alaska, 442, 444, 445, Barrier, The, British Columbia, 403, Blackhawk Canyon, California, 109, 449, 451 405 111 Aldwell Formation, Washington, 380 Basin and Range Province, 29, 43, Blackhawk landslide, California, 109 algae 48, 51, 53, 73, 75, 77, 83, 121, Blackrock Point, Oregon, 295 Oahu, 6, 7, 8, 10 163 block slide, California, 201 Owens Lake, California, 150 Basin Range fault, California, 236 Blue Lake, Oregon, 329 Searles Valley, California, 142 Beacon Rock, Oregon, 324 Blue Mountains, Oregon, 318 Tatonduk River, Alaska, 459 Bear Meadow, Washington, 336 Blue Mountain unit, Washington, 380 Algodones dunes, California, 101 Bear Mountain fault zone, California,
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Sage-Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment Forest Plan Amendment
    DRAFT Greater Sage-Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment Forest Plan Amendment Biological Evaluation/Biological Assessment and Wildlife Specialist Report Prepared by: Doug Middlebrook Wildlife Biologist for: Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest 02/05/2015 DRAFT DRAFT The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. DRAFT DRAFT Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 4 Summary of Determinations.................................................................................................................. 4 Additional Recommendations or Conservation Measures
    [Show full text]