DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix A), As Well As a Query of Data on Lodgepole Pine and Mountain Hemlock Distribution Based Upon 2006 Imagery (Ohmann Et Al

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix A), As Well As a Query of Data on Lodgepole Pine and Mountain Hemlock Distribution Based Upon 2006 Imagery (Ohmann Et Al United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Management Indicator Species Report Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Umpqua National Forest Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Fremont-Winema National Forest U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service 3040 Biddle Road Medford, Oregon 97504 Phone: (541) 618-2200 April 2018 Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species Report Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Umpqua National Forest ..................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Northern Spotted Owl ..................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Pileated Woodpecker ...................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Primary Cavity Excavators (nesters)............................................................................................. 15 2.4 American (Pine) Marten ................................................................................................................ 20 2.5 Roosevelt Elk ................................................................................................................................ 23 2.6 Columbian Black-tailed Deer ........................................................................................................ 30 2.7 Peregrine Falcon ........................................................................................................................... 35 2.8 Bald Eagle ..................................................................................................................................... 37 2.9 Water Quality Indicator Species .................................................................................................... 40 3.0 Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest .............................................................................................. 47 3.1 Northern Spotted Owl ................................................................................................................... 49 3.2 Columbian Black-tailed Deer ........................................................................................................ 51 3.3 Roosevelt Elk ................................................................................................................................ 57 3.4 American (Pine) Marten ................................................................................................................ 64 3.5 Pileated Woodpecker .................................................................................................................... 68 3.6 Primary Cavity Excavators (nesters)............................................................................................. 73 4.0 Fremont-Winema National Forest ..................................................................................................... 79 4.1 Northern Spotted Owl ................................................................................................................... 81 4.2 Pileated Woodpecker .................................................................................................................... 82 4.3 Northern Goshawk ........................................................................................................................ 85 4.4 Three-Toed Woodpecker or Black-backed Woodpecker .............................................................. 87 4.5 American (Pine) Marten ................................................................................................................ 90 4.6 Bald Eagle ..................................................................................................................................... 93 4.7 Mule Deer ...................................................................................................................................... 95 4.8 Resident Trout............................................................................................................................. 101 5.0 References...................................................................................................................................... 104 List of Tables Table 1-1 Summary of Management Indicator Species Analyzed for Each National Forest Affected by the Pipeline ...................................................................................................... 3 Table 2-1 Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres) to Corresponding Wildlife Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the Umpqua National Forest ..................................................................................................... 6 Table 2-2 Summary of NSO Habitat Removed (acres) within Umpqua National Forest .................... 8 Table 2-3 Acres of Snag Patches Estimated by the Region 6 Aerial Detection Surveys (2007-2016) and Wildlife Perimeters (2007-2016) to Measure Current Functional Snag Habitat in the Umpqua National Forest ................................................................... 11 Table 2-4 Data Compiled for 20-years and Trends of Population Indices (Numbers Counted per BBS Route per Year in BCR 5) of Primary Cavity Excavator MIS in the Vicinity of the Umpqua National Forest and Pipeline .............................................................................. 16 Table 2-5 Cavity Excavator Maxim Potential Population Capacity by Snag/Acre as Described in the Umpqua National Forest Plan ................................................................................. 17 Table 2-6 Amounts of Pine Marten Habitat Modeled by Davis and Chapman (2008), as well as Lodgepole and Mountain Hemlock Habitat Derived from Ohmann et al. (2010) .............. 22 Table 2-7 Harvest Statistics for Roosevelt Elk within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2003-2016............................................................................................................ 25 Table 2-8 Harvest Statistics for Black-Tailed Deer within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2003-2011 ..................................................................................... 30 Table 2-9 Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile Black-tailed Deer within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29, 1998-2012 ......................................................................................................................... 31 i Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species Report Table 2-10 Summary of Habitats Removed by the Proposed Action from Riparian Zones Extending One-Site Potential Tree Height From Stream Banks and from Riparian Reserves, Extending up to Two Site-Potential Tree Heights From Stream Banks in the Umpqua National Forest ......................................................................................... 45 Table 3-1 Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres) to Corresponding Wildlife Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest .............................................................................. 48 Table 3-2 Summary of NSO Habitat Removed (acres) within Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest ................................................................................................................................ 51 Table 3-3 Harvest Statistics for Black-Tailed Deer within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 2003-2016............................................................................................................ 53 Table 3-4 Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile Black-tailed Deer within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 1998-2012 .. 53 Table 3-5 Harvest Statistics for Roosevelt Elk within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 2003-2011 ......................................................................................................................... 59 Table 3-6 Annual County Harvest Summary from ODFW for Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest ................................................................................................................................ 65 Table 3-7 Data Compiled for 20-years and Trends of Population Indices (Numbers Counted per BBS Route per Year) for BCR 5 of Primary Cavity Excavator MIS in the Vicinity of Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and the Pipeline ................................................... 75 Table 4-1 Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres) to Corresponding Wildlife Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the Fremont-Winema National Forest ..................................................................................... 80 Table 4-2 Summary of NSO Habitat Removed (acres) within Fremont-Winema National Forest ................................................................................................................................ 82 Table 4-3 Harvest Statistics for Mule Deer within the Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 2003-2016 ......................................................................................................................... 97 Table 4-4 Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Incident Management Situation Report Saturday, June 29, 2002 0800 Mdt National Preparedness Level 5
    (Converted From .wpd On 2/26/04) INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SITUATION REPORT SATURDAY, JUNE 29, 2002 0800 MDT NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS LEVEL 5 CURRENT SITUATION: Initial attack activity was moderate in the Rocky Mountain and Southwest Areas, and light elsewhere. Nationally, 148 new fires were reported. Seven of these became large fires, three in the Rocky Mountain Area and one each in the Southwest, Eastern Great Basin, Northwest and Northern Rockies Areas. Two large fires were contained, one each in the Southwest and Western Great Basin Areas. Very high to extreme fire indices were reported in Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. The 146th Air Expeditionary Group (Provisional), under the command of Brigadier General John Iffland, is conducting Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System (MAFFS) operations, supporting the National Interagency Fire Center wildland fire suppression effort. Two C-130H3 aircraft from the 302nd Air Wing, US Air Force Reserve, four C-130H3 aircraft from the 145th Air Wing, North Carolina Air National Guard and a joint 302nd/145th support group have been deployed to conduct air tanker missions at Peterson Field, Colorado. Lieutenant Colonel Ted Wright is the immediate commander for the deployed aircraft. SOUTHWEST AREA LARGE FIRES: Priorities are being established by the Southwest Multi-Agency Coordinating Group based on information submitted via Wildland Fire Situation Analysis reports and Incident Status Summary (ICS-209) forms. An Area Command Team (Ribar) is assigned to manage the Rodeo/Chediski complex. RODEO/CHEDISKI COMPLEX, Fort Apache Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs. Four Type 1 Incident Management Teams (Humphrey, Bateman, Dash, and Martin) are assigned.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determination for individual properties and districts. See instruction in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking ``x'' in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter ``N/A'' for ``not applicable.'' For functions, architectural classification, materials and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name East Longs Peak Trail; Longs Peak Trail; Keyhole Route; Shelf Trail other names/site number 5LR.11413; 5BL.10344 2. Location street & number West of State Highway 7 (ROMO) [N/A] not for publication city or town Allenspark [X] vicinity state Colorado code CO county Larimer; Boulder code 069; 013 zip code 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this [X] nomination [ ] request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property [ ] meets [ ] does not meet the National Register criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant [ ] nationally [ ] statewide [X] locally.
    [Show full text]
  • Cleveland (Cleve) Mccarty
    CLEVELAND (CLEVE) MCCARTY. Born 1933. TRANSCRIPT of OH 1336V A-B. This interview was recorded on June 8, 2005, for the Maria Rogers Oral History Program. The interviewer is Robyn Crispe. The interview is also available in video format, filmed by Liz McCutcheon. The interview was transcribed by Catherine Jopling and Carol Jordan. NOTE: The interviewer’s questions and comments appear in parentheses. Added material appears in brackets. ABSTRACT: Cleveland McCarty, a pioneer in rock climbing and co-author of High Over Boulder, talks about his love for climbing (both rock climbing and mountaineering) since his boyhood days in Boulder. He shares stories of some of his more memorable climbs along the Front Range and elsewhere. [A]. 00:00 (This is Robyn Crispe. I’m interviewing for the Maria Rogers Oral History Program of the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History. The date is Wednesday, June 8, 2005. The narrator is Cleveland McCarty, and we’re at his home at 315 Arapahoe in Boulder, Colorado.) (So, thank you for having this interview with us, and I’ll start by asking when and where were you born.) I’m a native, born in Denver, Colorado, and when—1933. (When did you move to Boulder?—What brought you here?) I went to school here, so that would’ve been in the ‘50s—‘53 or so. And then I went in the Air Force. I went to dental school in St. Louis at Washington University and then the Air Force, and back to Denver for a year, and finally in ‘66 bought a home here, started a practice.
    [Show full text]
  • PAAC Survey in the Pawnee Buttes Area
    An Archaeological Survey of Selected Tracts in the Pawnee Buttes Region, Weld County, Colorado by Kevin D. Black Principal Investigator with a contribution by Aaron V. A. Theis for the Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners Eaton, Colorado Sponsored by History Colorado Office of the State Archaeologist of Colorado Program for Avocational Archaeological Certification Denver, Colorado Colorado State Permits #2012–50, 2013–16, 2014–10 May 2017 Abstract During the 2012–2014 field seasons, an archaeological survey was conducted in dispersed portions of northeastern Colorado as part of the training available in the Program for Avocational Archaeological Certification (PAAC). The project thus depended heavily on the efforts of volunteers, most of whom are members of the Colorado Archaeological Society (CAS) already enrolled in PAAC, supervised and trained by the Assistant State Archaeologist from History Colorado. The inventory was completed on just under 1,500 acres of state trust lands in four separate tracts in the vicinity of the Pawnee Buttes in northern Weld County, Colorado. These four parcels cover a range of open grassland settings along four different drainages: Geary Creek, North Pawnee Creek, South Pawnee Creek, and Wild Horse Creek, all at elevations of 1,450–1,634 m (4,765–5,360 feet). This area was intensively surveyed in part to train the 46 PAAC volunteers in archaeological inventory and mapping methods, but also to gather data on the archaeological record of state-owned lands adjacent to Pawnee National Grasslands properties in a part of Weld County witnessing intensive oil and gas development in recent years. As a result of the survey a total of 52 sites and 77 isolated finds (IFs) were recorded for the first time, and one other previously documented site was formally re- recorded.
    [Show full text]
  • State Forest State Park Management Plan
    Table of Contents Management Planning Team ................................................................................................... 5 Partners and Stakeholders ...................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 7 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 9 Park Description ..................................................................................................................... 9 Purpose of the Plan ................................................................................................................ 9 Relationship to the CPW Strategic Plan .............................................................................10 Park Goals ..........................................................................................................................11 Previous Planning Efforts ...................................................................................................12 Public Input Process ...........................................................................................................12 Influences on Management ................................................................................................13 Management Considerations ..............................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • A Message from the Forest Supervisor Front Range 2 It Is Hard to Believe That This Years There Are Many Things I June 23
    Volume 4, Issue 2, Summer 2006 Website: www.fs.fed.us/r2/arnf/ E-mail: [email protected] Highlights A message from the Forest Supervisor Front Range 2 It is hard to believe that this years there are many things I June 23. Deputy Forest Super- Partnership will be my last note to you in the am very proud of that the ARP visor Jackie Parks will be the Mountain 4 Forest to Grassland Newsletter. showed strong leadership in or Acting Forest Supervisor for Pine Beetle In case some of you have not accomplished. The Front 120 days after that date. Jackie heard, I have accepted a pro- Range Fuel Treatment Partner- and I have worked very closely Fire 5 motion to our National Head- ship, the ARP Foundation and over the last two years and I Restrictions quarters in Washington, D.C., the Mountain Pine Beetle Coop- know you will enjoy working Former 7 where I will serve as the Direc- erative featured in this issue are with her as we work to fill my Chief’s visit tor for Recreation and Heritage just a few examples. I am also position. Resources. I am very excited proud that this forest isn’t hesi- I hope our paths cross again Diamond 8 about my new opportunity and tant to take on the challenging sometime in the future. Until Peak as I look back to my six years of issues such as recreational then, thank you for the wonder- Mountain Bike Patrol service here I know I will miss shooting, dispersed camping, ful opportu- the challenges, scenic beauty, campfires and prairie dogs in nity of serv- ARP 9 and the wonderful people I have order to work towards environ- ing you.
    [Show full text]
  • Lassen National Forest Over-Snow Vehicle Use Designation DEIS Mar 15, 2016
    March 15, 2016 Chris O’Brien On behalf of Russell Hays, Forest Supervisor Lassen National Forest 2550 Riverside Drive Susanville, CA 96130 [email protected] By Electronic Mail Re: Comments on Lassen OSV Use Designation DEIS Dear Supervisor Hays, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Lassen National Forest’s Over-Snow Vehicle (OSV) Use Designation Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The Lassen National Forest is the very first forest in the country to undergo winter travel management planning under the Forest Service’s new regulation governing OSV use, subpart C of the Forest Service travel management regulations.1 The rule 1 36 C.F.R. part 212, subpart C. 1 requires national forests with adequate snowfall to designate and display on an “OSV Use Map” specific areas and routes where OSV use is permitted based on protection of resources and other recreational uses. OSV use outside the designated system is prohibited. We are pleased to see that many sections of the DEIS provide a relatively thorough discussion of the impacts associated with OSV use. Unfortunately, the Forest Service has failed to apply that information and analysis to formulate a proposed action and alternatives that satisfy the requirements of the new subpart C regulations. To ensure that rule implementation is off to the right start and avoid the specter of litigation that has plagued summertime travel management planning, it is critical that the Lassen’s OSV use designation planning process: Satisfy the Forest Service’s substantive legal duty to locate each area and trail to minimize resource damage and conflicts with other recreational uses – not just identify or consider those impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • People and Nature on the Mountaintop a Resource and Impact Study of Longs Peak in Rocky Mountain National Park
    People and Nature on the Mountaintop A Resource and Impact Study of Longs Peak in Rocky Mountain National Park A Project funded by the Rocky Mountain Cooperative Ecosystems Study Unit, Rocky Mountain National Park, and Colorado State University. Ruth M. Alexander, Principal Investigator and Author, Professor of History, Colorado State University Catherine Moore, Graduate Research Assistant, Center for Public History and Archaeology, Colorado State University 2010 “Longs Peak is a citadel. I mean it’s a castle with defenses. And the Keyhole Route just so intricately snakes its way 270 degrees around the mountain, sneaking through the mountain’s defenses to get to the top.” – Mike Caldwell, 2009.1 People and Nature on the Mountaintop • A Resource and Impact Study of Longs Peak in Rocky Mountain National Park INTRODUCT I ON his study examines the history of Longs Peak from Longs may be formidable, but it is also a stunningly the 1920s to the present, providing a narrative beautiful peak widely visible to residents and visitors all Tthat traces over time the values and practices of along the northern Front Range. It captures the eye and the individuals who climbed the peak, their impact on its natural imagination. Rangers throughout the park’s history have and cultural resources, and the efforts of park rangers both recognized its powerful allure to those wishing to experience to facilitate climbing and protect the peak from harm.2 Longs simultaneously its aesthetic splendors and the challenges Peak is an icon of the Rocky Mountain West. It
    [Show full text]
  • History La Plata the 1960S
    GREAT LOCAL STORIES History La Plata The 1960S: Snapshots in Time A Publication of the La Plata County Historical Society May 2018 v Volume XXIV History La Plata v The 1960s: Snapshots in Time 2 May 2018 z Volume XXIV From The President Kathy McKenzie Snapshots are defined as informal two answers. Either of those questions bring back fond memories from your photographs taken with a small hand- will bring back snapshots of very vivid past or give you a new insight as to held camera as a record or view of memories for you or nothing comes to what was going on in our area during a particular point in a sequence of mind since you hadn’t been born yet. the 60s. We all need to recognize how events or a continuing process. This The 1960s were full of many memories historically important this decade was year’s History La Plata hopes to give which were both unsettling and and how it changed all of us. It was you “snapshots” of the 1960s using exciting. Those of us who were living known as “The Decade That Changed a photos as well as the written word to in the Durango area during this time Nation”. The La Plata County Historical remind or inform you of a decade of enjoyed going to the drive-in theater, Society and the Animas Museum hope discontent as well as a time of peace, ice skating at Huck Finn Pond by the you have a blast reading this year’s love and harmony. fish hatchery, and watching the Navajo History La Plata publication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Abundance, Migration and Management of Mule Deer in Dinosaur National Monument
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-1968 The Abundance, Migration and Management of Mule Deer in Dinosaur National Monument Robert W. Franzen Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Other Life Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Franzen, Robert W., "The Abundance, Migration and Management of Mule Deer in Dinosaur National Monument" (1968). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 1685. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1685 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ABUNDANCE, MIGRATION AND MANAGEMENT OF MULE DEER IN DINOSAUR NATIONAL MONUMENT by Robert W. Franzen A thesi.s submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Wildlife Biology Approve. d~ {\failA' Professor "'ead of Deoartment Dean ~ Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 1968 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my sincere app-reciation to Dr. Jessop B•. Low, Leader, Utah Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, for his guidance, encouragement, and constructive criticism throughout the study period. I am grateful to the National Park Service for providing housing and many items necessary during the study. The invaluable cooperation received from the Monument staff will long be remembered. The assistance given by ranger Larry Hanneman is particularly appreciated. I also would like to thank Dr. Jim B. Grumbles for his interest and suggestions concerning the vegetation analysis methods used.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ecological Services Colorado Field Office 755 Parfet Street, Suite 361 Lakewood, Colorado 80215 IN REPLY REFER TO: ES/GJ-6-CO-03-F-018 MS 65412 GJ October 14, 2003 Richard C. Stem, Deputy Regional Forester U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region P.O. Box 25127 Lakewood, Colorado 80225-0127 Dear Mr. Stem: This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) biological opinion based on our review of the biological assessments (BA), for the 26 projects submitted for batched consultation and effects to the threatened Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Your request for consultation was received on July 15, 2003. As you may already know, the District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order on December 26, 2002, that enjoins the Service from issuing any written concurrence[s] that actions proposed by any Federal agencies “may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect” the threatened Canada lynx. Until further notice, all consultations concerning effects to the Canada lynx must be conducted in accordance with the direction of the Court. Specifically, any actions subject to consultation that may affect the Canada lynx require formal consultation as described in 50 CFR ' 402.14 and preparation of a biological opinion that addresses how the proposed action is expected to affect the Canada lynx in order to complete the procedural requirements of section 7. In light of the court decision discussed above you requested formal consultation on 26 projects considered to be of “high priority” within Region 2 of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Klettergarden
    Klettergarden To Fort Collins C O M A N C H E P E A K W I L D E R N E S S R A W A H Comanche Peak 12702 ft 3872 m W I L D E R N E S S Mirror Lake L o n R O O S E V E L T g 14 N A T I O N A L F O R E S T D Signal Mountain raw 11262ft l orra 3433m C Cr ee Ro Stormy Peaks k ad Corral Creek 12135ft Cameron Pass Trailhead 3699m Pass my Tr NPS/USFS Mum ail Stormy Peaks Long Draw e Pass gu Mummy Pass N E O T A Ha C Lake re 11440ft e Lake Husted C k 3487m Lost R O O S E V E L T a Louise Lake C O L O R A D O c W I L D E R N E S S h North e il To Fork Tra l a N Walden orth Big pson P rk Thom Lost IR o Lake Fo RVO u Falls SE d Dunraven Riv RE r e e r W RA D R i S T A T E F O R E S T G v N N LO e r o Thunder r t Mountain Rowe Peak h 12070 ft Rowe 3679 m Flatiron Mountain Glacier s 12335ft E ake k L e G an e 3760m Hagues Peak hig r ic C 13560 ft N M B Lake A o 4133 m u Snow n Dunraven / North Agnes Thunder R d Lake a N A T I O N A L Fork Trailhead S Pass La Poudre Pass ry Desolation Peaks N Mummy Mountain 12949 ft Crystal 13425ft I w B o 3947m Lake OX l 4092m CA il W NYON est A H W TC Mount Richthofen DI Fairchild Mountain 12940 ft Lawn T T C 13502 ft Cr ra 3944 m h Lake eek i a 4115 m l E l p N Tepee Mountain GRAN E N i i D L O a n Ypsilon Mountain T T r 12568 ft IT T L S 13514ft U 3831 m W r C Y O e r 4119m L e SKEL L iv e ETON E R k M West O Y GUL re Creek CH d u M Falls o Medicine P Spectacle Glen M r Bow U Lakes e Haven Lead Mountain iv Curve Fall River Pass 12537 ft R Mount Chiquita M ROUTT re 13069ft Ypsilon F O R E S T 3821 m ud Alpine Ridge
    [Show full text]