DOCSLIB.ORG

Campo Wind Cultural Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Campo Wind Cultural Report APPENDIX I Cultural Resources Report CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY AND EVALUATION REPORT IN SUPPORT OF SECTION 106 OF THE NHPA for the CAMPO WIND PROJECT WITH BOULDER BRUSH FACILITIES Reviewing Agency: Bureau of Indian Affairs Pacific Region 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 Contact: Dan Hall Prepared by: 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 Brad Comeau, MSc, RPA, Angela Pham, MA, RPA, Micah Hale, PhD, RPA and Rachel Hoerman, PhD, MAY 2019 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Campo Wind Project with Boulder Brush Facilities NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE (NADB) INFORMATION Authors: Brad Comeau, MSc, RPA; Angela Pham, MA, RPA; Micah J. Hale, PhD, RPA and Rachel Hoerman, PhD Firm: Dudek Project Proponent: Terra-Gen Development Company LLC 11512 El Camino Real, Suite 100 San Diego, California 92130 Report Date: April 2019 Report Title: Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Campo Wind Project with Boulder Brush Facilities, San Diego County, California Type of Study: Phase I Archaeological Survey; Phase II Archaeological Evaluation New Sites: CWA-S-001, CWA-S-004, CWA-S-005, CWS-S-006, CWS-S-007, CWS-S- 008, CWS-S-009, CWS-S-010, CWS-S-011, CWS-S-012; ECWEP-I-015, ECWEP-SW-001, ECWEP-SW-003, ECWEP-SW-005, ECWEP-SW-006, ECWEP-SW-007, ECWEP-SW-009, ECWEP-SW-011, ECWEP-SW-017, TW-S-001, TW-S-002, TW-S-003, TW-S-007,TW-S-008, TW-S-009, TW-S- 010, TW-S-011, TW-S-012, TW-S-013, TW-S-014, TW-S-015, TW-S-016, TW-S-017, TW-S-030, TW-S-031, TW-S-033, TW-S-034, TW-S-035 Updated Sites: CA-SDI-4005, CA-SDI-6891, CA- SDI-7136, CA-SDI-7138, CA-SDI- 7139, CA-SDI-7140, CA-SDI-7145, CA-SDI-7148, CA-SDI-7149, CA- SDI-7151, CA-SDI-7152, CA-SDI-7156, CA-SDI7163, CA-SDI-7258, CA-SDI-8198, CA-SDI-8939, CA-SDI-8945, CA-SDI-8946, CA-SDI- 8962, CA-SDI-8963, CA-SDI-8968, CA-SDI-8977, CA-SDI-8980, CA- SDI-8985, CA-SDI-8986, CA-SDI-9018, CA-SDI-9050, CA-SDI-9059, CA-SDI-17205, CA-SDI- SDI-18048, CA-SDI- SDI-18049, CA-SDI- SDI- 19859, CA-SDI-20368, CA-SDI-20586, CA-SDI-20587, CA-SDI-20588, CA-SDI-20590, CA-SDI-20591, CA-SDI-20592, CA-SDI-20593, CA- SDI-20594, CA-SDI-20597, CA-SDI-20598, CA-SDI-20599, CA-SDI- 20604, CA-SDI-20605, CA-SDI-20607, CA-SDI-20608, CA-SDI-20610, CA-SDI-20611, CA-SDI-21776, P-37-024023, P-37-025680 10212 i May 2019 Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Campo Wind Project with Boulder Brush Facilities New Isolates: CWA-I-001, CWA-I-002, CWA-I-003, CWA-I-004, CWA-I-005, CWS-I- 006, CWS-I-008, CWS-I-008, CWS-I-010, CWS-I-011, CWA-S-002, ECWEP-I-001, ECWEP-I-006, ECWEP-I-008, ECWEP-I-009, ECWEP-I- 012, ECWEP-I-013, ECWEP-I-014, ECWEP-I-016, ECWEP-I-017, ECWEP-I-018, ECWEP-I-020, ECWEP-I-025, ECWEP-I-028, ECWEP-I- 029, ECWEP-I-030, TW-I-001, TW-I-002, TW-I-003, TW-I-004, TW-I- 005, TW-I-006, TW-I-007, TW-I-008, TW-I-014, TW-I-015, TW-I-016, TW-I-017, TW-I-018, TW-I-019, TW-I-020, TW-I-021, TW-I-022, TW-I- 023, TW-I-024, TW-I-025, TW-I-026, TW-I-027, TW-I-028, TW-I-029, TW-I-030, TW-I-031, TW-I-033, TW-I-039, TW-I-040, TW-I-041, TW-I- 042, TW-I-043, TW-I-045, TW-I-046, TW-I-047, TW-I-050, TW-I-051, TW-I-052, TW-I-054 Updated Isolates: P-37-032854 USGS Quads: Township 16S, Range 7E, Sections 19, 20, 29, 31, and 32; Township 17S, Range 7E, Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8; Township 17S, Range 6E, Sections 1, 3, 10-15, 17, 20-22, 27, 28, and 33-36; and Township 18S, Range 6E, Sections 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 on the Campo, Tierra Del Sol, Cameron Corners, Sombrero Peak, and Live Oak Springs, CA 7.5’ Acreage: 2768 acres (APE) Permit Numbers: None Available Keywords: Inventory; survey; lithic scatter; projectile point; groundstone; ceramic scatter; biface; millingstone; human remains; debitage; midden; habitation; ceramic scatter; artifact scatter; Obsidian Butte; chert; chalcedony; volcanic; quartz; brownware, buffware, bowl; historic refuse; cans; bottle; ranching; coral; Campo; Section 106; NHPA; NRHP; NAGPRA; Boulder Brush; Campo Wind; railroad; historic road 10212 ii May 2019 Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Campo Wind Project with Boulder Brush Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE (NADB) INFORMATION ....................... I MANAGEMENT SUMMARY .................................................................................................VII 1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Description and Area of Potential Effects .................................................. 1 1.1.1 Project Description...................................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Area of Potential Effects and Area of Direct Impacts ................................ 2 1.2 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 2 1.2.2 Records Search Results on the Reservation .............................................. 14 1.2.3 Record Search Results on Private Land .................................................... 20 2 REGULATORY CONTEXT ..........................................................................................23 21 36 CFR 800 and Section 106 of the NHPA .......................................................... 23 2.2 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act ................................... 25 2.3 Archaeological Resources Protection Act ............................................................ 26 3 RESEARCH DESIGN .....................................................................................................29 3.1 Integrity and Structure of Archaeological Deposits.............................................. 29 3.2 Chronological Placement ...................................................................................... 30 3.3 Settlement and Site Function ................................................................................ 32 3.4 Subsistence ............................................................................................................ 34 4 METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................37 4.1 Survey Methods .................................................................................................... 37 4.2 Evaluation Methods .............................................................................................. 38 4.3 Native American Correspondence and Participation ............................................ 41 5 SURVEY RESULTS ........................................................................................................43 5.1 Archaeological Sites ............................................................................................. 43 5.1.1 Previously Recorded Sites ........................................................................ 46 5.1.2 Newly Recorded Sites ............................................................................... 66 5.2 Archaeological Isolates ......................................................................................... 77 5.3 Built Environment Resources ............................................................................... 80 6 EVALUATION RESULTS .............................................................................................83 6.1 Evaluation Results of Archaeological Sites Within the ADI ................................ 83 6.2 Evaluation Results of Built Environment Resources .......................................... 120 10212 iii May 2019 Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Campo Wind Project with Boulder Brush Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Section Page No. 7 SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ......................................123 8 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................125 9 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED.............................................................................133 APPENDICES A SCIC Records Search Results – CONFIDENTIAL B Confidential Figures and DPR Site Records – CONFIDENTIAL C Résumés of Key Personnel D NAGPRA Documents – CONFIDENTIAL E Previous Studies Performed by ASM in the APE – CONFIDENTIAL F Figures TABLES 1-1 Previous Studies Performed on the Reservation within 0.25 Miles of the APE ................15 1-2 Previously Recorded Resources on the Reservation within 0.25 Miles of the APE .................18 1-3 Previous Studies Performed on Private Lands within 1.0 Miles of the APE .....................20 1-4 Previous Recorded Resources on Private Lands within 1.0 Miles of the APE..................22 4-1 Level of Effort for Evaluated Sites within the ADI ...........................................................41 5-1 Archaeological Sites Recorded Within the Project APE ...................................................43 5-2 CA-SDI-7140 Bedrock Milling Features ...........................................................................48 5-3 Isolates Recorded within the Project APE .........................................................................78 5-4 Built Environment Resources Recorded within the Project APE ......................................80 6-1 Cultural Resources Identified in the ADI ..........................................................................83
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tijuana River Valley Existing Conditions Report
    Climate Understanding & Resilience in the River Valley Tijuana River Valley Existing Conditions Report Prepared by the Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve for the CURRV project’s Stakeholder Working Group Updated April 14, 2014 This project is funded by a grant from the Coastal and Ocean Climate Applications Program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate Program Office. Also, supported in part by a grant from the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) Science Collaborative. 1 Table of Contents Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Figures ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Resources and Geography ........................................................................................................................... 6 Climate ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Topography & Floodplain ....................................................................................................................... 6 Hydrology ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Source Water System
    CHAPTER 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SOURCE WATER SYSTEM 2.0 Description of the Source Water System During the last 100 years, the CSD’s water system has evolved into a very complex system. It is now estimated to serve a population of 1.4 million people spread out over 370 square miles (Table 2.1). The CSD treats imported raw water and local runoff water at three City WTPs which have a combined capacity of 378 MGD. The CSD treats water by conventional technologies using coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and disinfection. Recently, all CSD water treatment plants have been modified to provide for the addition of fluoride to the potable water supply. To ensure safe and palatable water quality, the CSD collects water samples at its reservoirs, WTPs, and throughout the treated water storage and distribution system. The CSD’s use of local and imported water to meet water demand is affected by availability, cost, and water resource management policies. Imported water availability decreases the need to carry over local water for dry years in City reservoirs. CSD policy is to use local water first to reduce imported water purchases; this policy runs the risk of increased dependence on imported water during local droughts. Table 2.1 - City of San Diego General Statistics Population (2010) 1,301,621 Population (Estimated 2014) 1,381,069 Population percent change 6.1 Land Area Square Miles 370 Population Density per Square Mile 3733 Water Distribution Area Square Miles 403 Number of Service Connections (2015) 279,102 2.1 Water Sources (Figure 2.1) Most of California's water development has been dictated by the multi-year wet/dry weather cycles.
    [Show full text]
  • Water, Capitalism, and Urbanization in the Californias, 1848-1982
    TIJUANDIEGO: WATER, CAPITALISM, AND URBANIZATION IN THE CALIFORNIAS, 1848-1982 A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History By Hillar Yllo Schwertner, M.A. Washington, D.C. August 14, 2020 Copyright 2020 by Hillar Yllo Schwertner All Rights Reserved ii TIJUANDIEGO: WATER, CAPITALISM, AND URBANIZATION IN THE CALIFORNIAS, 1848-1982 Hillar Yllo Schwertner, M.A. Dissertation Advisor: John Tutino, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This is a history of Tijuandiego—the transnational metropolis set at the intersection of the United States, Mexico, and the Pacific World. Separately, Tijuana and San Diego constitute distinct but important urban centers in their respective nation-states. Taken as a whole, Tijuandiego represents the southwestern hinge of North America. It is the continental crossroads of cultures, economies, and environments—all in a single, physical location. In other words, Tijuandiego represents a new urban frontier; a space where the abstractions of the nation-state are manifested—and tested—on the ground. In this dissertation, I adopt a transnational approach to Tijuandiego’s water history, not simply to tell “both sides” of the story, but to demonstrate that neither side can be understood in the absence of the other. I argue that the drawing of the international boundary in 1848 established an imbalanced political ecology that favored San Diego and the United States over Tijuana and Mexico. The land and water resources wrested by the United States gave it tremendous geographical and ecological advantages over its reeling southern neighbor, advantages which would be used to strengthen U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Resource Management Plan for Potrero/Mason Property San Diego County
    Draft Resource Management Plan for Potrero/Mason Property San Diego County April 2018 The County of San Diego Department of Parks and Recreation is pleased to announce the availability of the Draft Potrero/Mason Property (Property) Resource Management Plan (RMP) for public review and comment. This RMP has been prepared as a guidance document to manage and preserve the biological and cultural resources within the Property. As part of the RMP effort, biological and cultural surveys were conducted in 2012 to characterize the baseline conditions of the Property needed to develop future management and monitoring efforts. The vegetation communities within the Property include coast live oak woodland, eucalyptus woodland, chamise chaparral, coastal sage-chaparral transition, northern mixed chaparral, southern mixed chaparral, scrub oak chaparral, Diegan coastal sage scrub, coastal scrub/chaparral, non-native grassland, and foothill/mountain perennial grassland. These vegetation communities support multiple sensitive species including: coast horned lizard, loggerhead shrike, white-tailed kite, and Dulzura pocket mouse. If you have any questions, please contact Jennifer Price at (858) 966-1375. Please send your comments to the attention of Jennifer Price, via mail at 5500 Overland Avenue, Suite 410, San Diego, CA 92123; via fax to (858) 495-5841; or via email to [email protected] by May 17, 2018. Potrero/Mason Property April 2018 Draft Resource Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Flow of the Colorado River and Other Western Boundary Streams and Related Data
    WESTERN WATER BULLETIN 1994 RECENL.iJ Flow of SEpgg 2m® The Colorado RiveyBwc .and other Western Boundary Streams and INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION UNITED STATES AND MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF STATE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1994 INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION UNITED STATES AND MEXICO UNITED STATES SECTION MEXICAN SECTION JOHN M . BERNAL J. ARTURO HERRERA SOLIS .Commissioner Commissioner El Paso, Texas Cd. Juarez, Chihuahua ALTON L . GOFF CECILIO LOMELI LOPEZ Chief Area Subdirector Yuma, Arizona Hydro Office Mexicali, Baja California WESTERN WATER BULLETIN 1994 Flow of The Colorado River and other Western Boundary Streams and Related Data COLORADO RIVER TIJUANA RIVER SANTA CRUZ RIVER SAN PEDRO RIVER WHITE WATER DRAW 1994 2 WESTERN BOUNDARY WATER BULLETIN - 1994 - INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION CONTENTS Foreword and Acknowledgments 4 General Hydrologic Conditions for 1994 6 Map of Western Boundary - Douglas, Arizona to Pacific Ocean 44 I - COLORADO RIVER - IMPERIAL DAM TO GULF OF CALIFORNIA Map of Lower Colorado River, United States and Mexico . Following Page 84 QUANTITY OF WATER Stream-Flow and Stage Records Tributary - Reservation Main Drain No . 4 (California Drain) 8 Yuma Main Canal Wasteway to Colorado River at Yuma, Arizona 9 Colorado River below Yuna Main Canal Wasteway at Yuma, Arizona - Discharges 10 below Yuma Main Canal Wasteway at Yuma, Arizona - Stages 11 Tributary - Yuma Mesa Outlet Drain to Colorado River near Yuma, Arizona 12 Drain No . 8-8 (Araz Drain) 13 Pilot Knob Power Plant and Wasteway
    [Show full text]
  • County of San Diego Guidelines for Determining
    COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENT GROUP Department of Planning and Land Use Department of Public Works July 30, 2007 APPROVAL I hereby certify that these Guidelines for Determining Significance for Emergency Response Plans are a part of the County of San Diego, Land Use and Environment Group’s Guidelines for Determining Significance and were considered by the Director of Planning and Land Use, in coordination with the Director of Public Works on the 30th day of July, 2007. I hereby certify that these Guidelines for Determining Significance for Emergency Response Plans are a part of the County of San Diego, Land Use and Environment Group’s Guidelines for Determining Significance and have hereby been approved by the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer (DCAO) of the Land Use and Environment Group on the 30th day of July, 2007. The Director of Planning and Land Use is authorized to approve revisions to these Guidelines for Determining Significance for Emergency Response Plans, except any revisions to Chapter 4.0 must be approved by the DCAO. Approved, July 30, 2007 EXPLANATION These Guidelines for Determining Significance for Emergency Response Plans and information presented herein shall be used by County staff for the review of discretionary projects and environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These Guidelines present a range of quantitative, qualitative, and performance levels for particular environmental effects. Normally
    [Show full text]
  • San Diego Union-Tribune Photograph Collection
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt6r29q3mg No online items Guide to the San Diego Union-Tribune Photograph Collection Rebecca Gerber, Therese M. James, Jessica Silver San Diego Historical Society Casa de Balboa 1649 El Prado, Balboa Park, Suite 3 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (619) 232-6203 URL: http://www.sandiegohistory.org © 2005 San Diego Historical Society. All rights reserved. Guide to the San Diego C2 1 Union-Tribune Photograph Collection Guide to the San Diego Union-Tribune Photograph Collection Collection number: C2 San Diego Historical Society San Diego, California Processed by: Rebecca Gerber, Therese M. James, Jessica Silver Date Completed: July 2005 Encoded by: Therese M. James and Jessica Silver © 2005 San Diego Historical Society. All rights reserved. Descriptive Summary Title: San Diego Union-Tribune photograph collection Dates: 1910-1975 Bulk Dates: 1915-1957 Collection number: C2 Creator: San Diego union-tribune Collection Size: 100 linear ft.ca. 150,000 items (glass and film negatives and photographic prints): b&w and color; 5 x 7 in. or smaller. Repository: San Diego Historical Society San Diego, California 92138 Abstract: The collection chiefly consists of photographic negatives, photographs, and news clippings of San Diego news events taken by staff photographers of San Diego Union-Tribune and its predecessors, San Diego Union, San Diego Sun, San Diego Evening Tribune, and San Diego Tribune-Sun, which were daily newspapers of San Diego, California, 1910-1974. Physical location: San Diego Historical Society Research Library, Booth Historical Photograph Archives, 1649 El Prado, Casa de Balboa Building, Balboa Park, San Diego, CA 92101 Languages: Languages represented in the collection: English Access Collection is open for research.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Factors That Affected the Growth of San Diego's Chinatown
    Geographic Factors that Affected the Growth of San Diego’s Chinatown Relative to Los Angeles and San Francisco By Murray Kent Lee B.A. in Geography, May 1951, The George Washington University A Thesis submitted to The Faculty of Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of the George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts May 18, 2014 Thesis directed by Elizabeth Chacko Associate Professor of Geography and International Affairs Acknowledgments Dr. Elizabeth Chacko met the challenge of supervising a thesis while on sabbatical in Singapore. This was not an easy task, but she had patience and understanding under less than ideal circumstances. She has earned by my gratitude for her professional performance. My wife Gladys also deserves acknowledgement for sacrificing many activities while I spent hours glued to the computer. She did some proof reading of drafts and assisted with solving some of the computer glitches, breakdowns, and inconsistencies. Thanks to Bruce Semelsberger of the San Diego Railroad Museum for his update of the San Diego and Arizona Railway and his offer to meet in Campo to review some of their collection of photos of the “Impossible Railroad.” Of the nineteen photos and maps, the San Diego History Center, nine were from the San Diego History Center archives, although only two were specifically ordered for this document. Five photos were from the author and five maps were created. I would also like to acknowledge Dr. Robert Campbell, who was my mentor in the GWU Geography Department when I received my BA in 1951.
    [Show full text]
  • Valoración Económica Del Ecosistema Del Arroyo Alamar En La Ciudad De Tijuana
    Copyright © 2017 de los autores. Publicado bajo licencia de Redibec URL: https://redibec.org/revista/numeros-anteriores/#ano-2017 Gómez y Becerra 2017. Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica Vol. 27: 71-84 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VALORACIÓN ECONÓMICA DEL ECOSISTEMA DEL ARROYO ALAMAR EN LA CIUDAD DE TIJUANA Dr. José García Gómez Universidad Autónoma de Baja California: Facultad de Economía y Relaciones Internacionales Calzada Universidad #14418, Parque Industrial Internacional C.P. 22390, Tijuana, Baja California, México. [email protected] Jesús Martin Beas Becerra Universidad Autónoma de Baja California: Facultad de Economía y Relaciones Internacionales Calzada Universidad #14418, Parque Industrial Internacional C.P. 22390, Tijuana, Baja California, México. [email protected] Resumen El mundo emprende proyectos para rescatar escurrimientos pluviales, algunos se han convertido en espacios icónicos y de atracción, sin embargo, en México se sigue considerando la “urbanización” sin límites como señal de progreso e impulsando proyectos de ingeniería hidráulica tradicional para abordar problemas de inundaciones, contaminación y demanda de espacio. Es el caso del proyecto del arroyo Alamar en Tijuana B.C. En ese sentido el objetivo del trabajo es la valoración económica de la perdida ambiental que supone la construcción del referido proyecto, ésta se efectúa en parte con base a la propuesta de De la Lanza y colaboradores (2013); la cual se sustenta teórica y metodológicamente en el concepto y clasificación de los Servicios Ecológicos (SE) propuestos por el grupo de evaluación de ecosistemas del milenio (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) en 2005. Los resultados señalan una pérdida monetaria anual de 2 335 124.96 dólares americanos, a al que habría que sumar no solo la ambiental si no también la “social” o urbana.
    [Show full text]
  • Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus (=Microscaphus))
    Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus (=microscaphus)) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) Photo by permission of Will Flaxington U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office Ventura, California August 2009 5-YEAR REVIEW Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus (=microscaphus)) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing of a species as endangered or threatened is based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of a species. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process defined in the Act that includes public review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 City of Imperial Beach Sea Level Rise Assessment
    2016 City of Imperial Beach Sea Level Rise Assessment September 2016 Submitted to the City of Imperial Beach By Revell Coastal, LLC 125 Pearl Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 [email protected] 831.854.7873 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................................i Figures…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…iv Tables…………… ................................................................................................................................... v Photographs ..................................................................................................................................... vi Acronyms/Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. vii Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 1. Planning Background .......................................................................................................... 1-1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1-1 Location............................................................................................................................ 1-1 California Coastal Commission Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance & Local Coastal Programs .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Campo/Lake Morena Community Plan
    County of San Diego General Plan Update CAMPO/LAKE MORENA COMMUNITY PLAN Table of Contents Community Background .................................................................................................. 1 a. History .............................................................................................................. 1 b. Relationship to Adjoining Communities ............................................................ 4 c. Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4 d. Existing Land Uses and Community Character ................................................ 6 e. Existing Circulation and Mobility ..................................................................... 10 f. Existing Community Facilities and Infrastructure ............................................ 10 g. Public Safety .................................................................................................. 11 h. Trends and Future Projections ....................................................................... 13 Community Vision ......................................................................................................... 17 a. Who We Are ................................................................................................... 17 b. Community Character ..................................................................................... 17 c. Circulation and Mobility .................................................................................. 19 d.
    [Show full text]