DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report—CONCEPTS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report—CONCEPTS DATA COLLECTION AND CONCEPTS MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION Prepared by Eddy J. Langendoen Watershed Physical Processes Research Unit U.S. Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service National Sedimentation Laboratory, P.O. Box 1157, Oxford, MS. 38655 April 2013 Prepared as part of agreement #60-6408-8-088 (Enhanced Stream-Corridor Modeling Tools for Adaptive Management of Tahoe Basin Streams; P003) with: USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station 1731 Research Park Dr Davis, CA 95618 This research was supported using funds provided by the Bureau of Land Management through the sale of public lands as authorized by the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. I LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ II LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ IV 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ............................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives and Scope ................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Approach, Methodology, and Geographic Location of Research ............................................. 3 1.2.1 Quantifying the Effects of Vegetation and Bio-Engineered Treatments ............................... 5 1.2.2 Near-Bank Groundwater Model: Dynamic Pore-Water Pressure .......................................... 5 1.2.3. Lateral Migration of Meanders ............................................................................................. 5 1.2.4 Evaluating Performance of Restoration Treatments and Validating Model Results ............. 6 2. FIELD DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Streambank hydrology .............................................................................................................. 8 2.1.1 Upper Truckee River.............................................................................................................. 8 2.1.2 Trout Creek .......................................................................................................................... 15 2.2 Resistance to Erosion of Channel Boundary Materials .......................................................... 20 2.2.1 Trout Creek .......................................................................................................................... 21 2.3 Channel Geometry of Trout Creek ......................................................................................... 25 3. CONCEPTS MODEL ENHANCEMENTS ............................................................................. 40 3.1 Near-bank Groundwater Model .............................................................................................. 40 3.2 Lateral Migration Model ......................................................................................................... 41 4. CONCEPTS MODEL VALIDATION ..................................................................................... 43 4.1 Model Setup ............................................................................................................................ 43 4.2 Model Results ......................................................................................................................... 47 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 54 I LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Map showing locations of study reaches on the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek. ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2 Map of monitoring sites on the Upper Truckee River. Symbols: blue triangle, water surface transducer; red plus, tensiometer; orange circle, groundwater transducer; pink square, snow staff gage; white square, acoustic distance sensor; blue pentagon, soil moisture probe. ...... 9 Figure 3 Photos of the monitoring sites on the Upper Truckee River: (a) Site 1, (b) Site 2, (c) Site 3, and (d) Site 4. ..................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 4 Observed precipitation, groundwater elevation (GWE), and pore-water pressure (PWP) at Site #1 on the Upper Truckee River.......................................................................................... 12 Figure 5 Observed precipitation, surface water (SWE) and groundwater elevations (GWE), and pore-water pressure (PWP) at Site #2 on the Upper Truckee River. ............................................ 13 Figure 6 Observed precipitation, surface water (SWE) and groundwater elevations (GWE), and pore-water pressure (PWP) at Site #3 on the Upper Truckee River. ............................................ 14 Figure 7 Observed precipitation, surface water (SWE) and groundwater elevations (GWE), and pore-water pressure (PWP) at Site #4 on the Upper Truckee River. ............................................ 15 Figure 8 Map of monitoring sites on Trout Creek. Symbols: blue triangle, water surface transducer; red plus, tensiometer; orange circle, groundwater transducer; pink square, snow staff gage; white square, acoustic distance sensor; blue pentagon, soil moisture probe....................... 16 Figure 9 Photos of the monitoring sites on Trout Creek: (a) Site 1, (b) Site 2, (c) Site 3, and (d) Site 4. ............................................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 10 Observed precipitation, surface water (SWE) and groundwater elevations (GWE), and pore-water pressure (PWP) at Site #1 on Trout Creek. .......................................................... 18 Figure 11 Observed precipitation, surface water elevation (SWE), and pore-water pressure (PWP) at Site #3 on Trout Creek. ................................................................................................. 19 Figure 12 Observed precipitation, surface water and groundwater elevations, and pore-water pressure at Site #4 on Trout Creek. ............................................................................................... 20 Figure 13 Location of data collection sites on Trout Creek to characterize the resistance to erosion of channel boundary materials. ...................................................................................... 22 Figure 14 Grain-size distribution of bank-material samples collected along Trout Creek ......... 24 Figure 15 Grain-size distribution of riffles along Trout Creek. The riffles labeled PCx-x xx were sampled by SHG (2004). The first number indicates monitoring reach (cf. Figure 17), the second number indicates cross section, and the last number indicates year of sampling. The riffles labeled Trout #x were sampled in 2008; the number indicates sampling site (cf. Figure 13). ................................................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 16 Grain-size distribution of pools along Trout Creek. The numbers in the legend indicate data collection site (cf. Figure 13). .................................................................................. 25 Figure 17 Location of reaches and cross sections on Trout Creek monitored by Swanson Hydrology + Geomorphology (2004). ........................................................................................ 26 Figure 18 Observed changes in thalweg elevation of the reconstructed Trout Creek channel between 2001 and 2008. ............................................................................................................... 29 Figure 19 Observed changes in thalweg elevation along the reaches monitored by Swanson Hydrology + Geomorphology (2004) of the reconstructed Trout Creek channel between 2001 and 2008. ...................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 20 Observed changes in cross section geometry along Reach 1 on Trout Creek. ........... 34 II Figure 21 Observed changes in cross section geometry along Reach 2 on Trout Creek. ........... 35 Figure 22 Observed changes in cross section geometry along Reach 3 on Trout Creek. ........... 36 Figure 23 Observed changes in cross section geometry along Reach 4 on Trout Creek. ........... 37 Figure 24 Observed changes in cross section geometry along Reach 5 on Trout Creek. ............ 38 Figure 25 Observed changes in cross section geometry along Reach 6 on Trout Creek. ........... 39 Figure 26 Definition sketch of variables used to formulate the CONCEPTS sub-model of groundwater dynamics. ................................................................................................................. 40 Figure 27 Trout Creek modeling reach with model sections. Cold Creek discharges into cross section 152+05. ............................................................................................................................. 44 Figure 28 List of soil profiles used in the CONCEPTS model of Trout Creek. For example,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Native Trout Waters of California Details Six of the State’S Most Scenic, Diverse, and Significant Native Trout Fisheries
    NATIVE TROUT WATERS OF CALIFORNIA Michael Carl The Ecological Angler www.ecoangler.com TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUTION – THE ORIGINAL SIX 4 ABOUT THE BOOK 4 CLAVEY RIVER 5 BACKGROUND 6 TROUT POPULATION DATA 6 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 7 DIRECTIONS TO REACH SEGMENT 3 AND 4 (E.G., BRIDGE CROSSING CLAVEY RIVER): 7 AREA MAP 8 CLAVEY RIVER FLOW STATISTICS 9 FISHING TECHNIQUES 9 EAGLE LAKE 10 BACKGROUND 11 BIG TROUT FOOD – TUI CHUBS 11 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 11 DIRECTIONS TO EAGLE LAKE FROM RED BLUFF, CALIFORNIA: 11 AREA MAP 12 PRODUCTIVE TIMES AND ZONES TO FISH 13 FISHING TECHNIQUES 13 SPALDING TRACT – TOPO MAP 14 PIKES POINT – TOPO MAP 15 GOLDEN TROUT CREEK 16 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 17 ABUNDANCE OF CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT 17 CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT GENETIC DATA 17 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 18 DIRECTIONS TO COTTONWOOD PASS TRAILHEAD 18 AREA MAP 19 PHOTO JOURNAL – COTTONWOOD PASS TO TUNNEL MEADOW 20 FISHING TECHNIQUES 23 HEENAN LAKE 24 BACKGROUND 25 FLY ANGLER STATISTICS – 2007 SEASON (8/3/07 TO 10/28/07) 26 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 27 AREA MAP 27 DIRECTIONS 27 PRODUCTIVE ZONES TO FISH 28 FISHING TECHNIQUES 28 UPPER KERN RIVER 29 BACKGROUND 30 KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 DISTRIBUTION OF KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 31 MAP – LLOYD MEADOW ROAD TO FORKS OF THE KERN 32 SPOTLIGHT – FORKS OF THE KERN 33 DIRECTIONS AND TRAIL DESCRIPTION 33 RECOMMENDED FISHING GEAR 33 UPPER TRUCKEE RIVER 35 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 36 ABUNDANCE AND SIZE OF LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT 37 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, ACCESS & DISTANCE 37 DIRECTIONS TO REACH TRAILHEAD: 38 AREA MAP 39 TRAIL DESCRIPTION 40 FISHING TECHNIQUES 40 Introduction – The Original Six The Native Trout Waters of California details six of the state’s most scenic, diverse, and significant native trout fisheries.
    [Show full text]
  • Eight Eastside Rivers Wild and Scenic River Study Report, Record Of
    USDA Record of Decision ~ United States Eight Eastside Rivers Department of Agriculture Wild and Scenic River Study Report Forest Service PacifIC Southwest And Final Environmental Impact Statement Region ~t;k:nal Fores and Tahoe National Forest and lake Tahoe Basin L k To h B - M t U -t Management Unit a e.8 oe aSln anagemen nl m February 1999 CONTENTS Page I. Decision I II. Alternatives Considered 3 III. Public Participation 4 IV. Rationale for the Decision 6 Rationale for Selecting Two Rivers 7 Rationale for Not Selecting Rivers 10 V. EnvironmentaHy Preferable Alternative 12 VI. Compatibility with Goals and Plans ofOther Agencies and Organizations 13 VII. Implementation 13 VIII. Findings Required By Law 14 IX. Administrative Review 15 X. Contact Persons 16 XI. Signature Page 17 Exhibit A Response to comments on the Final EIS Friends ofthe River and associated groups comments A-I Loree Joses comments A-6 Chris Gansberg, Jr. Chair, Alpine County Board ofSupervisors comments A-7 Derrick Adamache comments A-8 John R. Swanson comments A-9 Kenneth W. Holt, MSEH, National Center for Environmental Health comments A-9 Record of Decision Eight Eastside Rivers Wild and Scenic River Study Report and Final Environmental Impact Statement USDA FOREST SERVICE TAHOE NATIONAL FOREST and LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Sierra, Nevada, Placer, EI Dorado, and Alpine Counties, California I. DECISION It is our decision to adopt the Preferred Alternative, Alternative E, as presented in the Eight Eastside Rivers Wild and Scenic River Study Report and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The heart of this decision is our recommendation that Sagehen Creek and the Upper Truckee River be designated Wild and Scenic Rivers pursuant to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.s.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology and Management of Threatened and Endangered Western Trouts
    Biology and Management of Threatened and Endangered Western Trouts August 1976 USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-28 Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Abstract Behnke, R. J., and Mark Zarn. 1976. Biology and management of threatened and endangered western trouts. USDA For. Sew. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-28, 45 p. Rocky Mt. For. and Range Exp. Stn., Fort Collins, Colo. Discusses taxonomy, reasons for decline, life history and ecology, and sug- gestions for preservation and management of six closely related trouts native to western North America: Colorado River cutthroat, Salmo clarki pleuriticus; green- back trout, S. c. stomias; Lahontan cutthroat, S. c. henshawi; Paiute trout, S. c. seleniris; Gila trout, S. gilae; and Arizona native trout, S. apache. Meristic characters, distribution and status, habitat requirements and limiting factors, protective measures, and management recommendations are presented for each taxon. Keywords: Native trout, Salrno clarki pleuriticus. Sali?zo ckurki stoi~zius. Sulnzo clarki herzshawi, Salmo clarki seleniris, Salrno gilue. Sulrno uprrchc. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-28 August 1976 Biology and Management of Threatened and Endangered Western Trouts R. J. Behnke Colorado State University Mark Zarn Conservation Library Denver Public Library Information reported here was prepared under contract by the Conservation Library of the Denver Public Library, through the Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. The report is printed as prepared by the authors; opinions are not necessarily those of the U.S. Forest Service. TABLE OF CONTENTS I . GJ3NERAL MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES FOR RAE3 AND ENDANGJIRED WESTERN TROUTS Introduction ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project
    DRAFT Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Statement Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Volume III Appendices SCH# 2006082150 Lead Agencies: California State Parks Lake Tahoe Bureau of Reclamation Environmental Improvement Program August 2010 DRAFT Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Statement Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Volume III Appendices SCH# 2006082150 Lead Agencies: California State Parks Lake Tahoe Environmental Bureau of Reclamation Improvement Program P.O. Box 16 P.O. Box 5310 2800 Cottage Way, Room E-2606 Tahoe City, CA 96145 Stateline, NV 89449 Sacramento, CA 95825 Attn: Cyndie Walck Attn: Mike Elam Attn: Myrnie Mayville CEQA Coordinator TRPA Project Manager NEPA Coordinator (530) 581-0925 (775) 588-4547 (916) 978-5037 P 05110049.01 August 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Volume III Appendices A Public Scoping Report B Proposed River and Floodplain Treatments by Alternative C Conceptual Treatment Descriptions and Typical Sketches D Upper Truckee LVSRA WMSP Bridge Report E Lake Tahoe Golf Course Economic Feasibility Analysis F Water Quality Data Tables G Aquatic Resources Technical Memorandum H Native American Contacts I Air Quality Modeling Data J Noise Modeling Data Upper Truckee River Restoration and State Parks/Reclamation/TRPA Golf Course Reconfiguration Draft EIR/EIS/EIS i Table of Contents This page intentionally left blank. State Parks/Reclamation/TRPA
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Projects and Environmental Improvement Projects (Eips) in the Upper Truckee Meadows Community Watershed
    Conservation Projects and Environmental Improvement Projects (EIPs) in the Upper Truckee Meadows Community Watershed: General Background The Upper Truckee River Community Watershed (UTRCW) is located in the southern side of the Lake Tahoe Basin primarily in eastern El Dorado County and partially in northern Alpine County. The UTRCW contains the subwatersheds of Camp Richardson (2,652 acres) as well as the Upper Truckee River (36,224 acres), of which is the largest watershed in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The total drainage area of the UTRCW is 69.7 square miles, and the main drainages are The Upper Truckee River, Angora Creek, Sawmill Pond Creek, Big Meadow Creek, and Grass Lake Creek. The northern portion of the watershed consists of the urban areas of South Lake Tahoe and Meyers, whereas the southern portion is primarily US Forest Service land managed by the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. The main channel of the Upper Truckee River is 21.4 miles long and originates in the volcanic bluffs surrounding Meiss Meadow near Carson Pass. The river then flows northward through a series of meadows and lakes until it reaches an 800-foot glacial step over, where it enters the head of Christmas Valley. The river flows through Christmas Valley until is it met by Angora Creek, downstream of the present-day Lake Tahoe Golf Course (LTGC). After converging with another unnamed tributary near the tenth hole of the LTGC, the UTR continues to flow northward through Sunset Ranch, the Lake Tahoe Airport, and to the eastern side of the Tahoe Keys through Cove East where it drains to Lake Tahoe.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Water Quality
    Indicator Name of Adopted TRPA Threshold Applicable State and Unit of Standard Type TRPA Indicator Category Standard Standard (Resolution 82-11) Federal Standards Measure Concentration: Reduce dissolved inorganic Annual Mean Total Nitrogen milligrams/liter Nitrogen nitrogen (N) loading from all Concentration < 0.15 - 0.23 Numerical Total annual load (mg/L) Load: loading sources by 25% of 1973-81 mg/L depending on the kilograms/year annual average water body. (kg/yr) Achieve the following long-term Phytoplankton water quality standard: Annual grams primary Numerical None grams/m2/yr. mean phytoplankton primary Carbon/m2/yr. productivity productivity: 52gmC/m2/yr. Transparency - Annual Pelagic Lake mean Secchi disk Achieve the following long-term Tahoe transparency: 29.7m (CA Secchi disk water quality standard: Winter Numerical State standard) Clarity- Secchi disc depth Meters (m) transparency (December - March) mean Secchi Vertical Extinction disk transparency: 33.4m. Coefficient (NV State Standard) This threshold [numeric standard] is currently being Recognition of exceeded and will likely continue Threshold Policy to be exceeded until sometime N/A N/A N/A Standard after full implementation of the exceedance loading reductions prescribed by the thresholds. Indicator Name of Adopted TRPA Threshold Applicable State and Unit of Standard Type TRPA Indicator Category Standard Standard (Resolution 82-11) Federal Standards Measure Annual mean total Reduce the loading of dissolved phosphorus concentration < phosphorus, iron, and other algal 0.005-0.015 mg/L, Concentration: Pollutant nutrients from all sources as depending on the water Management Total annual load mg/L Load loading required to achieve ambient body. Annual mean iron kg/yr standards for primary concentration < 0.01-0.03 productivity and transparency.
    [Show full text]
  • Tahoe's Seven Summits
    Birds return to Lake Tahoe, page 4 Summer 2014 Drought offers TAHOE’S SEVEN SUMMITS good news, bad By Jeff Cowen news for Lake Tahoe In Depth By Jim Sloan The Lake may be this Region’s Tahoe In Depth most famous geographic feature, but it is Tahoe’s peaks that define our From the shoreline, a long-term landscapes and, at times, the course or severe drought seems to put of our lives. Daily, we glimpse them Lake Tahoe in dire straits. The water towering over our tedium, indelible recedes, streams dry up and the reminders of nature’s greatness and our shoreline beaches expand to expose own impermanence. Succumbing to a bathtub ring along the 72-mile their power, we climb them. shoreline. Some climbers are peak collectors, But from the water, things don’t “bagging” the major summits one by always look so bad. During a one. Others climb on a lark, impulsively drought, many of the pollutants joining friends and unprepared for the that affect Lake Tahoe’s clarity can’t Photo © Steve Dunleavy experience ahead. Regardless of our Pyramid Peak rises above the fog-choked Tahoe Basin. find their way to the Lake. Droughts paths, once we reach their summits, we slow down the rate of urban runoff, feel at once tiny and expansive, earth and rodents. Trees become shorter and neighborhoods. reducing erosion and the flow of fine and time stretching in all directions wider, until they disappear entirely. Our Climbers of even our most benign sediment and other water-clouding below us, the experience undeniably bodies change too.
    [Show full text]
  • South Tahoe Area Trail Map (From Kingsbury Grade to Highway 89) VAN SICKLE C Si Kl BI-STATE PARK N E Tahoe Rim Trail a Tra V Il to Kingsbury Grade & Stagecoach Lodge
    South Tahoe Area Trail Map (From Kingsbury Grade to Highway 89) VAN SICKLE c Si kl BI-STATE PARK n e Tahoe Rim Trail a Tra V il To Kingsbury Grade & Stagecoach Lodge HGHWAY 50 5.8 L a k e T a h o e elev. 6,225’ East Peak SKI RUN BLVD 9,590’ Heavenly CA Lodge Future 6,500’ Heavenly Mountain Resort Bike 8.5 Park l i a AL TAHOE BLVD r T e * T n i a l r Monument Peak h e 10,060’ o HGHWAY 89 HGHWAY 50 w e o Monument Pass P R i m 8,900’ 3.1 T r a i l 2.5 Co il ld Tra Cr e ek o ad High Meadow R dow 7,800’ a l e i High M a r PIONEER TRAIL1.6 T d e ra G d a o S r t il a a 1.8 r 3.83 R il C La ke Tr a HGHWAY 50 e d a r 1.9 T r Star Lake a C i elev. 9,100’ or l Sidewinder ra l Trail T Trimmer Peak ail r r T a m .9 9,910’ i i l R C ONEIDAS ST o e n h o n Ta e Freel Pass MAP LEGEND: F o c 9,700’ u t n o Multi-Use Trail t r NORTH a Trai in l1.7 P l 5.1 Freel Peak ace Dirt Road Road 10,880’ Fountain Place 7,800’ Narrow Paved Road Neighborhood Street Neighborhood Trails S to Meyers a 3.8 x o Primary Street n Arm stro C n g Trai Creek r l e e k 200’ Interval Contour ( M r .
    [Show full text]
  • Tahoe Sierra Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
    TAHOE SIERRA INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Originally developed June 2006 Revised version adopted July 19, 2007 A coordinated effort towards the protection and enhancement of water resources throughout Alpine County, California-Tahoe, and Truckee. Prepared in partnership by: Contributors to this Plan The Tahoe Sierra Plan was developed in cooperation by the following partners: Alpine County Alpine County Watershed Group California Tahoe Conservancy City of South Lake Tahoe El Dorado County Lake Tahoe Unified School District Markleeville Water Company Sierra Watershed Education Partnerships South Tahoe Public Utility District Squaw Valley Public Service District Tahoe City Public Utility District Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Tahoe Resource Conservation District Tahoe Truckee Unified School District Town of Truckee Truckee River Watershed Council UC Davis Tahoe Environmental Research Center For more information regarding this Tahoe Sierra Integrated Water Management Plan, please contact: Tahoe Resource Conservation District 870 Emerald Bay Road, Ste 108 South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Office: (530) 543-1501 ext. 100 Fax: (530) 543-1660 Email: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction……...………………………………………………………………. 1 A. Regional Water Management Group………………………………………… 5 B. Regional Description..……………………………………………………….. 10 C. Objectives....…………………………………………………………………. 16 D. Water Management Strategies……………………………………………….. 20 E. Integration.………………………………………………………………….... 38 F. Regional Priorities.…………………………………………………………... 42 G. Implementation……………………………………………………………....
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project
    DRAFT Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Statement Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project Volume 1 SCH# 2007032099 Lead Agencies: California California Tahoe Regional U.S. Department of Department of Tahoe Conservancy Planning Agency Interior Bureau of General Services Lake Tahoe Reclamation Environmental Improvement Program February 2013 DRAFT Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Statement Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project Volume 1 SCH# 2007032099 Lead Agencies: California Department of California Tahoe Regional Planning U.S. Department of Interior General Services Tahoe Conservancy Agency Lake Tahoe Bureau of Reclamation Environmental Improvement Mailstop 3-509 1061 Third Street Program P.O. Box 5310 P.O. Box 989052 South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Stateline, NV 89449 West Sacramento, CA 95798-9052 Attn: Scott Carroll P.O. Box 5310 Stateline, NV 89449 Attn: Myrnie Mayville Attn: Tiffany Schmid, RESD- Associate Environmental Planner NEPA Coordinator Environmental Services, 3rd floor Watershed/SEZ Restoration Attn: Adam Lewandowski 775/589-5240 Senior Environmental Planner Program TRPA Project Manager 916/376-1609 530/543-6062 775/589-5233 Prepared by: 775/589-5233 2020 L Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95811 Contact: Danielle Hughes 916/414-5809 295 U.S. Highway 50, Suite 1 Zephyr Cove, NV 89448 Contact: Virginia Mahacek 775/588-9069 P 00110066.04 February 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Volume 1 ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL Brochure English
    What is Integrated Regional Tahoe Sierra Integrated Regional Water Management? Water Management Stakeholders Alpine County—Alpine Springs County Water Integrated Regional Water District—Alpine Watershed Group—American Management (IRWM) is a Rivers—California Trout—California Department of collaborative effort to identify and Transportation—California Tahoe Conservancy— Carson Water Subconservancy District—City of South implement water management Lake Tahoe—Department of Water Resources—El solutions on a regional scale that Dorado County—Eldorado County Water Agency— Environmental Protection Agency—Trout increase regional self-reliance, reduce Unlimited—Friends of Hope Valley—Friends of conflict, and manage water to Squaw Creek—Lahontan Regional Water Quality concurrently achieve social, Control Board—Forest Service—Lakeside Park Association—Lukins Brothers Water Company—Lake Tahoe‐Sierra Integrated environmental, and economic Tahoe Unified School District—Markleeville PUD— objectives. This approach delivers Markleeville Water Company—Natural Resources Conservation District—North Tahoe PUD—Placer Regional Water Management Planning higher value for investments by County—Sierra County—Sierra County DOT—Sierra considering all interests, providing County Fire Safe and Watershed Council—Sierra multiple benefits, and working across Nevada Conservancy—Sierra Watershed Education Partnerships—South Tahoe PUD—Squaw Valley jurisdictional boundaries. Benefits PSD—St. Joseph’s Community Land Trust—Tahoe include improved water quality, better City PUD—Tahoe
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Reach Restoration Project Upper Truckee River Between Meyers and South Lake Tahoe, California
    LTBMU Biological Assessment and Biological Evaluation February 2, 2010 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE-FOREST SERVICE LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation Aquatic and Terrestrial Species Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Reach Restoration Project Upper Truckee River between Meyers and South Lake Tahoe, California Prepared by: _______________________________________ Date: _______________ California Tahoe Conservancy (with assistance from ENTRIX, Inc.) Reviewed by: _______________________________________ Date: _______________ Sarah Muskopf/Aquatic Biologist Reviewed by: _______________________________________ Date: _______________ Richard Vacirca/LTBMU Journey Level Aquatic Biologist Reviewed by: _______________________________________ Date: _______________ Shay Zanetti/LTBMU Journey Level Wildlife Biologist Approved by: _______________________________________ Date: _______________ Journey-level Fish/Wildlife Biologist Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Reach Restoration Project 1 LTBMU Biological Assessment and Biological Evaluation February 2, 2010 I. INTRODUCTION The Upper Truckee River is the largest source of sediment and nutrients to Lake Tahoe. The USDA Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU) and the California Tahoe Conservancy (Conservancy) own and manage land along the Sunset Stables Reach of the Upper Truckee River. The Sunset Stables Reach has experienced active bank failures, channel widening, and degraded aquatic, riparian and meadow habitat. As a result, the
    [Show full text]