DOCSLIB.ORG

Landforms Tempe Quadrangle, Maricopa County, Arizona

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Landforms Tempe Quadrangle, Maricopa County, Arizona State of Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology Geologic Investigation Series Map GI-2-D LANDFORMS 112"00' TEMPE QUADRANGLE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA ".,.' ( Phoenix "'~"~ Cathy S. Wellendorf James T. Bales Troy L. Pewe • I-0:"""::'~'~-To PllfI Pedlm.,t I I --- . Tampe Department of Geology Arizona State University SUP'Ontitution ~ MI.:; 1986 -" Prepared in cooperation with the cities of o '0 M ilas I , Tempe, Scottsdale, and Phoenix, and the Arizona State Land Department INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT 3 6.'5/ III S W (PARADfS£ 000 FE ET 11 1 · 52'30 " 33"30' The Tempe Quadrangle is in the Sonoran Desert Section of the Basin and Range Physiographic Province. The alternating basins and ranges were produced during a period of block faulting which occurrod in M id -Tertiary time, approximataly 12 to 17 million years ago. The re la tive ly upthrown blocks form the ranges, while the downdropped blocks fonn the ba sins. Ero­ sion of the bedrock hig hlands of thesa ranges has contributed great thicknesses of dabris. forming alluvial fans at the base of the highlands. As t he ba sins f ill with alluvium, the dis ta l ends of these alluvial fan s cOli lesce Into a nea rly flat, elCtanslva basin floor. Many small. isolated knobs of bed rock. such as T~ mp e Butte, Bell Butte, 1md Twin Buttes, represent the tops of hills and ranges that are tieing buried by the infi lling allUVium. z Mountains in arid regions are commonly bordered by a realitively Smooth, eroded bedrock o surface called a pediment. A break In slope separates the broad , concavtl upward pedimont Sut­ face from the steep mo untain f ront. The Papago Pa rk Pediment is a partly buried, gullied ped i­ ment. The Original upland mass has be!!n reduced to a number of isolated, residual bedrock hills called inselbergs. The Papago P3rk Pediment is small. only 7.5 mi 09.5 km l. II is thought to 1M! about 3 to 5 million years old. This age is Uased on the rclm lvely extensive development of caliche In tha colluvium which overlies the pediment. As the surrounding basins filled with alluvium, the debris could no longer btl transpocted away f rom tha pediment, and accumulated on the bedrock surfaces, ~here it became cemented by caliche. As thEl bordering Salt River has lowered Its base level. streams d raining tha pediment have cut into this calichified colluvium, locally aJlPosing bedrock in the floors and sides of the gullies. ST The pediment Is distinguished from an alluvial fa n: a pediment is a surface of erosion, bu t an alluvial fan is a sur1ace of deposition. Ailuvia l f ans are not well devaloped w ithin this quadrangle due to the absence of large mountnins. The rlistal portions of alluvial fans from surrounding moun­ tain ranges converge to fonn the contlnOUS surface of the basin f loor. Dry washes draining the "'" fans of Camelback Mountllin and the McDowell Mounteins are tributari es to Indian Bend W ash, a shifting, ephemeral straa m which is a tributary to the Salt Rivar. The Salt River has contributed to the basin-fill deposits by trllnspottin~ al luvium from the Superstition-Goldfield-MazetZ91 Mountains In the east. As me river locelly mea nders across the valley, It MS Oroded laterally forming an eJltensiva floodplain. Four paired alluvial terraces bordar the modern chanr18l, and represent older floodplain levels. These floodpill in remnants were left behind as the river cut down through alluv ium which It had deposited at an eerller time. Three ter­ rar.:o levels can be distinguished w ithin the TerTlle Quadrangle. Each terrace reflects a period of downcutting due to uplift of the mountains in the east, which causes a rejuvenation of the ri ver. The terraces converge nsar Tempe, where the older terraces disappear undel the basin floor . '31 Tho Iowost terrace, the Leh i, is only 5 It (1.6 m) above Ihe dry river bed near Tempe, and rises to 18 ft 16 m) above the ri ve r 24 miles (40 km) upstream. A higher terrace, the Bl ue Point. is not recognized In I hls Quad rangle. The most prominent tartllce is the Mesa. on which most of the T 2 N. citios of Mesa and Tempe are built. II is 10 to 15 ft (3 to 4.5 m) above the dry ri ver bed atTemJle. 21B ft (67 m) above the river at StllWClrt Mountain Dam. an d mora than 290 ft (90 m) above t ho river near Roosevelt Dam. The highest and oldest terrace, t he Sawik. is the most fragmentary. It is :>'" about 45 ft (15 m) above the dry river bed at Scottsdale and the Sa lt River IMlan Reservetion. whore It h..'lS boon buried under all uvia l fan deposits horn Camelback: Mountain and the McDowell Mounta ins. Although the river has shifted back and forth across the va lley, and its level is now lower. the groin-size distribution, the roundne5S. and the ~pheric i ty of the cob ble ~ indicate that conditions under which the older gravels were dep06ited are very simila r to the modarn condilions of deposition. Comparison of the rock types of terrace daposlts with those of the modern channel show that the source has 1'1 01 changed th roughout the hist ory of the Salt River. The downstrnam convergence of the l erraces suggests a continual reg ional uplift of the mountains to the east and T.! N. north, w ith the relative subsidence of tho basin. The older Mesa and Saw ik Terrace deposits show various stages of caliche development, and could be up to 2 million yea rs old. Similar terraces on the Gila River downstream nee r Arl­ 27',," 1- 27'30 " ington are covered by lava flows 2 to 3 million yoars old. , , . , On November 4, ,9n, Nwl! (unpublished data) found II fossil tortoise (l<!to Pleistocene 7) at a depth of 6 It 12 m) under overbank silt on the Lohi Tarnu:e 1/ 4 mile t1016 ml sou theast of Lehi, Arizona 12 1/2 miles 14.2 kmJ east of Tempe Quadrangle). Teeth of II Pleistoc8f1e horse were found in the Lehl Terrace deposit ellst of Sky Herbor Airpon, south of Washington Stroet, north of the Salt RIver INalions and Lindsoy, 1976) . The tOElt h were identrfied to be from Equus ucciden(iJfk> nnd their condition suggests the specimefls had not been transported with t he rivar gravels nor reworked f rom older deposits Presence of those teeth supports a late Pleistocene age (Rancho­ labrean Land Mammal Age) for the Lehi Terrace deoosit. As the river abandons a former level, the terrace gradually becomes covered by en­ croaching allUVium from t he surroundillQ highlands. This alluvIal blanket Is thicker to the aast, where the mountains are higher end closur to Ihe river. South Mountains is clooe enough to the river to have caused partial buria l of even the youngest terrace. Different landforms are the resuh of different geologic conditions . Parameters used to dif­ ferentiatolondforms include topogralllljc expression, sloplt, calic he development, drainage and in­ cision. Identification of a particular l<!n dform allows a prediction of the reilltive flood hazard, the penneability, t he 1nIaiiabie materi.'ll resources, and t~ excavation conditions. 18 ." ,I .I' SELECTED REFERENCES 30gB Christenson, G. C., and P6we, T. L . 1978, Environmental geology of the McDowell Mountain area, Maricopa County, Arizona - Landform s map: Arizona Bu rea u of Geology and Min­ era i Technology. Geologic Investigation Series, GI-l -B, 1:24,000. 25' Cordy. G. E.. Holway, J . V., end Pew~, T. L. , 19n, Environmental geology of the Pnradisc V;:lIley bfc=,;, Quadrangle, Maricopa County, Arizona: Tempe. Arizona, unpublished folio of maps pl e­ pa red for the City of Scottsdale. 14 plates. 1 :24,000. Den ny. C. S .. 1967. Fans and pediments: American Journal of Science, p. 81-105 Kokalis, P. G., 1971 , Terraces of the lower Salt River Valley . A rizona' unpubli shed Master of Science thesis. Arizono Stllte Un iversity, 103 p . Lee , W. T., 1905. Underground waters 01 Salt River Va lley : United States Geo logical SUf\lr!y Water Supply and Irrigation Paper 1'10. 136,196 P Nations, J . D., and Lindsay, E. , 1976, Pleistocene Equus from SaH River terrace gravels. PhoeniX, Arizona: Joornal of A rizona Academy of Science, volume 11, p . 27-28. Pewe. T. L , 1978. TerracllS of the lower Salt River Valley in rela tion to Ihe Late Ctlilezoil: history ol l he Phoenix Basin, Arizona: in a iln, D. M., and Nwe. T. L., Guidebook to the geology of central Arizona: Arizona Bureau of Geology and Minerai Techno logy, Spm:ial Paper number 2, p. 1-45. Pope, C. W ., 1974, Geology 01 the lower Vcrdr: Rive r Valley, Maricopa County, Arizona: I .~B unpublished Ma~ter of Science I hesl~ , Arizona State University, 104 p. •. i This map involves a general evaluation on a broad scale and does not preclude · - I ~I t he necessity of site investigation. L ,. 870 FEET SYMBOLS * Vertebrate fossil locality :> 55' '15 11 1 °52'30 " BASE MAP FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TOPOGRAPH IC MAP. 1:24.000 SERIES * TE M PE QUADRANGLE (1952 PHOTOFI EV ISED 19B7 ) Additional revisions compiled by the Geological 6CO.) 7003 FEET Survey from aorial photographs taksn 1978 and otha. sources. This information not f ield chocked. M a~ edited 1982. 1) 1M GRID ANO 1982 MAGNETIC NOlrnH OEC LINATION AT CENi EA OF SH EET EXPLANATION Active geologic fluodlliam af Ilia Sa il River - Undulatory topograph\l of Sawlk Terrac e - High alluvial terrace remnant of the Sail River.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sonoran Preserve Master Plan
    City of Phoenix Sonoran Preserve Master Plan City of Phoenix Sonoran Preserve Sonoran Preserve Master Plan An Open Space Plan for the Phoenix Sonoran Desert HCDE Sonoran Preserve Master Plan An Open Space Plan for the Phoenix Sonoran Desert City of Phoenix Parks, Recreation and Library Department February 17, 1998 Herberger Center for Design Excellence Arizona State University The City of Phoenix prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, religion, age, sexual ori- entation, or disability in its services, programs and activi- ties. Anyone who believes he or she has been discriminated against may file a complaint with the City of Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department. The City of Phoenix does not carry accident insurance to cover participants. Involvement in any activity is done at the participant’s own risk. This pubication can be provided in an alternative format upon request. Call 602-262-6862 (voice). TDD 602-262- 6713 (parks and recreation) or 602-534-5500 (city opera- tor). FAX 602-534-3787. E-mail [email protected] Figure Credits Ward Brady: cover map, chapter 2 divider, 2.14 Jim Burke: chapter 3 divider, 3.19, 5.4 City of Phoenix Information Technology: 2.13 City of Phoenix Parks, Recreation, and Library Department: cover owl, 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.11, 1.12, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.12, 2.15, 2.17, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.18, 3.23, 4.1, 4.2, chapter 5 divider, 5.5, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.10, 5.11 City of Phoenix Planning Department: 2.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 Joe Ewan: cover children,
    [Show full text]
  • The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012
    The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012 (Photographs: Arizona Game and Fish Department) Arizona Game and Fish Department In partnership with the Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ i RECOMMENDED CITATION ........................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ iii DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ iv BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 1 THE MARICOPA COUNTY WILDLIFE CONNECTIVITY ASSESSMENT ................................... 8 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT AND ASSOCIATED GIS DATA ................................................... 10 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 12 MASTER LIST OF WILDLIFE LINKAGES AND HABITAT BLOCKSAND BARRIERS ................ 16 REFERENCE MAPS .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Maricopa County Regional Trail System Plan
    Maricopa County Regional Trail System Plan Adopted August 16, 2004 Maricopa Trail Maricopa County Trail Commission Maricopa County Department of Transportation Maricopa County Parks and Recreation Maricopa County Planning and Development Flood Control District of Maricopa County We have an obligation to protect open spaces for future generations. Maricopa County Regional Trail System Plan VISION Our vision is to connect the majestic open spaces of the Maricopa County Regional Parks with a nonmotorized trail system. The Maricopa Trail Maricopa County Regional Trail System Plan - page 1 Credits Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Andrew Kunasek, District 3, Chairman Fulton Brock, District 1 Don Stapley, District 2 Max Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5 Maricopa County Trail Commission Supervisor Max Wilson, District 4 Chairman Supervisor Andrew Kunasek, District 3 Parks Commission Members: Citizen Members: Laurel Arndt, Chair Art Wirtz, District 2 Randy Virden, Vice-Chair Jim Burke, District 3 Felipe Zubia, District 5 Stakeholders: Carol Erwin, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Fred Pfeifer, Arizona Public Service (APS) James Duncan, Salt River Project (SRP) Teri Raml, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Ex-officio Members: William Scalzo, Chief Community Services Officer Pictured from left to right Laurel Arndt, Supervisor Andy Kunasek, Fred Pfeifer, Carol Erwin, Arizona’s Official State Historian, Marshall Trimble, and Art Wirtz pose with the commemorative branded trail marker Mike Ellegood, Director, Public Works at the Maricopa Trail
    [Show full text]
  • Part 629 – Glossary of Landform and Geologic Terms
    Title 430 – National Soil Survey Handbook Part 629 – Glossary of Landform and Geologic Terms Subpart A – General Information 629.0 Definition and Purpose This glossary provides the NCSS soil survey program, soil scientists, and natural resource specialists with landform, geologic, and related terms and their definitions to— (1) Improve soil landscape description with a standard, single source landform and geologic glossary. (2) Enhance geomorphic content and clarity of soil map unit descriptions by use of accurate, defined terms. (3) Establish consistent geomorphic term usage in soil science and the National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS). (4) Provide standard geomorphic definitions for databases and soil survey technical publications. (5) Train soil scientists and related professionals in soils as landscape and geomorphic entities. 629.1 Responsibilities This glossary serves as the official NCSS reference for landform, geologic, and related terms. The staff of the National Soil Survey Center, located in Lincoln, NE, is responsible for maintaining and updating this glossary. Soil Science Division staff and NCSS participants are encouraged to propose additions and changes to the glossary for use in pedon descriptions, soil map unit descriptions, and soil survey publications. The Glossary of Geology (GG, 2005) serves as a major source for many glossary terms. The American Geologic Institute (AGI) granted the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) permission (in letters dated September 11, 1985, and September 22, 1993) to use existing definitions. Sources of, and modifications to, original definitions are explained immediately below. 629.2 Definitions A. Reference Codes Sources from which definitions were taken, whole or in part, are identified by a code (e.g., GG) following each definition.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Groun D Water Features of the Butte Valley Region Siskiyou County California
    Geology and Groun d Water Features of the Butte Valley Region Siskiyou County California By P. R. WOOD GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1491 Prepared in cooperation with the California Department offf^ater Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1960 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRED A. SEATON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library catalog card for this publication appears after page 151. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Abstract___.__-_-____________-____________-_____----_----------- 1 Introduction.___---____-______________________--_----------------- 3 Purpose and scope of the work._..._____________________----.._-- 3 Location of area.-_-___-_____________-______--_------_--------- 4 Culture and accessibility. ________-___.___-______-----_--------- 4 Previous investigations.________-_____-______-_-_---_----------- 4 Acknowledgments _________________-___-____-__------_--------- 6 Well-numbering system____-______________-______------_------- 6 Method of investigation._____-______________-__-----_---------- 7 Physical features of the area..___________________._____-___-.---_--- 10 Topography and drainage. __________________-____----_-----_--- 10 Cascade Range.--___________-__________-_-_---_-_--------- 10 Butte Valley_-___----._-_----_---_--_---_----------------- 11 Red Rock Valley area________-_--__---_-------------------- H Oklahoma district. _____________________-___---------------
    [Show full text]
  • The Western Environmental Technology Office (WETO) Butte, Montana ^Jj&Gs^ «*Sim«
    DOE/EM-0217 Office of Environmental Management Office of Technology Development The Western Environmental Technology Office (WETO) Butte, Montana ^jj&gS^ «*sim« •4 4 1 Technology Summary October 1994 i DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENrT I S UNLIMITED DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. THE WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY OFFICE (WETO) BUTTE, MONTANA TECHNOLOGY SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword iii Introduction iv 1.0 Office of Technology Development-Sponsored Projects 1 Heavy Metals Contaminated Soil Project 1.1 Heavy-Metals-Contaminated Soil Project 3 1.2 Heavy
    [Show full text]
  • Hogback Is Ridge Formed by Near- Vertical, Resistant Sedimentary Rock
    Chapter 16 Landscape Evolution: Geomorphology Topography is a Balance Between Erosion and Tectonic Uplift 1 Topography is a Balance Between Erosion and Tectonic Uplift 2 Relief • The relief in an area is the maximum difference between the highest and lowest elevation. – We have about 7000 feet of relief between Boulder and the Continental divide. Relief 3 Mountains and Valleys • A mountain is a large mass of rock that projects above surrounding terrain. • A mountain range is a continuous area of high elevation and high relief. • A valley is an area of low relief typically formed by and drained by a single stream. • A basin is a large low-lying area of low relief. In arid areas basins commonly have closed topography (no river outlet to the sea). Mountains • Typically occur in ranges. • Glaciated forms –Horn –Arête • Desert Mountains – Vertical Cliffs – Alluvial Fans 4 Mountain Landforms: Horn Deserts: Vertical Cliffs and Alluvial Fans 5 Valleys and Basins • River Valleys – U-shape (Glacial) – V-shape (Active Water erosion) – Flat-floored (depositional flood plain) • Tectonic (Fault) Valleys (Basins) – Tectonic origin – San Luis Valley – Jackson Hole – Great Basin U-shaped Valley: Glacial Erosion 6 V-shaped Valley: Active water erosion Flat-floored Valley: Depositional Flood Plain 7 Desert and Semi-arid Landforms • A plateau is a broad area of uplift with relatively little internal relief. • A mesa is a small (<10 km2)plateau bounded by cliffs, commonly in an area of flat-lying sedimentary rocks. • A butte is a small (<1000m2) hill bounded by cliffs Plateau, Mesa, Butte 8 Colorado National Monument Canyonlands 9 Desert and Semi-arid Landforms • A cuesta is an asymmetric ridge in dipping sedimentary rocks as the Flatirons.
    [Show full text]
  • Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0
    Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0 Introduction The Sutter-Butte Basin (Basin) covers 300 square miles bordered by the Cherokee Canal to the north, the Sutter Buttes to the west, the Sutter Bypass to the southwest and the 44-mile long Feather River to the east—see Figure 1. The Basin is home to 95,000 residents and encompasses $7 billion of damageable assets (as estimated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE). The region has sustained numerous floods, including the 1955 levee failure on the Feather River, which resulted in the deaths of at least 38 people. The personal safety and economic stability of large segments of the population are reliant on flood management systems that, until recent efforts, did not begin to meet modern engineering standards. Numerous projects and programs have been implemented in the Basin over the years to reduce flood risk, including the Feather River West Levee Project, which is nearing completion. The Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) leads the planning and implementation efforts in the Basin to reduce the risk of catastrophic, riverine flooding. In this role, SBFCA collaborates with local, regional, state, tribal and federal agencies and organizations. On January 13, 2016 the SBFCA Board of Directors adopted the Strategic Plan to guide these efforts. This version is the first update to the Strategic Plan. 2.0 Purpose of the Strategic Plan The purpose of the Strategic Plan is to help formulate and articulate a vision for flood management within the Basin and to describe an approach to achieve this vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Slope Stability of Crestone, CO Snodgrass Mountain Ski Area March 2008 Crested Butte, CO CHAPTER 2-- GEOLOGY
    GEO-HAZ Consulting, Inc. Geology and Slope Stability of Crestone, CO Snodgrass Mountain Ski Area March 2008 Crested Butte, CO CHAPTER 2-- GEOLOGY This chapter describes the bedrock and Quaternary geology of Snodgrass Mountain, with special emphasis of landslides. Because the area had been mapped several times before, our first task was to compare the various maps. 2.1 Methods 2.1.1 Digitizing previous landslide mapping During the winter of 2006-2007 we digitized the landslide mapping from all seven previous landslide studies (Table 2-1). These maps were georeferenced by International Alpine Design, Vail, CO, for use in our GIS, so we could visually compare the various maps. Table 2-1. Previous studies in which landslides were mapped on Snodgrass Mountain. Author Date Title Map Remarks and Digitizing Scale Gaskill et al. 1967 Geologic map of the 1:24,000 Published USGS color map; being Oh-Be-Joyful digitized by IAD quadrangle… Soule 1976 Geologic Hazards in Ca. Polygons identical to those in the Crested Butte- 1:43,000 Gaskill. Gunnison Area (9 quads) Gaskill et al. 1991 Geologic map of the 1:24,000 Published USGS color map; see Gothic quadrangle… DIGITAL APPENDIX D2.1 on DVD- ROM only Resource 1995 Geologic Hazard 1:6,000 Includes several large landslide Consultants Assessment and deposits, and many small scarps; and Mitigation Planning for digitized by Pioneer Environmental Engineers Crested Butte Mountain in 1995 (RCE) Resort Irish 1996 Geologic Hazard Study 1:12,000 Concludes that Chicken Bone, Zones 3-A and 3-B Slump Block, and toe
    [Show full text]
  • A Geomorphic Classification System
    A Geomorphic Classification System U.S.D.A. Forest Service Geomorphology Working Group Haskins, Donald M.1, Correll, Cynthia S.2, Foster, Richard A.3, Chatoian, John M.4, Fincher, James M.5, Strenger, Steven 6, Keys, James E. Jr.7, Maxwell, James R.8 and King, Thomas 9 February 1998 Version 1.4 1 Forest Geologist, Shasta-Trinity National Forests, Pacific Southwest Region, Redding, CA; 2 Soil Scientist, Range Staff, Washington Office, Prineville, OR; 3 Area Soil Scientist, Chatham Area, Tongass National Forest, Alaska Region, Sitka, AK; 4 Regional Geologist, Pacific Southwest Region, San Francisco, CA; 5 Integrated Resource Inventory Program Manager, Alaska Region, Juneau, AK; 6 Supervisory Soil Scientist, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM; 7 Interagency Liaison for Washington Office ECOMAP Group, Southern Region, Atlanta, GA; 8 Water Program Leader, Rocky Mountain Region, Golden, CO; and 9 Geology Program Manager, Washington Office, Washington, DC. A Geomorphic Classification System 1 Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 5 I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 6 History of Classification Efforts in the Forest Service ............................................................... 6 History of Development .............................................................................................................. 7 Goals
    [Show full text]
  • Marysville Levee Commission Background
    Marysville Levee Commission Background 2012 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Regional Flood Management Plans Basin‐wide Feasibility Studies 2017 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Feather River Regional Boundary Memorandum of Understanding Partner Agencies: Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) Marysville Levee Commission (MLC) Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA) Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA) Marysville Levee Commission Feather River Regional Flood Management Plan Purpose: Build upon the CVFPP by obtaining more region‐specific information and local input for long term implementation of a sustainable and integrated flood risk reduction program in the Central Valley Duration: 18 months Budget: $1.1M Funding: DWR Grant Feather River Regional Stakeholders • 4 Counties – Sutter, Yuba, Butte, and Placer • 6 Cities –Yuba City, Live Oak, Biggs, Gridley, Marysville, and Wheatland • 4 Flood Control Agencies – Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA), Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority (TRLIA), and the Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA), Marysville Levee Commission (MLC) • 9 LMAs –RD’s 10, 784, 817, 2103, 1001, LD 1, LD 9, Marysville Levee District and the Sutter Yard (MA 5, 7, 13, & 16) • 2 Small Communities –Rio Oso and Nicolaus • 21 Currently identified Stakeholder Groups – Including Farm Bureau, Growers, Enterprise Rancheria, Environmental groups/NGOs, Water groups, Chambers of Commerce, Schools, Building and Realty groups, and Citizen and Neighborhood associations Coordinating Committee Steve Lambert primary;
    [Show full text]
  • Phoenix Trail Guide
    WELCOME SAFETY TIPS SEASONS Mother Nature smiles on some cities more than others. Phoenix, Most of the mountain parks and preserves in Greater Phoenix are undeveloped Welcome to Greater Phoenix, America’s sunniest obviously, is blessed in the sunshine department. Sonoran Desert areas. Hikers may encounter rocky terrain, rattlesnakes, bees destination. and other hazards native to this ecosystem. These safety tips are crucial to Phoenix basks in sunshine more than any other major metropolitan area read before embarking on a hike in the desert. in the U.S. — during 85 percent of its daylight hours. And the cliché What sets Phoenix apart from every other big city in the that “it’s a dry heat” rings true: Humidity levels are pleasantly low, even United States is its Sonoran Desert scenery. Phoenix • Drink plenty of water. Bring at least 1 quart for short hikes, and in summer. is surrounded on all sides by mountains, and the sun 3-5 quarts for daylong hikes. When you’ve consumed half of your shines during 85 percent of daylight hours. water, turn around. The bottom line: Any time is a good time to visit the Sonoran Desert. • Make sure someone knows where you’ll be hiking and when you Phoenix has more acreage of parks and preserves than expect to return. WINTER • Hike with a friend. It’s safer … and more fun. any other major destination in the nation, and visitors @jacquelinehurst at Phoenix Mountain Preserve Trail #300 (Summit/Piestewa Peak) During the winter months Greater Phoenix enjoys blue skies and highs in • During hot-weather months, hike in the early morning or near dusk.
    [Show full text]