DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation of Potential Acecs: Relevance and Importance Criteria Table of Contents Aprl 2019 Draft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation of Potential Acecs: Relevance and Importance Criteria Table of Contents Aprl 2019 Draft U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Evaluation of Potential ACECs Relevance and Importance Criteria April 2019 Draft Royal Gorge Field Office A Supplement to the Draft Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan Cover photo of Cucharas Canyon by Kyle Sullivan Evaluation of Potential ACECs Relevance and Importance Criteria April 2019 Draft A Supplement to the Draft Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan Prepared by U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Royal Gorge Field Office Cañon City, CO April 2019 This page intentionally left blank. Evaluation of Potential ACECs: Relevance and Importance Criteria Table of Contents Aprl 2019 Draft TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... V 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan .................................................... 1 1.2. Authorities............................................................................................................ 1 1.3. Area of Consideration .......................................................................................... 1 1.4. The ACEC Designation Process ......................................................................... 1 2. REQUIREMENTS FOR ACEC DESIGNATION ........................................................ 2 2.1. Identifying ACECs .............................................................................................. 2 2.2. Special Management Attention ............................................................................ 2 2.3. Nomination of ACECs ......................................................................................... 3 2.4. Evaluation of Potential ACECs .......................................................................... 3 2.5. Relevance ............................................................................................................. 4 2.6. Importance ........................................................................................................... 4 2.7. Consideration of Potential ACECs ..................................................................... 5 2.8. Comments on Proposed ACECs ......................................................................... 5 2.9. Designation of ACECs ......................................................................................... 5 3. RELEVANCE AND IMPORTANCE EVALUATIONS ............................................... 6 3.1. Arkansas Canyonlands ACEC .............................................................................. 6 3.2. Arkansas River Corridor ACEC ......................................................................... 9 3.3. Castle Gardens ACEC ........................................................................................ 17 3.4. Cucharas Canyon ACEC .................................................................................... 19 3.5. Dikes of the Spanish Peaks ACEC (Incorporating Mount Mestas [Maestas] and North Raton Basin ACECs) ....................................................... 21 3.6. Droney Gulch ACEC .......................................................................................... 23 3.7. Eastern Plains–Lesser Prairie Chicken Habitat ACEC ...................................... 25 3.8. Garden Park Paleontological Area ACEC ......................................................... 27 3.9. Grape Creek ACEC ............................................................................................ 29 3.10. Mount Ouray to Poncha Drainages ACEC ........................................................ 31 3.11. Reinecker Ridge ................................................................................................ 33 3.12. Ruby Mountain/Railroad Gulch ACEC ............................................................ 35 3.13. South Pikes Peak ACEC (Incorporating Existing Beaver Creek, Phantom Canyon, and Externally Proposed Phantom ACECs) ........................................ 37 3.14. Top of the World ACEC (Incorporating Mosquito Pass Expansion and Birdseye Gulch) ................................................................................................. 39 3.15. Thompson Mountain–Twin–Gribble Mountain ACEC ..................................... 41 4. LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................ 43 A Supplement to the Draft Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan i Evaluation of Potential ACECs: Relevance and Importance Criteria April 2019 Draft Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1. Arkansas Canyonlands ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ....................... 7 Table 3.2. Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 1 Relevance and Importance Criteria ................................................................................................. 9 Table 3.3. Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 2 Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 11 Table 3.4. Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 3 Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 13 Table 3.5. Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 4a Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 15 Table 3.6. Castle Gardens ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria .................................. 17 Table 3.7. Cucharas Canyon ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria .............................. 19 Table 3.8. Dikes of the Spanish Peaks ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria .............. 21 Table 3.9. Droney Gulch ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ................................... 23 Table 3.10. Eastern Plains–Lesser Prairie Chicken Habitat ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 25 Table 3.11. Garden Park Paleontological Area ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 27 Table 3.12. Grape Creek ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ...................................... 29 Table 3.13. Mount Ouray to Poncha Drainages ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 31 Table 3.14. Reinecker Ridge ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................... 33 Table 3.15. Ruby Mountain/Railroad Gulch ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ....... 35 Table 3.16. South Pikes Peak ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria .............................. 37 Table 3.17. Top of the World ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria .............................. 39 Table 3.18. Thompson Mountain–Twin–Gribble Mountain ACEC Relevance and Importance Criteria ............................................................................................... 41 Table 4.1. List of BLM Staff Preparers ................................................................................. 43 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1. Map of Arkansas Canyonlands ACEC ................................................................... 8 Figure 3.2. Map of Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 1 .................................................. 10 Figure 3.3. Map of Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 2 .................................................. 12 Figure 3.4. Map of Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 3 .................................................. 14 Figure 3.5. Map of Arkansas River Corridor ACEC Zone 4 .................................................. 16 Figure 3.6. Map of Castle Gardens ACEC .............................................................................. 18 Figure 3.7. Map of Cucharas Canyon ACEC .......................................................................... 20 Figure 3.8. Map of Dikes of the Spanish Peaks ACEC ........................................................... 22 Figure 3.9. Map of Droney Gulch ACEC ............................................................................... 24 ii A Supplement to the Draft Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan Evaluation of Potential ACECs: Relevance and Importance Criteria Table of Contents Aprl 2019 Draft Figure 3.10. Map of Eastern Plains–Lesser Prairie Chicken Habitat ACEC ............................ 26 Figure 3.11. Map of Garden Park Paleontological Area ACEC ............................................... 28 Figure 3.12. Map of Grape Creek ACEC .................................................................................. 30 Figure 3.13. Map of Mount Ouray to Poncha Drainages ACEC .............................................. 32 Figure 3.14. Map of Reinecker Ridge ACEC ........................................................................... 34 Figure 3.15. Map of Ruby Mountain/Railroad Gulch ACEC ................................................... 36 Figure 3.16. Map of South Pikes Peak ACEC .......................................................................... 38 Figure 3.17. Map of Top of the World ACEC .......................................................................... 40 Figure 3.18. Map of Thompson Mountain–Twin–Gribble Mountain ACEC ........................... 42 A
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter W-9 - Wildlife Properties
    07/15/2021 CHAPTER W-9 - WILDLIFE PROPERTIES Index Page ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS #900 REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL WILDLIFE 1 PROPERTIES, EXCEPT STATE TRUST LANDS ARTICLE II PROPERTY SPECIFIC PROVISIONS #901 PROPERTY SPECIFIC REGULATIONS 8 ARTICLE III STATE TRUST LANDS #902 REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL STATE TRUST LANDS 53 LEASED BY COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE #903 PROPERTY SPECIFIC REGULATIONS 55 ARTICLE IV STATE FISH UNITS #904 REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL STATE FISH UNITS 71 #905 PROPERTY SPECIFIC REGULATIONS 72 ARTICLE V BOATING RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL DIVISION CONTROLLED PROPERTIES, INCLUDING STATE TRUST LANDS LEASED BY COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE #906 AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES (ANS) 72 APPENDIX A 74 APPENDIX B 75 Basis and Purpose 81 Statement CHAPTER W-9 - WILDLIFE PROPERTIES ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS #900 - REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL WILDLIFE PROPERTIES, EXCEPT STATE TRUST LANDS A. DEFINITIONS 1. “Aircraft” means any machine or device capable of atmospheric flight, including, but not limited to, airplanes, helicopters, gliders, dirigibles, balloons, rockets, hang gliders and parachutes, and any models thereof. 2. "Water contact activities" means swimming, wading (except for the purpose of fishing), waterskiing, sail surfboarding, scuba diving, and other water-related activities which put a person in contact with the water (without regard to the clothing or equipment worn). 3. “Youth mentor hunting” means hunting by youths under 18 years of age. Youth hunters under 16 years of age shall at all times be accompanied by a mentor when hunting on youth mentor properties. A mentor must be 18 years of age or older and hold a valid hunter education certificate or be born before January 1, 1949.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revision of the Bark Beetle Genus Dendroctonus Erichson (Coleoptera: Scolytidae)
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 23 Number 1 – Number 2 Article 1 6-14-1963 A revision of the bark beetle genus Dendroctonus Erichson (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) Stephen L. Wood Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Wood, Stephen L. (1963) "A revision of the bark beetle genus Dendroctonus Erichson (Coleoptera: Scolytidae)," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 23 : No. 1 , Article 1. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol23/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Y The Great Basin Naturalist Published at Provo, Utah by Brigham Young University Volume XXIII June 14, 1963 ' Jj'^^^^^ljS^ AUG 1 8 1966 hMrxvMrXLJ A REVISION OF THE BARK BEETLE GENUS ^ SIT DENDROCTONUS ERICHSON (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE)^ Stephen L. Wood' Abstract This taxonomic revision of all known species of Dendroctonus is based on an analysis of anatomical and biological characters. Among the anatomical structures found to be of greatest use in char- acterizing species were the seminal rod of the male genital capsule, the surface features of the frons, and the features of the elytral declivity. Characters of the egg gallery, position and arrangement of egg niches and grooves, and the character and position of the larval mines provided features for field recognition of species that were equal to, if not superior to, anatomical characters.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Wide Hazardous Tree Removal and Fuels Reduction Project
    107°0'0"W VAIL k GYPSUM B e 6 u 6 N 1 k 2 k 1 h 2 e . e 6 . .1 I- 1 o 8 70 e c f 7 . r 0 e 2 2 §¨¦ e l 1 0 f 2 u 1 0 3 2 N 4 r r 0 1 e VailVail . 3 W . 8 . 1 85 3 Edwards 70 1 C 1 a C 1 .1 C 8 2 h N 1 G 7 . 7 0 m y 1 k r 8 §¨¦ l 2 m 1 e c . .E 9 . 6 z W A T m k 1 5 u C 0 .1 u 5 z i 6. e s 0 C i 1 B a -7 k s 3 2 .3 e e r I ee o C r a 1 F G Carterville h r e 9. 1 6 r g 1 N 9 g 8 r e 8 r y P e G o e u l Avon n C 9 N C r e n 5 ch w i r 8 .k2 0 N n D k 1 n 70 a tt e 9 6 6 8 G . c 7 o h 18 1 §¨¦ r I-7 o ra West Vail .1 1 y 4 u h 0 1 0. n lc 7 l D .W N T 7 39 . 71 . 1 a u 1 ch W C k 0 C d . 2 e . r e 1 e 1 C st G e e . r 7 A Red Hill R 3 9 k n s e 5 6 7 a t 2 .
    [Show full text]
  • A MODEL for BIOMASS ASSESSMENT E-023 SUBMITTED BY: Dr
    • A MODEL FOR BIOMASS ASSESSMENT E-023 SUBMITTED BY: Dr. Stephen J. Walsh Associate Professor Dr. George p. Malanson Assistant Professor Dr. John D. Vitek Associate Professor Dr. David R. Butler Assistant Professor Department of Geography Oklahoma State University & in conjunction with USDA/Agricultural Research Service SUBMITTED TO: Dr. Norman N. Durham, Director Water Research Center Oklahoma State University March 14, 1983 Introduction The surface of the earth is a complex system responding to the input of energy, natural and human. Human use of the surface for maximum agricultural efficiency requires knowledge of the interactions of all variables involved in the system. Broad categories of phenomena, including the atmosphere (weather and climate), biosphere (vegetation, fauna, and human activity), hydrosphere (precipitation, runoff, infiltration, fluvial erosion, and evapotranspiration), and the lithosphere (soil, topography, and parent material), can be identified as the major variables in any assessment. Assessment of interactions requires data from various sources. The emergence of remote sensing as a source of data for assessments in the last decade permits the development of more accurate predictive models. Refinements in data acquisition, such as improved resolution, the use of radar, and the correlation of detailed surface observations with satellite overpasses, provide researchers with the capability to assess inter­ relationships and create accurate models. A conceptual model, Figure 1, illustrates the interaction of the Department of Geography/CARS and the USDA/Agricultural Research Service with components of the natural system for the purpose of creating a predictive model for biomass assessment~~CARS, the remote sensing center at Oklahoma State University, plus ARS of the USDA bring different skills to this joint research effort.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Names
    GEOGRAPHIC NAMES CORRECT ORTHOGRAPHY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES ? REVISED TO JANUARY, 1911 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1911 PREPARED FOR USE IN THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE BY THE UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHIC BOARD WASHINGTON, D. C, JANUARY, 1911 ) CORRECT ORTHOGRAPHY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES. The following list of geographic names includes all decisions on spelling rendered by the United States Geographic Board to and including December 7, 1910. Adopted forms are shown by bold-face type, rejected forms by italic, and revisions of previous decisions by an asterisk (*). Aalplaus ; see Alplaus. Acoma; township, McLeod County, Minn. Abagadasset; point, Kennebec River, Saga- (Not Aconia.) dahoc County, Me. (Not Abagadusset. AQores ; see Azores. Abatan; river, southwest part of Bohol, Acquasco; see Aquaseo. discharging into Maribojoc Bay. (Not Acquia; see Aquia. Abalan nor Abalon.) Acworth; railroad station and town, Cobb Aberjona; river, IVIiddlesex County, Mass. County, Ga. (Not Ackworth.) (Not Abbajona.) Adam; island, Chesapeake Bay, Dorchester Abino; point, in Canada, near east end of County, Md. (Not Adam's nor Adams.) Lake Erie. (Not Abineau nor Albino.) Adams; creek, Chatham County, Ga. (Not Aboite; railroad station, Allen County, Adams's.) Ind. (Not Aboit.) Adams; township. Warren County, Ind. AJjoo-shehr ; see Bushire. (Not J. Q. Adams.) Abookeer; AhouJcir; see Abukir. Adam's Creek; see Cunningham. Ahou Hamad; see Abu Hamed. Adams Fall; ledge in New Haven Harbor, Fall.) Abram ; creek in Grant and Mineral Coun- Conn. (Not Adam's ties, W. Va. (Not Abraham.) Adel; see Somali. Abram; see Shimmo. Adelina; town, Calvert County, Md. (Not Abruad ; see Riad. Adalina.) Absaroka; range of mountains in and near Aderhold; ferry over Chattahoochee River, Yellowstone National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC)
    Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Summits on the Air USA - Colorado (WØC) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S46.1 Issue number 3.2 Date of issue 15-June-2021 Participation start date 01-May-2010 Authorised Date: 15-June-2021 obo SOTA Management Team Association Manager Matt Schnizer KØMOS Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Page 1 of 11 Document S46.1 V3.2 Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Change Control Date Version Details 01-May-10 1.0 First formal issue of this document 01-Aug-11 2.0 Updated Version including all qualified CO Peaks, North Dakota, and South Dakota Peaks 01-Dec-11 2.1 Corrections to document for consistency between sections. 31-Mar-14 2.2 Convert WØ to WØC for Colorado only Association. Remove South Dakota and North Dakota Regions. Minor grammatical changes. Clarification of SOTA Rule 3.7.3 “Final Access”. Matt Schnizer K0MOS becomes the new W0C Association Manager. 04/30/16 2.3 Updated Disclaimer Updated 2.0 Program Derivation: Changed prominence from 500 ft to 150m (492 ft) Updated 3.0 General information: Added valid FCC license Corrected conversion factor (ft to m) and recalculated all summits 1-Apr-2017 3.0 Acquired new Summit List from ListsofJohn.com: 64 new summits (37 for P500 ft to P150 m change and 27 new) and 3 deletes due to prom corrections.
    [Show full text]
  • Salida Buena Vista
    CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORADO R 82 W R 81 W R 80 W R 79 W R 78 W R 77 W R 76 W South Peak Mt Elbert Casco Peak Black Mountain Bull Hill Independence Mountain Parry Peak T 11 S Lower Lake Upper Lake Monitor Rock T 11 S Star Mountain LAKE COUNTY Ouray Peak l Y Grizzly Lake 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 36 31 32 33 34 35 33 34 T 34 32 Grizzly Peak 35 36 31 35 l 31 G r a n i t e 398-D G r a n i t e 2905 l Twin Peaks +$ N 2903 l Rinker Peak 2901 4 2899 6 5 3 2 1 6 5 6 4 3 1 Garfield Peak 4 3 2 1 5 2 6 4 2 l La Plata Peak 5 3 U l lRed Mountain 7 8 O 7 9 10 11 12 9 Willis Lake l 8 9 10 11 8 10 Mt H11ope 12 7 12 Crystal Lake lQuail Mountain 7 8 9 10 11 Middle Mountain Clear Creek Reservoir l C 3 18 17 16 15 13 16 14 18 17 15 14 18 17 16 15 14 13 13 18 15 14 0 $+390 17 16 13 N 5 V i c k s b u r g 7 I V i c k s b u r g 9 T 12 S 21 0 20 19 20 19 21 022 23 24 $+388 23 24 19 20 21 022 23 22 0 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 l T 12 S K 3 0 West Buffalo Peak 0 ¤£204 21 l $+371 P Antero Reservoir W i n f i e l d East Buffalo Peak T W3i n f i e l d 30 Winfield Pea2k9 28 27 26 I 3 A l 25 3 25 30 29 26 28 27 26 27 26 l 25 30 29 28 25 30 29 28 l Cross Mountain Waverly Mountain 1 R P Jenkins Mountain Middle Mountain 371 K l $+ Virginia Peak 1 l Mt Oxford l 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 35 Browns Peak 33 34 35 36 C 32 34 35 Mt Belford 31 33 36 31 032 33 l Waupaca Reservoir O l 3 2 U Rainbow Lake 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 l6Missouri Mountain5 4 2 Huron Peak Cloyses Lake 3 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 N l 5 4 Lois Lake Granite Mountain T l Iowa Peak l l 1 6 386 Y 12 $+ Marmot Peak 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Evaluation of Potential Acecs---Royal
    Preliminary Evaluation of Potential ACECs—Royal Gorge Field Office Relevance and Importance Criteria Prepared by U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Royal Gorge Field Office Cañon City, CO February 2017 This page intentionally left blank Preliminary Evaluation of Potential iii ACECs—Royal Gorge Field Office Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... xi _1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 _1.1. Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan ............................................................... 1 _1.2. Authorities ....................................................................................................................... 1 _1.3. Area of Consideration ..................................................................................................... 1 _1.4. The ACEC Designation Process ..................................................................................... 1 _2. Requirements for ACEC Designation .................................................................................... 3 _2.1. Identifying ACECs .......................................................................................................... 5 _2.2. Special Management
    [Show full text]
  • Frozen Ground
    Frozen Ground Th e News Bulletin of the International Permafrost Association Number 32, December 2008 INTERNATIONAL PERMAFROST ASSOCIATION Th e International Permafrost Association, founded in 1983, has as its objectives to foster the dissemination of knowledge concerning permafrost and to promote cooperation among persons and national or international organisations engaged in scientifi c investigation and engineering work on permafrost. Membership is through national Adhering Bodies and Associate Members. Th e IPA is governed by its offi cers and a Council consisting of representatives from 26 Adhering Bodies having interests in some aspect of theoretical, basic and applied frozen ground research, including permafrost, seasonal frost, artifi cial freezing and periglacial phenomena. Committees, Working Groups, and Task Forces organise and coordinate research activities and special projects. Th e IPA became an Affi liated Organisation of the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) in July 1989. Beginning in 1995 the IPA and the International Geographical Union (IGU) developed an Agreement of Cooperation, thus making IPA an affi liate of the IGU. Th e Association’s primary responsibilities are convening International Permafrost Conferences, undertaking special projects such as preparing databases, maps, bibliographies, and glossaries, and coordinating international fi eld programmes and networks. Conferences were held in West Lafayette, Indiana, U.S.A., 1963; in Yakutsk, Siberia, 1973; in Edmonton, Canada, 1978; in Fairbanks, Alaska, 1983; in Trondheim, Norway, 1988; in Beijing, China, 1993; in Yellowknife, Canada, 1998, in Zurich, Switzerland, 2003, and in Fairbanks, Alaska, in 2008. Th e Tenth conference will be in Tyumen, Russia, in 2012.Field excursions are an integral part of each Conference, and are organised by the host Executive Committee 2008-2012 Council Members Professor Hans-W.
    [Show full text]
  • Papilio (New Series) # 25 2016 Issn 2372-9449
    PAPILIO (NEW SERIES) # 25 2016 ISSN 2372-9449 ERNEST J. OSLAR, 1858-1944: HIS TRAVEL AND COLLECTION ITINERARY, AND HIS BUTTERFLIES by James A. Scott, Ph.D. in entomology University of California Berkeley, 1972 (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract. Ernest John Oslar collected more than 50,000 butterflies and moths and other insects and sold them to many taxonomists and museums throughout the world. This paper attempts to determine his travels in America to collect those specimens, by using data from labeled specimens (most in his remaining collection but some from published papers) plus information from correspondence etc. and a few small field diaries preserved by his descendants. The butterfly specimens and their localities/dates in his collection in the C. P. Gillette Museum (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado) are detailed. This information will help determine the possible collection locations of Oslar specimens that lack accurate collection data. Many more biographical details of Oslar are revealed, and the 26 insects named for Oslar are detailed. Introduction The last collection of Ernest J. Oslar, ~2159 papered butterfly specimens and several moths, was found in the C. P. Gillette Museum, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado by Paul A. Opler, providing the opportunity to study his travels and collections. Scott & Fisher (2014) documented specimens sent by Ernest J. Oslar of about 100 Argynnis (Speyeria) nokomis nokomis Edwards labeled from the San Juan Mts. and Hall Valley of Colorado, which were collected by Wilmatte Cockerell at Beulah New Mexico, and documented Oslar’s specimens of Oeneis alberta oslari Skinner labeled from Deer Creek Canyon, [Jefferson County] Colorado, September 25, 1909, which were collected in South Park, Park Co.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Colorado Sheep & Goat
    C OLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE 2017 Colorado Sheep & Goat APPLICATION DEADLINE: APRIL 4 online brochure cpw.state.co.us 2017 Colorado Sheep & Goat Hunting Online Features Watch more Colorado Parks and Wildlife videos on our VIMEO & YOUTUBE VIDEO CHANNELS VIDEOS: WHAT’S NEW: 2017 BIG GAME GET UPDATED on the new, general regulatory changes to the 2017 Sheep & Goat and Big Game brochures. See this brochure for species- and unit- specific changes. THE FUTURE OF CONSERVATION LEARN HOW your license dollars contribute directly to the conservation of wildlife species and outdoor recreation in Colorado. HUNTER PINK GET INFORMED about the new hunter pink cloth- ing alternative to fluorescent orange. There’s a link MORE ONLINE to the fact sheet in the video too! QUIZ AND RESOURCES: MOUNTAIN GOAT IDENTIFICATION HUNTING COLORADO’S If you are hunting mountain goats, it is difficult — but extremely impor- tant — that you identify female goats properly. Read the CPW online PUBLIC LANDS guide and take the quiz to ensure you know your target and avoid fines once you are hunting in the field. CLICK TO TAKE THE QUIZ HEAR THE DETAILS about big game, small game Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep and waterfowl hunting on Colorado’s public lands, © Wayne Lewis, CPW 2 including State Wildlife Areas, State Trust Lands and State Parks. 2017 Colorado Sheep & Goat Hunting 2017 Colorado Sheep & Goat Hunting TABLE OF CONTENTS 2017 What’s New ...................................................1 CPW OFFICE LOCATIONS cpw.state.co.us License Fees & Information ................................. 1 ADMINISTRATION Watch more Colorado Parks and Wildlife videos on our VIMEO & YOUTUBE VIDEO CHANNELS • Fees and surcharges 1313 Sherman St., #618 • Hunter education requirements Denver, 80203 303-297-1192 In the Field & Special License Information .........
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Interpretation of Gravity and Magnetic Data in the Salida Region, Colorado
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic interpretation of gravity and magnetic data in the Salida region, Colorado By . J. E. Case and R.F. Sikora Open-File Report 84-372 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U. S. Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Trade names are used for descriptive purposes only. 1.345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 1984 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Summary of Major Rock Units 3 Precambrian rocks 3 Sedimentary rocks 6 Paleozoic strata 6 Mesozoic strata 6 Cenozoic strata 6 Cenozoic volcanic rocks 7 Cretaceous and Tertiary intrusive rocks 7 Physical Properties of Rock Units 7 Magnetic Properties 10 Precambrian gneiss 11 Precambrian granitoid rocks 11 Paleozoic sedimentary rocks 11 Upper Cretaceous and Tertiary igneous rocks 11 Tertiary volcanic rocks 12 Other geophysical surveys 12 DESCRIPTION OF SURVEYS 12 Gravity Survey 12 Aeromagnetic Survey 14 General Features of the Bouguer Anomaly Map 14 General Features of the Magnetic Map 15 Interpretation of the Geophysical Anomalies 15 South Park and Mosquito Range 15 Arkansas Valley Basin 21 S a watch Range 24 Southern Mosquito Range 31 Sangre de Cristo Range 32 San Luis Valley and vicinity 33 Bonanza Caldera and vicinity 36 Acknowledgements 41 References 42 Table 1 Generalized geologic column 4 Fig. 1 Index map of central and western Colorado 2 2 Densities 8 3 Magnetic susceptibilities 9 4 Residual gravity anomaly map, north part of 17 Antero Reservoir quadrangle 5 Interpretation of residual gravity anomaly along 18 profile H-H' 6 Interpretation of the gravity anomaly 20 along profile A-A1 7 Two-dimensional model computed along 22 profile B-B 1 8 Two-dimensional model computed along gravity 23 profile C-C 1 9 Bouguer gravity anomaly map of west-central Colorado 27 10 Gravity profiles along B-B 1 and gravity model for 28 Mount Princeton batholith.
    [Show full text]