Conservation Management Strategy for Mesquite and Acacia Woodlands in Clark County, Nevada

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Conservation Management Strategy for Mesquite and Acacia Woodlands in Clark County, Nevada CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FOR MESQUITE AND ACACIA WOODLANDS IN CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office March 2006 Prepared by: Lisa Crampton, PhD, Department of Biology, University of Nevada Reno, Jeri Krueger, MS, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Las Vegas, Nevada, Dennis Murphy, PhD, Department of Biology, University of Nevada Reno Mesquite and Acacia Conservation Management Strategy TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................II LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................V LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... VI SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................VII INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ...............................................................................1 BACKGROUND, INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT................................................5 A. Planning Area and Target Species .......................................................................5 B. Existing Information..............................................................................................7 1. Other Plans ........................................................................................................7 2. Literature Review.............................................................................................12 a) Ecology of mesquite and acacia.................................................................12 b) Ecology of desert mistletoe........................................................................20 c) Phainopepla ecology ..................................................................................26 d) Conservation biology theory: metapopulations and reserve design ..........27 3. Spatial Data .....................................................................................................29 a) Data acquisition..........................................................................................29 b) Data review and consolidation...................................................................31 C. Data Gaps .............................................................................................................33 1. Data Gaps Requiring Research and Monitoring ...........................................33 2. Data Gaps Requiring Surveying and GPS/GIS Work....................................36 D. Existing Environment..........................................................................................37 1. Distribution and Land Management Status of Woodlands ...........................37 2. General Habitat Conditions ............................................................................43 a) Historical/reference conditions ..................................................................43 b) Current conditions......................................................................................43 3. Associated Plants and Animals.......................................................................46 a) Plants..........................................................................................................46 b) Animals......................................................................................................48 4. General Human Uses ......................................................................................50 a) Mining........................................................................................................50 b) Livestock....................................................................................................51 c) Feral horses and burros ..............................................................................51 d) Rights-of-way ............................................................................................51 e) Woodcutting...............................................................................................52 f) Historical/anthropological resources ..........................................................52 g) Recreational resources ...............................................................................52 5. General Conservation Issues and Threats......................................................53 6. Major Woodland Regions and Metapatches in Clark County: Status and Threats....................................................................................................56 a) Pahranagat..................................................................................................56 b) Muddy Mountains......................................................................................60 c) Gold Butte ..................................................................................................63 d) Virgin River ...............................................................................................65 e) Las Vegas Valley .......................................................................................67 f) Eldorado .....................................................................................................69 ii Mesquite and Acacia Conservation Management Strategy g) Piute ...........................................................................................................71 h) Newberry ...................................................................................................73 i) Corn Creek..................................................................................................75 j) Pahrump......................................................................................................77 k) Mesquite Lake............................................................................................79 l) Small regions (Lucy Gray Mountains, Indian Springs, Red Rocks) ..........79 CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS...................................................81 A. Legal Framework.................................................................................................81 B. Desired Future Condition and General Conservation Goals...........................81 C. General Conservation Objectives.......................................................................82 D. General Conservation Actions............................................................................83 CONSERVATION STRATEGY...................................................................................93 A. Identification of Priority Woodland Metapatches............................................93 B. Specific Conservation Objectives and Actions for Priority Metapatches.......99 1. Muddy River.....................................................................................................99 2. Big Bend.........................................................................................................101 3. Piute Wash .....................................................................................................103 4. Hiko................................................................................................................104 5. Overton...........................................................................................................105 6. Grapevine.......................................................................................................106 7. North Las Vegas ............................................................................................107 8. Pahrump-Stump Springs and southeast Pahrump ......................................108 9. Arrow Canyon................................................................................................110 10. Gold Butte SW .............................................................................................111 11. Mormon Mesa E ..........................................................................................111 12. Bunkerville...................................................................................................112 13. Nelson ..........................................................................................................113 14. Corn Creek...................................................................................................114 C. Global Prioritization of Conservation Actions and Timeline for their Implementation..............................................................................................115 D. Adaptive Management and Performance Measures ......................................117 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ......................................................................................120 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................122 APPENDIX A. CHARACTERISTICS AND STATUS OF SPECIES INCLUDED IN THE CMS .................................................................................131 A.1. BIRDS ..............................................................................................................132 A.2. REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS..................................................................133 A.3. MAMMALS ....................................................................................................134 A.4. INSECTS .........................................................................................................135 A.5. PLANTS...........................................................................................................136
Recommended publications
  • Project: 2003-NPS-305-P Seed Fates of Arctomecon Californica By
    Project: 2003-NPS-305-P Seed Fates of Arctomecon californica By: Laura Megill & Dr. Lawrence Walker University of Nevada, Las Vegas Final Report Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan June 30, 2006 ** A copy of the finished thesis and subsequent publications will be sent upon completion. INTRODUCTION The Las Vegas bearpoppy, Arctomecon californica Torr. and Frem., is a rare herbaceous perennial endemic to the Mojave Desert that mainly inhabits gypsum outcrops. The Las Vegas bearpoppy is listed as Critically Endangered by the State of Nevada (Mistretta et al., 1995). A vital aspect of the life history of the bearpoppy that has been overlooked in previous studies is the fate of seeds. The unknown fate of the bearpoppy seeds provides an information gap in conservation management plans that is critical to plan mitigation measures (Powell and Walker 2003). Therefore, the objective of this research project is to determine the seed fates of the Las Vegas bearpoppy to further promote conservation efforts. The scope of this project follows seed fates through seed production, seed dispersal, and granivory to incorporation within the soil seed bank. In addition, seed viability testing will occur throughout the project to substantiate seed fate data. The research data will be collected from four study areas with an additional area added for soil seed bank studies traversing the natural range of the Las Vegas bearpoppy over a two-year consecutive period. The following hypotheses will be addressed in this research study: (1) Seed production corresponds to capsule size and number of rosettes. (2) Primary seed dispersal declines leptokurtically from the source.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Conservation Plan Washington County, Utah
    Habitat Conservation Plan Washington County, Utah Submitted by: Washington County Commission 197 East Tabernacle St. George, Utah 84770 (801) 634-5700 Submitted to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Field Office Lincoln Plaza, Suite 404 145 East 1300 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 801-524-5001 Prepared by: Washington County HCP Steering Committee and SWCA, Inc. Environmental Consultants 114 North San Francisco Street, Suite 100 Flagstaff, Arizona 86001 (800) 224-4234 December 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................ ix CHAPTER 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................1 1.1 THE NEED FOR AN HCP IN WASHINGTON COUNTY ...................................1 1.2 PLAN AREA AND PROPOSED ACTIVITIES .....................................................2 1.3 THE HCP PLANNING PROCESS .........................................................................2 1.4 COORDINATION WITH THE DESERT TORTOISE RECOVERY PLAN .........9 1.5 HCP GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .........................................................................9 1.6 PROPOSED PROGRAM ......................................................................................10 1.7 IS THE DESERT TORTOISE NATIVE TO THE ST. GEORGE AREA? ..........11 CHAPTER 2.0 BIOLOGICAL PROGRAM ................................................................................13 2.1 SPECIES OF CONCERN ......................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report
    Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report Draft CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Rare Plant Survey Report Prepared for May 2011 Santa Margarita Water District Draft CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Rare Plant Survey Report Prepared for May 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 www.esassoc.com Oakland Olympia Petaluma Portland Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills D210324 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project: Rare Plant Survey Report Page Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................2 Objective .......................................................................................................................... 2 Project Location and Description .....................................................................................2 Setting ................................................................................................................................... 5 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 5 Topography and Soils ......................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamics of a Dwarf Bear-Poppy (Arctomecon Humilis) Population Over a Sixteen-Year Period
    Western North American Naturalist Volume 64 Number 4 Article 8 10-29-2004 Dynamics of a dwarf bear-poppy (Arctomecon humilis) population over a sixteen-year period K. T. Harper Brigham Young University Renée Van Buren Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Recommended Citation Harper, K. T. and Van Buren, Renée (2004) "Dynamics of a dwarf bear-poppy (Arctomecon humilis) population over a sixteen-year period," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 64 : No. 4 , Article 8. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol64/iss4/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Western North American Naturalist 64(4), © 2004, pp 482–491 DYNAMICS OF A DWARF BEAR-POPPY (ARCTOMECON HUMILIS) POPULATION OVER A SIXTEEN-YEAR PERIOD K.T. Harper1,2 and Renée Van Buren3 ABSTRACT.—A population of the dwarf bear-poppy (Arctomecon humilis Coville, Papaveraceae) at Red Bluff, Wash- ington County, Utah, was monitored twice annually between 1987 and 2002. This is a narrowly endemic, gypsophilous species that has been formally listed as endangered since 1979. During the 16 years of observation, density of this species has fluctuated between 3 and 1336 individuals on the 0.07-ha monitoring plot. Moderate to large recruitments of seedlings occurred in 1992, 1995, and 2001. Seedling recruitments from a large, long-lived seed bank are triggered by abundant precipitation during the February–April period.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • The Taxonomic Report of the INTERNATIONAL LEPIDOPTERA SURVEY
    Volume 7 1 February 2010 Number 3 The Taxonomic Report OF THE INTERNATIONAL LEPIDOPTERA SURVEY TIPS ON COLLECTING AND REARING IMMATURES OF 375 BUTTERFLY AND SKIPPER TAXA JACQUE WOLFE 459 East 2700 South Apt 16, Salt Lake City, UT 84115 JACK HARRY 47 San Rafael Court, West Jordan, UT 84088 TODD STOUT 1 1456 North General Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84116 ABSTRACT: Rearing techniques are discussed for 375 different butterfly and skipper taxa from Utah and beyond. Additional keywords: ova, larvae, pupae, over wintering, obtaining and caring for immatures INTRODUCTION The authors of this paper, Jacque Wolfe, Jack Harry, and Todd Stout, with contributions from Dale Nielson have over 100 years combined experience collecting and rearing butterflies. This publication includes natural and lab host plants. We hope that this information will help you avoid some of the mistakes and losses we have experienced. We also hope that this publication will encourage someone who has only collected adults to give rearing a try. For those new to rearing we encourage starting small. Not only can rearing provide perfect specimens but also provide knowledge regarding the life histories of butterflies, which includes how to find caterpillars or how to entice live females to lay eggs. The advantages justify the time and effort it requires. Another advantage of rearing is that some species, like Papilio indra and Megathymus species, are difficult to collect as adults. Therefor, rearing them can be much easier. For example, collecting larvae or netting a single live female can result in obtaining a nice series of perfect specimens.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera Recorded for Imperial County California Compiled by Jeffrey Caldwell [email protected] 1-925-949-8696 Note
    Lepidoptera Recorded for Imperial County California Compiled by Jeffrey Caldwell [email protected] 1-925-949-8696 Note: BMNA = Butterflies and Moths of North America web site MPG = Moth Photographers Group web site Most are from the Essig Museum’s California Moth Specimens Database web site Arctiidae. Tiger and Lichen Moths. Apantesis proxima (Notarctia proxima). Mexican Tiger Moth. 8181 [BMNA] Ectypia clio (clio). Clio Tiger Moth. 8249 Estigmene acrea (acrea). Salt Marsh Moth. 8131 Euchaetes zella. 8232 Autostichidae (Deoclonidae). Oegoconia novimundi. Four-spotted Yellowneck Moth. 1134 (Oegoconia quadripuncta mis-applied) Bucculatricidae. Ribbed Cocoon-maker Moths. Bucculatrix enceliae. Brittlebrush Moth. 0546 Cossidae. Goat Moths, Carpenterworm Moths, and Leopard Moths. Comadia henrici. 2679 Givira mucida. 2660 Hypopta palmata. 2656 Prionoxystus robiniae (mixtus). Carpenterworm or Locust Borer. 2693 Depressariidae. Pseudethmia protuberans. 1008 [MPG] Ethmiidae. Now assigned to Depressariidae. Ethmiinae. Ethmia timberlakei. 0984 Pseudethmia protuberans. 1008 Gelechiidae. Twirler Moths. Aristotelia adceanotha. 1726 [Sighting 1019513 BMNA] Chionodes abdominella. 2054 Chionodes dentella. 2071 Chionodes fructuaria. 2078 Chionodes kincaidella. 2086 (reared from Atriplex acanthocarpa in Texas) Chionodes oecus. 2086.2 Chionodes sistrella. 2116 Chionodes xanthophilella. 2125 Faculta inaequalis. Palo Verde Webworm. 2206 Friseria cockerelli. Mesquite Webworm. 1916 Gelechia desiliens. 1938 Isophrictis sabulella. 1701 Keiferia lycopersicella. Tomato Pinworm. 2047 Pectinophora gossypiella. Pink Bollworm. 2261 Prolita puertella. 1895 Prolita veledae. 1903 Geometridae. Inchworm Moths, Loopers, Geometers, or Measuring Worms. Archirhoe neomexicana. 7295 Chesiadodes coniferaria. 6535 Chlorochlamys appellaria. 7073 Cyclophora nanaria. Dwarf Tawny Wave. W 7140 Dichorda illustraria. 7055 Dichordophora phoenix. Phoenix Emerald. 7057 Digrammia colorata. Creosote Moth. 6381 Digrammia irrorata (rubricata). 6395 Digrammia pictipennata. 6372 Digrammia puertata.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of Pinal County, Arizona, United States
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • Mojave National Preserve Management Plan for Developed
    Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Introduction This chapter describes the unique factors that influence water resource management in the Preserve and the resources that could be affected by the implementation of any of the alternatives described in Chapter 2: Alternatives. The resource descriptions provided in this chapter serve as a baseline to compare the potential effects of the management actions proposed in the alternatives. The following resource topics are described in this chapter: • Environmental Setting • Cultural Resources • Water Resources • Wilderness Character • Wildlife Environmental setting and water resources are important for context and are foundational for water resource management, but are not resources that are analyzed for effects. Resource issues that were considered and dismissed from further analysis are listed in Chapter 1: Purpose of and Need for Action and are not discussed further in this EA. A description of the effects of the proposed alternatives on wildlife, cultural resources, and wilderness character is presented in Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences. Environmental Setting The Preserve includes an ecologically diverse yet fragile desert ecosystem consisting of vegetative attributes that are unique to the Mojave Desert, as well as components of the Great Basin and Sonoran Deserts. Topography The topography of the Preserve is characteristic of the mountain and basin physiographic pattern, with tall mountain ranges separated by corresponding valleys filled with alluvial sediments. Primary mountain ranges in the Preserve, from west to east, include the Granite, Kelso, Providence, Clark, New York, and Piute Mountains. Major alluvial valleys include Soda Lake (dry lake bed), Shadow Valley, Ivanpah Valley, Lanfair Valley, and Fenner Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of El Paso County, Texas, United States
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • Mojave-Road2.Pdf
    Mojave Road Detour over the Piute Range The following road log provides a 14.2 mile detour or "go around" to get over the Piute Range if the old Underground Telephone Cable Road is not practicable or closed. GPS coordinates and elevations are included. Even if the road over the Piute Range is open, this route can serve as a pleasant side trip off the Mojave Road, providing an interesting visit to Leiser Ray Mine, the Signal Mining District, Tungsten Flat, and the old Craig family home site. 0.0 N35° 5.47’ W114° 57.30’ (Elevation 2,473 feet) Begin at Mile 27.0 on page 66 in the 2010 edition of the Mojave Road Guide. Instead of turning right (west) to go over the Piute Range, continue generally south on the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) service road. 2.8 miles to: 2.8 N35° 3.05’ W114° 57.40’ (Elevation 2,723 feet) Turn off the MWD service road, curving right on a dirt “flyover.” Continue on this road in a southwest direction. A BLM carsonite trail sign indicates you are on route NN9108. 1.0 mile to: 3.8 N35° 2.69’ W114° 58.38’ (Elevation 2,861 feet) Come to a "Y." Take the road to the right (straight ahead). A BLM carsonite trail sign indicates route [NN9]108 goes to the right. 0.5 mile to: 4.3 N35° 2.40’ W114° 58.68’ (Elevation 2,908 feet) Turn right, up a wash. 0.0+ mile to: 4.3+ Pass a National Park Service Mojave National Preserve boundary marker.
    [Show full text]