DOCSLIB.ORG

Tulare Lake River Basin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tulare Lake River Basin FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REFUGE WATER SUPPLY LONG-TERM WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENTS TULARE LAKE BASIN JANUARY 2001 U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION AND U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Contents Section Page 1.0 Purpose and Need ...............................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................1-1 1.2 History of Refuge Water Supply Planning..........................................................1-1 1.3 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action........................................................1-4 1.4 Public Scoping .........................................................................................................1-5 2. Background ............................................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Kern National Wildlife Refuge..............................................................................2-2 2.2 Pixley National Wildlife Refuge............................................................................2-4 3. Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation..................................................3-1 3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement...............................................3-1 3.3 Conveyance of Refuge Water Supply for South San Joaquin Study Area ....3-24 3.4 Management of Wildlife Areas ...........................................................................3-27 4. Description of Alternatives.................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Water Service Agreement ......................................................................................4-1 4.3 On-Refuge Management ........................................................................................4-4 4.4 Alternative Considered But Not Analyzed in Detail.......................................4-11 5. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences...........................................5-1 5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Biological Resources ...............................................................................................5-2 5.3 Water Quality ........................................................................................................5-13 5.4 Agricultural Land Use..........................................................................................5-15 5.5 Recreation...............................................................................................................5-18 5.6 Regional Economics..............................................................................................5-19 5.7 Social Conditions...................................................................................................5-22 5.8 Cultural Resources................................................................................................5-24 5.9 Visual Resources ...................................................................................................5-27 5.10 Power ....................................................................................................................5-28 6. Consultation and Coordination..........................................................................................6-1 6.1 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act .....................................................................6-1 6.2 Endangered Species Act.........................................................................................6-1 6.3 Cultural Resources Coordination .........................................................................6-2 SAC\155333\JAN 2001/010190001 (TULARE CONTENTS.DOC) III CONTENTS 6.4 Indian Trust Assets................................................................................................. 6-2 6.5 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................ 6-2 6.6 Farmlands Policy .................................................................................................... 6-3 Attachments Environmental Commitments References List of Preparers Appendix Terms and Conditions of Biological Opinion Tables 1-1 Annual Level 2 and Level 4 Refuge Water Supplies for Tulare Lake Basin Refuges ...................................................................................................................................... 1-5 3-1 Refuge Water Supply and Delivery Assumptions in the PEIS No Action Alternative................................................................................................................................ 3-5 3-2 Refuge Water Supply and Delivery Assumptions in the PEIS for Level 2 and Level 4 Water Supplies in Alternatives 2, 3, and 4...................................................... 3-9 3-3 Refuge Water Supply and Delivery Assumptions in the PEIS for Level 2 Water Supplies in Alternative 1........................................................................................... 3-10 3-4 Summary of CVPIA PEIS Analysis ..................................................................................... 3-11 4-1 Quantities of Water to Be Provided to the Kern and Pixley NWRs under the No Action Alternative............................................................................................................. 4-1 4-2 Summary of the Proposed Water Service Memorandum of Agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ......................................................................................... 4-3 4-3 Acres of Habitat Expected on Kern and Pixley NWRs under the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action.......................................................................................... 4-7 4-4 Special-Status Species for which the Service will Implement Conservation and Take Avoidance Measures under the Proposed Action ........................................... 4-11 5-1 Special-Status Species Known to Occur or Potentially Occurring on Kern and Pixley NWRs........................................................................................................... 5-5 Figure 2-1 Tulare Lake Basin Refuges ......................................................................................................2-1 IV SAC\155333\JAN 2001/010190001 (TULARE CONTENTS.DOC) Section 1: Purpose and Need SECTION 1 Purpose and Need 1.1 Introduction The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) proposes to enter into long-term water supply agreements with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) pursuant to Sections 3406(d)(1) and 3406(d)(2) of Title 34 of Public Law 102-575, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA). These sections of the CVPIA require the provision of firm water supplies to specified National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs), State Wildlife Areas (WAs), and private wetlands in the Grassland Resource Conservation District (RCD) (collectively referred to as “refuges”). Providing firm water supplies under this project would allow for optimum habitat management on the existing refuge lands. Reclamation is the federal Lead Agency for the preparation of this Environmental Assessment (EA) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).1 The proposed federal action is for the execution of the following water service agreement: • A Memorandum of Understanding between Reclamation and the Service for delivery of water to the Kern and Pixley NWRs. Reclamation is also undertaking concurrent actions to enter into long-term water supply agreements per the CVPIA for refuges in the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River basins of the Central Valley. Separate environmental documents are being prepared for these two study areas. 1.2 History of Refuge Water Supply Planning 1.2.1 The Pacific Flyway and Central Valley Wetlands The Central Valley lies at the southerly end of the Pacific Flyway migratory route. In pre- settlement times, it provided ideal wintering habitat and attracted large numbers of waterfowl. The Pacific Flyway is the westernmost of North America’s four flyways, or migration routes, which are defined as definite geographic regions with breeding grounds in the north, wintering grounds in the south, and a system of migration routes in between. The Pacific Flyway encompasses territory in three countries: northern and western Canada, Alaska and all states west of the Rocky Mountains in the U.S., and western Mexico. The Service ranks Central Valley wetland habitat as one of the top five habitats in the U.S. Historically, the Central Valley contained approximately 4 million acres of wetlands. Approximately 1.5 million acres located in the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta and the Tulare Basin were permanent marshes, while the remaining 2.5 million acres were seasonal wetlands created by winter rains and spring snow melt from the Sierra Nevada. Today, approximately 300,000 acres remain; 100,000 acres are publicly owned (federal and state 1 This EA determines that the project would not cause a substantial change in the human environment and thus does not
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4.3 Water Resources 4.3 Water Resources
    4.3 WATER RESOURCES 4.3 WATER RESOURCES This section describes the existing hydrological setting for the County, including a discussion of water quality, based on published and unpublished reports and data compiled by regional agencies. Agencies contacted include the United States Geological Survey, the California Department of Water Resources, and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. This section also identifies impacts that may result from the project. SETTING CLIMATE The local climate is considered warm desert receiving approximately six to eight inches of rainfall per year (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1986). Rainfall occurs primarily in the winter months, with lesser amounts falling in late summer and fall. Kings County would also be considered a dry climate since evaporation greatly exceeds precipitation.1 A common characteristic of dry climates, other than relatively small amounts of precipitation, is that the amount of precipitation received each year is highly variable. Generally, the lower the mean annual rainfall, the greater the year-to-year variability (Lutgens and Tarbuck, 1979). SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY The County is part of a hydrologic system referred to as the Tulare Lake Basin (Figure 4.3- 1). The management of water resources within the Tulare Lake Basin is a complex activity and is critical to the region’s agricultural operations. The County can be divided into three main hydrologic subareas: the northern alluvial fan and basin area (in the vicinity of the Kings, Kaweah, and Tule rivers and their distributaries), the Tulare Lake Zone, and the southwestern uplands (including the areas west of the California Aqueduct and Highway 5) (Figure 4.3-2).
    [Show full text]
  • Page 78 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 45A–1 Kaweah River and The
    § 45a–1 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 78 Kaweah River and the headwaters of that branch Fork Kaweah River to its junction with Cactus of Little Kern River known as Pecks Canyon; Creek; thence easterly along the first hydro- thence southerly and easterly along the crest of graphic divide south of Cactus Creek to its the hydrographic divide between Pecks Canyon intersection with the present west boundary of and Soda Creek to its intersection with a lateral Sequoia National Park, being the west line of divide at approximately the east line of section township 16 south, range 29 east; thence south- 2, township 19 south, range 31 east; thence erly along said west boundary to the southwest northeasterly along said lateral divide to its corner of said township; thence easterly along intersection with the township line near the the present boundary of Sequoia National Park, southeast corner of township 18 south, range 31 being the north line of township 17 south, range east of the Mount Diablo base and meridian; 29 east, to the northeast corner of said township; thence north approximately thirty-five degrees thence southerly along the present boundary of west to the summit of the butte next north of Sequoia National Park, being the west lines of Soda Creek (United States Geological Survey al- townships 17 and 18 south, range 30 east, to the titude eight thousand eight hundred and eighty- place of beginning; and all of those lands lying eight feet); thence northerly and northwesterly within the boundary line above described are in- along the crest of the hydrographic divide to a cluded in and made a part of the Roosevelt-Se- junction with the crest of the main hydro- quoia National Park; and all of those lands ex- graphic divide between the headwaters of the cluded from the present Sequoia National Park South Fork of the Kaweah River and the head- are included in and made a part of the Sequoia waters of Little Kern River; thence northerly National Forest, subject to all laws and regula- along said divide now between Horse and Cow tions applicable to the national forests.
    [Show full text]
  • René Voss – Attorney at Law 15 Alderney Road San Anselmo, CA 94960 Tel: 415-446-9027 [email protected] ______
    René Voss – Attorney at Law 15 Alderney Road San Anselmo, CA 94960 Tel: 415-446-9027 [email protected] ______________________________________________________________________________ March 22, 2013 Sent to: [email protected] and [email protected] Penelope Shibley, District Planner cc: Ara Marderosian Kern River Ranger District Georgette Theotig P.O. Box 9, 105 Whitney Road Kernville, CA 93238 Subject: Lower Kern Canyon and Greenhorn Mountains Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Restoration Project EA Comments for Sequoia ForestKeeper & Kern-Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club Ms. Shibley, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Lower Kern Canyon and Greenhorn Mountains Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Restoration Project EA. Sequoia ForestKeeper (SFK) and the Kern-Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club (SC) are generally supportive of efforts to close or restore areas damaged by OHVs to avert erosion, to deter illegal uses, to protect natural resources, and to reduce user conflict with non-motorized uses. Purpose and Scope of the Project The Lower Kern Canyon and Greenhorn Mountains Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Restoration Project would implement the closure and restoration of non-system routes within four recreation sites, relocate and restore campsites located within a recreation site (Evans Flat), and reroute portions of two OHV trails; one mile of the Woodward Peak Trail (Trail #32E53) and two miles of the Kern Canyon Trail (Trail #31E75). Three of the four recreation sites (Black Gulch North, Black Gulch South and China Garden) and one of the OHV trails (Kern Canyon Trail #31E75) are located in the Lower Kern Canyon. The fourth recreation site and the second OHV trail (Woodward Peak Trail #32E53) are located within the Greenhorn Mountains near Evans Flat Campground.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiking Trails Sequoia National Forest Western Divide Ranger District
    United States Department of Agriculture Hiking Trails Sequoia National Forest Western Divide Ranger District Western Divide Hiking Trails TRAIL NAME TRAIL # APPROX LOW HIGH EASY MOD STREN BIKE MILES Long Meadow 31E15 7.6 6,800’ 9,000’ X X Summit (GTW) 31E14 11.3 8,400’ 9,920’ Summit (South) 31E14 25 7,000’ 9,000’ X X Clicks Creek 32E11 8.2 6,200’ 7,800’ X X Lewis Camp 33E01 18.5 5,800’ 7,600’ Jerkey Meadow 32E12 9.8 6,000’ 6,800’ X X Forks of the Kern 33E20 11.5 4,600’ 5,700’ Lloyd Meadow 32E12 5.1 5,600’ 6,000’ X X Nelson 31E30 3.7 5,300’ 6,800’ X X X Bear Creek 31E31 8 5,000’ 9,000’ X X X Wishon 30E14 6 4,000’ 5,600’ X X X Needles 32E22 2.5 7,800’ 8,200’ X X Freeman Creek 32E20 4.3 5,600’ 7,100’ X X Jordan Peak 31E35 1.5 8,600’ 9,115’ X X X Mule Peak 31E43 1.5 7,600’ 8,200’ X X X LONG MEADOW: Leaves from Shake Camp in Mtn. Home State SUMMIT SOUTH (NON-WILDERNESS PORTION): Trail trav- Forest. Trail travels northeasterly starting at 6,800’ and enters Sequoia els from the GTW boundary south to Freeze out Mdw on the Hot & Kings Canyon National Parks at approximately 9,000’. Trail crosses Springs District. Trail is bisected many times by roads, but does pro- the Tule River twice, then junctions with the Touhy Gap Trail, then vide the visitor with many beautiful views and interesting things to see rises steeply on a rocky trail with many switchbacks to Summit Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources and Tribal and Native American Interests
    Giant Sequoia National Monument Specialist Report Cultural Resources and Tribal and Native American Interests Signature: __________________________________________ Date: _______________________________________________ The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14 th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Giant Sequoia National Monument Specialist Report Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Current Management Direction ................................................................................................................. 1 Types of Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 3 Objectives ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Salinity Impared Water Bodies and Numerical Limits
    Surface Water Bodies Listed as Impaired by Salinity or Electrical Conductivity on the 303(d) List1 Salinity Del Puerto Creek Hospital Creek Ingram Creek Kellogg Creek Knights Landing Ridge Cut Mountain House Creek Newman Wasteway Old River Pit River, South Fork Ramona Lake Salado Creek Sand Creek Spring Creek Tom Paine Slough Tule Canal Electrical Conductivity Delta Waterways (export area) Delta Waterways (northwestern portion) Delta Waterways (southern portion) Delta Waterways (western portion) Grassland Marshes Lower Kings River Mud Slough North Salt Slough San Joaquin River Temple Creek 1 List adopted by the Central Valley Water Board in June 2009. This list has not been approved by the State Water Board or U.S. EPA. Central Valley Water Bodies With Numerical Objectives for Electrical Conductivity or Total Dissolved Solids SURFACE WATERS GROUNDWATER Sacramento River Basin Tulare Lake Basin Hydrographic Units Sacramento River Westside Feather River Kings River American River Tulare Lake and Kaweah River Folsom Lake Tule River and Poso Goose Lake Kern River San Joaquin River Basin San Joaquin River Tulare Lake Basin Kings River Kaweah River Tule River Kern River Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Sacramento River San Joaquin River So. Fork Mokelumne River Old River West Canal All surface waters and groundwaters Delta-Mendota Canal designated as municipal and domestic Montezuma Slough (MUN) water supplies must meet the Chadbourne Slough numerical secondary maximum Cordelia Slough contaminant levels for salinity in Title Goodyear Slough 22 of the California Code of Intakes on Van Sickle and Chipps Regulations. Islands .
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer of Surface Waters of California
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTI8 SMITH, DIEECTOE WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 296 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA PART II. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OP JOHN C. HOYT BY B. D. WOOD In cooperation with the State Water Commission and the Conservation Commission of the State of California WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1912 NOTE. A complete list of the gaging stations maintained in the San Joaquin River basin from 1888 to July 1, 1912, is presented on pages 100-102. 2 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS IN SAN JOAQUIN RIYER BASIN, CALIFORNIA. By B. D. WOOD. INTRODUCTION. This gazetteer is the second of a series of reports on the* surf ace waters of California prepared by the United States Geological Survey under cooperative agreement with the State of California as repre­ sented by the State Conservation Commission, George C. Pardee, chairman; Francis Cuttle; and J. P. Baumgartner, and by the State Water Commission, Hiram W. Johnson, governor; Charles D. Marx, chairman; S. C. Graham; Harold T. Powers; and W. F. McClure. Louis R. Glavis is secretary of both commissions. The reports are to be published as Water-Supply Papers 295 to 300 and will bear the fol­ lowing titles: 295. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part I, Sacramento River basin. 296. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part II, San Joaquin River basin. 297. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part III, Great Basin and Pacific coast streams. 298. Water resources of California, Part I, Stream measurements in the Sacramento River basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Ground-Water Features of the Edison-Maricopa Area Kern County, California
    Geology and Ground-Water Features of the Edison-Maricopa Area Kern County, California By P. R. WOOD and R. H. DALE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1656 Prepared in cooperation with the California Department of Heater Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1964 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library catalog card for tbis publication appears on page following tbe index. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract______________-_______----_-_._________________________ 1 Introduction._________________________________-----_------_-______ 3 The water probiem-________--------------------------------__- 3 Purpose of the investigation.___________________________________ 4 Scope and methods of study.___________________________________ 5 Location and general features of the area_________________________ 6 Previous investigations.________________________________________ 8 Acknowledgments. ____________________________________________ 9 Well-numbering system._______________________________________ 9 Geography ___________________________________________________ 11 Climate.__-________________-____-__------_-----_---_-_-_----_ 11 Physiography_..__________________-__-__-_-_-___-_---_-----_-_- 14 General features_________________________________________ 14 Sierra Nevada___________________________________________ 15 Tehachapi Mountains..---.________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeological Conceptual Model and Water Budget of the Tule Subbasin Volume 1 August 1, 2017
    Hydrogeological Conceptual Model and Water Budget of the Tule Subbasin Volume 1 August 1, 2017 Tule Subbasin Lower Tule River ID GSA Pixley ID GSA Eastern Tule GSA Alpaugh GSA Delano- Earlimart Tri-County Water ID GSA Authority GSA Prepared for The Tule Subbasin MOU Group Tule Subbasin MOU Group Hydrogeological Conceptual Model and Water Budget of the Tule Subbasin 1-Aug-17 Table of Contents Volume 1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Tule Subbasin Area .......................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Types and Sources of Data ............................................................................................... 7 2.0 Hydrological Setting of the Tule Subbasin .......................................................................... 9 2.1 Location ............................................................................................................................ 9 2.2 Historical Precipitation Trends......................................................................................... 9 2.3 Historical Land Use .......................................................................................................... 9 2.4 Surface Water Features .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Middle Holocene Radiocarbon Date and the Geologic Context of Human Occupation in the Tulare Lake Basin of California
    UC Merced Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Title A Middle Holocene Radiocarbon Date and the Geologic Context of Human Occupation in the Tulare Lake Basin of California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6bg8r2mw Journal Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 25(2) ISSN 0191-3557 Authors Gardner, Jill K. Negrini, Robert M. Sutton, Mark Q. et al. Publication Date 2005 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology | Vol 25, No. 2 (2005) | pp 226-234 A Middle Holocene 13,000-acre project area just north and east of Kettleman City, adjacent to State Route 41. The survey, which was Radiocarbon Date and the the largest smgle mventory conducted at Tulare Lake to Geologic Context of Human date, resulted in the documentation of seven previously Occupation in the Tulare Lake unrecorded prehistoric sites and 46 isolated prehistoric Basin of California artifacts (Gardner 2003). All but one of the sites (CA-KIN-80^ see below) and a majority of the isolates were found within JILL K. GARDNER 100 m. of the 190-ft. contour shown on the most recent ROBERT M. NEGRINI topographic maps. In their discussion of the Witt Site, MARK Q. SUTTON RiddeU and Olsen (1969:121) proposed an elevation of PETER E.WIGAND 192 ft. above sea level as a possible Clovis-age shoreline ROBERT M.YOHE II California State University, Bakersfield, CA 93311 along Dudley Ridge, a few miles southeast of the project area, and argued that this elevation appears to have been a recurrent lake level for a considerable period In September 2001, during the course of an archaeological of time since the Late Pleistocene, at least along the project on the western shore of Tulare Lake in Kings County, southwest shoreline.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California
    Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1870-C Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California By WILLARD W. DEAN fPith a section on GEOMORPHIC EFFECTS IN THE KERN RIVER BASIN By KEVIN M. SCOTT FLOODS OF 1966 IN THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1870-C UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1971 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 73-610922 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 45 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract_____________________________________________________ Cl Introduction.____________ _ ________________________________________ 1 Acknowledgments. ________________________________________________ 3 Precipitation__ ____________________________________________________ 5 General description of the floods___________________________________ 9 Kern River basin______________________________________________ 12 Tule River basin______________________________________________ 16 Kaweah River basin____________________________--_-____-_---_- 18 Miscellaneous basins___________________________________________ 22 Storage regulation _________________________________________________ 22 Flood damage.__________________________________________________ 23 Comparison to previous floods___________-_____________--___------_
    [Show full text]
  • New Partnership for the Kern River Summer 2009 • Vol
    JOURNAL Canoes. Photo by Sebastian Santa. New Partnership for the Kern River Summer 2009 • Vol. 5, Issue 2 orking with the nonprofit organization,W the Kern River Corridor Endowment, River Partners is preparing a conceptual Osprey. Photo by Robert Blanchard. restoration plan for riparian habitats along the Kern River at the Panorama Vista Preserve in Bakersfield. It is the largest private-lands In This Issue project for River Panorama Vista Preserve, Kern River, Bakersfield, CA. Photo by Julie Rentner, Partners in its 11- Restoration Ecologist. year history. “What is Additional Refuge really unique about this restoration initiative is that it was spear headed by a group of Land Open private individuals who really care about the Kern River,” says Julie Renter, Restoration to the Public 3 Ecologist. “They make up the Kern River Corridor Endowment and worked to buy and protect the land.” Endangered Rivers River Partners staff has started assessing the 936-acre site, which has supported a and Solutions 4 variety of human uses, from agriculture to oil drilling. By considering the local ecology and historical land uses, this pre-restoration plan will make habitat recommendations for Thank You 11th restoring significant swaths of native vegetation within this privately-owned reserve. Anniversary “If this preserve could be restored, it would be a significant stepping stone in the Kern River Corridor for wildlife,” says Tom Griggs, Senior Restoration Ecologist. “It Dinner Sponsors 7 will be large enough acreage to support migration, especially for songbirds.” River Partners thanks the Kern River Corridor Endowment for inviting us to Paddle Season participate in their restoration efforts and the Partners for Fish and Wildlife (Kern Opens! Join Us National Wildlife Refuge) for partially funding the pre-restoration plan.
    [Show full text]