4.14 Recreation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Wilderness Visitors and Recreation Impacts: Baseline Data Available for Twentieth Century Conditions
United States Department of Agriculture Wilderness Visitors and Forest Service Recreation Impacts: Baseline Rocky Mountain Research Station Data Available for Twentieth General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-117 Century Conditions September 2003 David N. Cole Vita Wright Abstract __________________________________________ Cole, David N.; Wright, Vita. 2003. Wilderness visitors and recreation impacts: baseline data available for twentieth century conditions. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-117. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 52 p. This report provides an assessment and compilation of recreation-related monitoring data sources across the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). Telephone interviews with managers of all units of the NWPS and a literature search were conducted to locate studies that provide campsite impact data, trail impact data, and information about visitor characteristics. Of the 628 wildernesses that comprised the NWPS in January 2000, 51 percent had baseline campsite data, 9 percent had trail condition data and 24 percent had data on visitor characteristics. Wildernesses managed by the Forest Service and National Park Service were much more likely to have data than wildernesses managed by the Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service. Both unpublished data collected by the management agencies and data published in reports are included. Extensive appendices provide detailed information about available data for every study that we located. These have been organized by wilderness so that it is easy to locate all the information available for each wilderness in the NWPS. Keywords: campsite condition, monitoring, National Wilderness Preservation System, trail condition, visitor characteristics The Authors _______________________________________ David N. -
Iron Mountains Endangered Desert Legacy
Iron Mountains Endangered Desert Legacy Location: The Iron Mountains area is located in the Mojave Desert, in both San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, south of the town of Cadiz. The area is located north of Highway 62, northeast of Joshua Tree National Park, south of the Cadiz Dunes Wilderness and southwest of the Old Woman Mountains Wilderness. The area abuts the eastern side of the Cadiz Valley. Management Agency: Bureau of Land Management, Needles Field Office Description: The terrain includes rugged mountains, playas, sand dunes, bajadas, washes and dozens of other geologic features. The area also contains a portion of Danby Lake (dry). Elevations range from about 600 feet to about 3,200 feet. Wildlife and Plants: The Iron Mountains area is habitat for the endangered desert tortoise, the protected desert bighorn sheep (photo above), and several species on the state watch-list, including the Mojave fringe-toed lizard, hepatic tanager, and prairie falcon. Emory's crucifixion-thorn and Harwood's eriastrum can also be found here. In 1999, a Gila monster was also seen in the area. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife recognizes this area as a wildlife migration corridor, which is an area connecting wildlife populations that have been separated due to human activities. Corridors help avoid inbreeding and may help to re-establish populations that have been reduced or eliminated due to random events such as fire or disease. Desert bighorn sheep have also been found to migrate between the Iron Mountains and the Old Woman Mountains, which can be an important factor in trying to ensure that the species does not die out. -
Travel Summary
Travel Summary – All Trips and Day Trips Retirement 2016-2020 Trips (28) • Relatives 2016-A (R16A), September 30-October 20, 2016, 21 days, 441 photos • Anza-Borrego Desert 2016-A (A16A), November 13-18, 2016, 6 days, 711 photos • Arizona 2017-A (A17A), March 19-24, 2017, 6 days, 692 photos • Utah 2017-A (U17A), April 8-23, 2017, 16 days, 2214 photos • Tonopah 2017-A (T17A), May 14-19, 2017, 6 days, 820 photos • Nevada 2017-A (N17A), June 25-28, 2017, 4 days, 515 photos • New Mexico 2017-A (M17A), July 13-26, 2017, 14 days, 1834 photos • Great Basin 2017-A (B17A), August 13-21, 2017, 9 days, 974 photos • Kanab 2017-A (K17A), August 27-29, 2017, 3 days, 172 photos • Fort Worth 2017-A (F17A), September 16-29, 2017, 14 days, 977 photos • Relatives 2017-A (R17A), October 7-27, 2017, 21 days, 861 photos • Arizona 2018-A (A18A), February 12-17, 2018, 6 days, 403 photos • Mojave Desert 2018-A (M18A), March 14-19, 2018, 6 days, 682 photos • Utah 2018-A (U18A), April 11-27, 2018, 17 days, 1684 photos • Europe 2018-A (E18A), June 27-July 25, 2018, 29 days, 3800 photos • Kanab 2018-A (K18A), August 6-8, 2018, 3 days, 28 photos • California 2018-A (C18A), September 5-15, 2018, 11 days, 913 photos • Relatives 2018-A (R18A), October 1-19, 2018, 19 days, 698 photos • Arizona 2019-A (A19A), February 18-20, 2019, 3 days, 127 photos • Texas 2019-A (T19A), March 18-April 1, 2019, 15 days, 973 photos • Death Valley 2019-A (D19A), April 4-5, 2019, 2 days, 177 photos • Utah 2019-A (U19A), April 19-May 3, 2019, 15 days, 1482 photos • Europe 2019-A (E19A), July -
Recruitment of Desert Tortoises (Gopherus Agassizii and G
Herpetological Conservation and Biology 10(2):583–591. Submitted: 29 September 2014; Accepted: 7 April 2015; Published: 31 August 2015. RECRUITMENT OF DESERT TORTOISES (GOPHERUS AGASSIZII AND G. MORAFKAI): A SYNTHESIS OF REPRODUCTION AND FIRST-YEAR SURVIVAL STEVEN P. CAMPBELL1,2,3, ROBERT J. STEIDL1, AND ERIN R. ZYLSTRA1 1School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA 2Albany Pine Bush Preserve Commission, Albany, New York 12205, USA 3Corresponding author, email: [email protected] Abstract.—Recruitment is integral to population persistence, therefore characterizing this process is essential for evaluating recovery actions for species in decline. We gathered all data available and used Bayesian analyses to quantify annual recruitment of Mojave Desert (Gopherus agassizii) and Sonoran Desert (G. morafkai) tortoises as the product of four components: proportion of females that reproduced, number of eggs produced per reproducing female, hatching success, and hatchling survival. For Mojave Desert Tortoises, the estimated proportion of females that reproduced (0.81 [95% Credible Interval: 0.52–0.99]) and number of eggs produced per year (6.90 [5.51–8.16]) were higher than for Sonoran Desert Tortoises (0.52 [0.07–0.94] and 5.17 [3.05–7.60], respectively). For Mojave Desert Tortoises, hatching success averaged 0.61 (0.25–0.90). Data on hatching success for Sonoran Desert Tortoises and hatchling survival for both species were sparse, therefore we represented these components with a range of plausible values. When we combined components, average recruitment for Mojave Desert Tortoises ranged from 0.51 females/female/y assuming that hatchling survival was 0.30 to 1.18 females/female/y with hatchling survival assumed to be 0.70. -
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History Mojave Administrative History From Neglected Space To Protected Place: An Administrative History of Mojave National Preserve by Eric Charles Nystrom March 2003 Prepared for: United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Mojave National Preserve Great Basin CESU Cooperative Agreement H8R0701001 TABLE OF CONTENTS moja/adhi/adhi.htm Last Updated: 05-Apr-2005 http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi.htm[8/6/2013 5:32:15 PM] Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents) Mojave Administrative History TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER ACKNOWLEDGMENTS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION CHAPTER TWO: PRELUDE TO SYSTEMATIC FEDERAL MANAGEMENT Native Americans and Anglo Contact Grazing Mining Railroads Homesteading Modern Roads and Rights of Way Modern Military Training Recreation CHAPTER THREE: BLM MANAGEMENT IN THE EAST MOJAVE FLPMA and the Desert Plan The East Mojave National Scenic Area and the Genesis of the CDPA The Political Battle Over the CDPA CHAPTER FOUR: AN AWKWARD START AND THREATS OF AN EARLY END The Dollar Budget CHAPTER FIVE: PLANNING FOR MOJAVE'S FUTURE CHAPTER SIX: PARK MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION CHAPTER SEVEN: VISITOR SERVICES Resource and Visitor Protection Interpretation CHAPTER EIGHT: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Natural Resources http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:32:17 PM] Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents) Cultural Resources CHAPTER NINE: FUTURES BIBLIOGRAPHY FOOTNOTES INDEX (omitted from the online edition) LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Illustration 1 - Joshua tree and buckhorn cholla Illustration 2 - Prehistoric petroglyphs at Indian Well Illustration 3 - The 7IL Ranch Illustration 4 - Stone walls of 1880s-era Providence Illustration 5 - U.S. -
Castle Mountain Mine Plan and Reclamation
Castle Mountain Venture (Viceroy Gold Corporation) CASTLE MOUNTAIN MINE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINE PLAN AND RECLAMATION PLAN Ver.2.1 (90M-013) California Mine ID NO. 91-36-0015 Prepared by: Castle Mountain Venture Castle Mountain Mine 911 American Pacific Drive., Ste. 190 Henderson, NV 89014 January 2, 2019 Castle Mountain Mine January 2019 Mine Plan and Reclamation Plan TABLE CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO 1.0 SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Introduction and Background................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Mine Ownership and Prior Approvals .................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Purpose and Need .................................................................................................................. 1-2 1.4 Organization of this Mine Plan/Reclamation Plan ................................................................. 1-4 1.4.1 Description – Site, Access, and Property ................................................................... 1-7 1.4.2 Background and Current Status of Operation ......................................................... 1-10 1.4.2.1 Early History – Hart Mining District ........................................................ 1-10 1.4.2.2 Operations (1990 – 2001) ....................................................................... 1-11 1.4.2.3 Operations -
Mojave National Preserve California
A fact sheet from 2017 Dougall Photography/iStockphoto Mojave’s $131.8 million maintenance backlog includes repairs to historic buildings such as the Kelso Depot. Shane McMurphy/iStockphoto Mojave National Preserve California Overview Two hours from the hustle and bustle of Las Vegas and 100 miles from the nearest lodging lies California’s Mojave National Preserve. The Las Vegas Review-Journal dubbed this vast desert in San Bernardino County the “perfect escape for those seeking serenity.” The preserve spans 1.6 million acres, making it the third-largest National Park Service (NPS) unit in the contiguous United States. Mojave is ecologically and geologically diverse, with towering sand dunes, dun-colored mesas, and volcanic formations providing habitat for its abundant plants and wildlife. In addition to the densest forest of Joshua trees in the world, visitors can see bighorn sheep, bobcats, golden eagles, and breathtaking displays of seasonal wildflowers. The preserve also has a rich cultural heritage. Lands first inhabited by the Chemehuevi and Mojave tribes attracted gold miners in the late 19th century and were later crossed by several railroad lines. Visitors can learn more about this history through exhibits at the visitor center and by exploring archaeological sites, abandoned mines, and preserved homesteads and other buildings. The ghost town of Kelso, which once served as a Union Pacific Railroad depot and mining outpost, is one of the park’s most popular destinations. Unfortunately, Mojave faces over $131 million in deferred maintenance. Maintenance challenges Nearly all of Mojave’s needed repairs are for its road network. Severe deterioration of some sections of pavement has prompted the NPS to warn visitors of dangerous potholes. -
BLM Worksheets
10 18 " 13 4 47 ! ! ! 47 " " 11 Piute Valley and Sacramento Mountains 54 " ! ! 87 12 ! 81 " 4 55 61 22 " ! " Pinto Lucerne Valley and Eastern Slopes ! 63 33 " 56 " " " 36 25 Colorado Desert " 20 ! " " 59 37 ! 2 ! 19 " ! 16 19 ! 56 21 " ! ! 15 27 ! 38 Arizona Lake Cahuilla 72 Lake Cahuilla 48 57 " ! ! 57 ! " 34 35 84 ! " 42 76 ! 26 41 ! " 0 5 10 14 58I Miles 28 " " 43 ! ! ! ! 8!9 Existing " Proposed DRECPSubareas 66 62 Colorado Desert Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) ACECs within the Colorado Desert Subarea # Proposed ACECs 12 Cadiz Valley Chuckwalla Central 19 (covered in Chuckwalla, see below)) Chuckwalla Extension 20 (covered in Chuckwalla, see below) Chuckwalla Mountains Central 21 (covered in Corn Springs, see below) 22 Chuckwalla to Chemehuevi Tortoise Linkage Joshua Tree to Palen Corridor 33 (covered in Chuckwalla to Chemehuevi Tortoise Linkage) 36 McCoy Valley 37 McCoy Wash 38 Mule McCoy 44 Palen Ford Playa Dunes 48 Picacho Turtle Mountains Corridor 55 (covered in Chuckwalla to Chemehuevi Tortoise Linkage) 56 Upper McCoy # Existing ACECs (within DRECP boundary) 2 Alligator Rock 15 Chuckwalla 16 Chuckwalla Valley Dune Thicket 19 Corn Springs 25 Desert Lily Preserve 56 Mule Mountains 59 Palen Dry Lake 61 Patton's Iron Mountain Divisional Camp 81 Turtle Mountains Cadiz Valley Description/Location: North of Hwy 62, south of Hwy 40 between the Sheep Hole mountains to the west and the Chemehuevi ACEC to the east. Nationally Significant Values: Ecological: The Cadiz Valley contains an enormous variation of Mojave vegetation, from Ajo Lilies to Mojave Yucca. Bighorn, deer and mountain lion easily migrate between basin and range mountains of the Sheephole, Calumet Mountains, Iron Mountains, Kilbeck Hills and Old Woman Mountains with little or no human infrastructure limits. -
Understanding the Source of Water for Selected Springs Within Mojave Trails National Monument, California
ENVIRONMENTAL FORENSICS, 2018 VOL. 19, NO. 2, 99–111 https://doi.org/10.1080/15275922.2018.1448909 Understanding the source of water for selected springs within Mojave Trails National Monument, California Andy Zdon, PG, CHg, CEGa, M. Lee Davisson, PGb and Adam H. Love, Ph.D.c aTechnical Director – Water Resources, PARTNER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, INC., Santa Ana, CA, Sacramento, CA; bML Davisson & Associates, Inc., Livermore, CA; cVice President/Principal Scientist, Roux Associates, Inc., Oakland, CA ABSTRACT KEYWORDS While water sources that sustain many of the springs in the Mojave Desert have been poorly Water resources; clipper understood, the desert ecosystem can be highly dependent on such resources. This evaluation mountains; bonanza spring; updates the water resource forensics of Bonanza Spring, the largest spring in the southeastern groundwater; forensics; Mojave Desert. The source of spring flow at Bonanza Spring was evaluated through an integration isotopes of published geologic maps, measured groundwater levels, water quality chemistry, and isotope data compiled from both published sources and new samples collected for water chemistry and isotopic composition. The results indicate that Bonanza Spring has a regional water source, in hydraulic communication with basin fill aquifer systems. Neighboring Lower Bonanza Spring appears to primarily be a downstream manifestation of surfacing water originally discharged from the Bonanza Spring source. Whereas other springs in the area, Hummingbird, Chuckwalla, and Teresa Springs, each appear to be locally sourced as “perched” springs. These conclusions have important implications for managing activities that have the potential to impact the desert ecosystem. Introduction above Bonanza Spring. Identification of future impacts General information and data regarding springs in the from water resource utilization becomes problematic if Mojave Desert are sparse, and many of these springs are initial baseline conditions are unknown or poorly under- not well understood. -
Mojave Desert Land Trust 2020 Annual Report
2020 ANNUAL REPORT MOJAVE DESERT LAND TRUST ABOUT MDLT MISSION: The Mojave Desert Land Trust protects the Mojave Desert ecosystem and its natural, scenic, and cultural resource values. VISION: Dark night skies, clean air and water, broad views and vistas, and an abundance of native plants and animals. Photo: Lucas Basulto/MDLT The Mojave Desert Land Trust (MDLT) protects the unique living landscapes of the California deserts. Our service area spans nearly 26 million acres - the entire California portion of the Mojave and Colorado deserts - about 25% of the state. Since 2006 we have secured permanent and lasting protection for over 90,000 acres across the California deserts. We envisage the California desert as a vital ecosystem of interconnected, permanently protected scenic and natural areas that host a diversity of native plants and wildlife. Views and vistas are broad. The air is clear, the water clean, and the night skies dark. Cities and military facilities are compact and separated by large natural areas. Residents, visitors, land managers, and political leaders value the unique environment in which they live and work, as well as the impacts of global climate change upon the desert ecosystem. MDLT shares our mission of protecting wildlife corridors, land conservation education, habitat management and restoration, research, and outreach with the general public so they too can become well informed and passionate protectors and stewards of our desert resources. Only through acquisition, stewardship, public awareness, and advocacy can -
Forwards DOI Request for LLNL Tritium Tests at Ward Valley
- _ . - . - - . .. -_. - .. - - - * . March 19, 1996 NOTE T0: X. Stablein J. Austin ; C. Paperiello M. Bell ' J. Greeves J. Holonich M. Federline B. Reamer M. Weber C. Cameron P. Lohaus J. Kennedy P. Sobel FROM: Nelson,[[[ SUBJECT: DOE STAFF POSITION ON DOI REQUEST FOR LLNL TRITIUM TESTS AT WARD ! VALLEY ! The attached staff position paper was provided to us by Terry Plummer, ! DOE, last week and is forwarded FYI. ; Attachment: As stated | | l, i l ! ! 1 ! t l' 970 g;g,60pe, - 1 - , - - . - - - - - - 4 , ' . I 1 * , . i. > !. 4 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REQUEST FOR LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORA'IORY i 70 i PERFORM TRTITUM TF.STS AT WARD VALLEY, CALIFORNIA | f FACTS / BACKGROUND , i - On February 23,1996, John Garamendi, Deputy Secretary of the Depiu unent of the Interior, requested the participation of the De,partment of Energy in contracting with the Lawrence i Livermore National Laboratory to perform tntium tests at the State licensed low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facility in Ward Valley, Califomia. * On Demhn 15,1995, Secretary O' leary denied a similar request dated June 8,1995, : from Senator Boxer, (D-CA). 'Ihe Secretary stated that,"We believe the State of California, in its ! licensing role as authorized by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, should determine how to implement the National Academy of Sciences' recommendations. If the State Mermines that further testing is needed based on analytical services unique to the Departmw of Energy, we will consider such a request." l ! + In response to an earlier request of Senator Boxer, Secretary Babbitt asked the National ! Academy of Sciences (NAS) to examine several key safety related issues of the site. -
Wilderness Study Areas
I ___- .-ll..l .“..l..““l.--..- I. _.^.___” _^.__.._._ - ._____.-.-.. ------ FEDERAL LAND M.ANAGEMENT Status and Uses of Wilderness Study Areas I 150156 RESTRICTED--Not to be released outside the General Accounting Wice unless specifically approved by the Office of Congressional Relations. ssBO4’8 RELEASED ---- ---. - (;Ao/li:( ‘I:I)-!L~-l~~lL - United States General Accounting OfTice GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-262989 September 23,1993 The Honorable Bruce F. Vento Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Committee on Natural Resources House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: Concerned about alleged degradation of areas being considered for possible inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (wilderness study areas), you requested that we provide you with information on the types and effects of activities in these study areas. As agreed with your office, we gathered information on areas managed by two agencies: the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLN) and the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. Specifically, this report provides information on (1) legislative guidance and the agency policies governing wilderness study area management, (2) the various activities and uses occurring in the agencies’ study areas, (3) the ways these activities and uses affect the areas, and (4) agency actions to monitor and restrict these uses and to repair damage resulting from them. Appendixes I and II provide data on the number, acreage, and locations of wilderness study areas managed by BLM and the Forest Service, as well as data on the types of uses occurring in the areas.