North Coastal Californoa
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Background of Younger Lagoon Reserve
Background to Younger Lagoon Reserve 1 Naomi Stern Senior Internship Professor Karen Holl Winter 2013 Background to Younger Lagoon Reserve: A Socio-political Perspective Introduction Younger Lagoon Reserve (YLR) is a 72 acre (29 hectare) protected natural area surrounded by a diverse mix of agricultural and urban land uses. YLR is part of the University of California Natural Reserve System (UCNRS). Founded in 1965, the UC NRS is a network of protected lands that are used for research, education and public service. Today there are 39 reserves spanning approximately 750,000 acres of rare or endangered ecosystems in California (UC Natural Reserve 2012). UC Santa Cruz manages four reserves: Año Nuevo Island Reserve, Fort Ord Natural Reserve, Landels-Hill Big Creek Reserve in Big Sur, and Younger Lagoon Reserve. Located only half a mile north from one of the most popular beaches in Santa Cruz, Natural Bridges State Park, and near Highway 1, YLR land is highly visible to the public. YLR’s habitat types include such as seasonal freshwater wetlands, coastal prairie, and coastal scrub. Throughout its history, this land and its ecology have been continuously transformed by the social, economic, and political issues of the time. Today, adjacent to the reserve are highly visited tourist attractions and official government agencies, as well as world-class marine laboratories. The history of land use conversion and public policy at YLR influences the managerial restoration decisions made to protect it. Developing an understanding of the political systems Background to Younger Lagoon Reserve 2 that impact Younger Lagoon provides insight into the restoration that interns and volunteers take part in. -
Final Report: 2019 Western Snowy Plover Breeding in Coastal Northern California, Recovery Unit 2
Final Report: 2019 Western Snowy Plover Breeding in Coastal Northern California, Recovery Unit 2 E.J. Feucht1, M.A. Colwell1, K.M. Raby1, J.A. Windsor1, and S.E. McAllister2 1 Wildlife Department, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA 95521 2 6104 Beechwood Drive, Eureka, CA 95503 Abstract.—In 1993, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Pacific coast population of the Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. For the 19th consecutive year, we monitored plovers in Del Norte, Humboldt, and Mendocino counties in northern California (designated Recovery Unit 2 [RU2]). In this report, we summarize results from the 2019 breeding season and present a preliminary analysis on apparent survival of the local population using 19 years of mark-recapture data. In 2019, 72 adults (34 males, 38 females) bred in RU2, a 14% increase from 2018 and 48% of the recovery objective. First-time breeders made up 35-44% of the population, including 10-17 immigrants and 15 philopatric birds. Plovers nested on seven beaches (six in Humboldt and one in Mendocino) and fledged chicks at five locations. The sites with the most breeding plovers were South Spit of Humboldt Bay (n=30) and Centerville Beach (n=15). In total, plovers initiated 75 nests, hatched 100 chicks, and fledged 58 juveniles. For the fourth consecutive year, South Spit was the most productive site with 72% hatching success (23 of 32 nests) and 59% fledging success (37 of 63 chicks). Fledglings from South Spit made up 64% of the RU2 cohort, a percentage that has increased approximately 10% each year since 2016. -
THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGACY of the UC NATURAL RESERVE SYSTEM This Page Intentionally Left Blank the Environmental Legacy of the Uc Natural Reserve System
THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGACY OF THE UC NATURAL RESERVE SYSTEM This page intentionally left blank the environmental legacy of the uc natural reserve system edited by peggy l. fiedler, susan gee rumsey, and kathleen m. wong university of california press Berkeley Los Angeles London The publisher gratefully acknowledges the generous contri- bution to this book provided by the University of California Natural Reserve System. University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The environmental legacy of the UC natural reserve system / edited by Peggy L. Fiedler, Susan Gee Rumsey, and Kathleen M. Wong. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-520-27200-2 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Natural areas—California. 2. University of California Natural Reserve System—History. 3. University of California (System)—Faculty. 4. Environmental protection—California. 5. Ecology—Study and teaching— California. 6. Natural history—Study and teaching—California. I. Fiedler, Peggy Lee. II. Rumsey, Susan Gee. III. Wong, Kathleen M. (Kathleen Michelle) QH76.5.C2E59 2013 333.73'1609794—dc23 2012014651 Manufactured in China 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R 2002) (Permanence of Paper). -
OF DEL NORTE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 981 "H" Street, Suite 210 Crescent City, California 95531
COUNTY OF DEL NORTE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 981 "H" Street, Suite 210 Crescent City, California 95531 Phone Fax (707) 464-7214 (707) 464-1165 DEL NORTE COUNTY BOARD REPORT DATE: 4/5/07 AGENDA DATE : 4/10/07 TO: DEL NORTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Administration CONTACT PERSON : Jay Sarina, Assistant County Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Response to Blue Ribbon Coalition Request Letter RECOMMENDATION: Discuss possible action as requested by the Blue Ribbon Coalition as it relates to Tolowa Dunes State Park and associated access restrictions. Direct staff to assist as needed. DISCUSSION /JUSTIFICATION: Del Norte County has previously corresponded with California State Parks over Off-Highway Vehicle access restrictions imposed on land adjacent to and within Tolowa State Park without adequate public due process. The board of Supervisors previously requested State Parks reopen the issue and propose a specific format for the suggested community dialogue. The California Department of Parks and Recreation replied to that request nine months later and has indicated that they feel their staff took adequate steps to invite public discourse on the issue. No additional action was proposed. The Blue Ribbon Coalition has requested the County take appropriate formal action in support of recreationists to address issues at Tolowa dunes State Park and Kellogg beach. The Del Norte County Board of Supervisors has taken steps to reopen the issue and involve the public with no cooperation from State Parks. "Preserving Our Natural Resources FOR The Public Instead Of FROM The Public" April 5, 2007 (Sent via US Mail and Electronic Transmission) Supervisor Gerry Hemmingsen Del Norte County Board of Supervisors 981 H Street Crescent City, CA 95531 Re: Tolowa Dunes/Kellogg Beach Dear Supervisor Hemmingsen: Please accept this communiqu6 from the BlueRibbon Coalition (BRC) as an official request to the Del Norte County Board of Supervisors that they take the appropriate formal action and direct staff to address access issues at Tolowa Dunes and Kellogg Beach. -
Appendix A: Project Partners
Humboldt County Coastal Trail Implementation Strategy Technical Appendix JANUARY 2011 Prepared for: State of California Coastal Conservancy Project team: Natural Resources Services Division of Redwood Community Action Agency Alta Planning + Design Planwest Partners Streamline Planning Consultants Humboldt County Coastal Trail Implementation Strategy TECHNICAL APPENDICES Thank you to the community members and agency staff who provided input during public meetings and advisory team workshops throughout the planning process. Your participation and contributions are key to this and future efforts to bring the CCT to fruition. Peter Jarausch Project Manager State of California Coastal Conservancy [email protected] This plan was made possible through Proposition 40 funding Photo credits: Kids on bicycles, N. Wynne; Trail horses, U. Driscoll; Eureka boardwalk, J. Kalt All other photos by project team Appendix A: Project Partners Primary Partners ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Federal Agencies .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) ....................................................................................................................... 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) ................................................................................................................ -
Final Upper Main Eel River and Tributaries (Including
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX FINAL Upper Main Eel River and Tributaries (including Tomki Creek, Outlet Creek and Lake Pillsbury) Total Maximum Daily Loads for Temperature and Sediment Approved by date Original signed December 29, 2004 Alexis Strauss Director, Water Division Note: For further information please contact Palma Risler at 415/972-3451 and [email protected] or Dan Pingaro at 415/977-4275 and [email protected] Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Overview - 1 1.2. Watershed Characteristics - 2 1.3. Endangered Species Act Consultation - 4 1.4. Organization - 4 CHAPTER 2: PROBLEM STATEMENT 2.1. Fish Population Problems - 5 2.2. Temperature Problems - 7 2.3. Sediment Problems - 14 2.4. Water Quality Standards - 17 CHAPTER 3: TEMPERATURE TMDL 3.1. Interpreting the Existing Water Quality Standards for Temperature - 18 3.2. Temperature Modeling - 20 3.2.1 Temperature and Solar Radiation Modeling - 21 3.2.2 Selection of Scenario Corresponding to Water Quality Standards - 24 3.3.1 Loading Capacity and TMDL – Solar Radiation for all stream reaches - 26 3.3.2 Shade Allocations - 26 3.3.3 Margin of Safety - 27 3.3.4 Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions - 27 3.4 Instream Heat TMDL – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 28 3.4.1 Selection of Scenario Corresponding to Water Quality Standards - 34 3.4.2 Water Quality Indicators – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 34 3.4.3 Instream Heat Loading Capacity and TMDL - Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek- 34 3.4.4 Instream Heat Allocations – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 35 3.4.5 Margin of Safety - 35 3.4.6 Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions - 35 CHAPTER 4: SEDIMENT TMDL 4.1. -
Background for Assets and Values at Risk, Humboldt
HUMBOLDT COUNTY COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN, 2019 Table of Contents — Appendix D: Background Information for Assets and Values at Risk D.1 Communities at Risk ................................................................................................................... D-1 D.2 Community and Economic ......................................................................................................... D-4 Residential Construction and WUI Building Codes .......................................................................... D-4 D.3 Natural ....................................................................................................................................... D-9 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................................. D-9 Hydrology ....................................................................................................................................... D-10 Geology .......................................................................................................................................... D-11 Figures Figure D.1 Humboldt County Designated Communities at Risk .............................................................. D-1 Figure D.2. Improvement Value by Fire Hazard Severity Zone ................................................................. D-4 Figure D.3 Medical Facilities ................................................................................................................... -
June Minutes
STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES June 5, 2005 10:00 a.m. State Capitol – Hearing Room 126 Sacramento, Ca MEMBERS PRESENT: Doug Bosco (Public Member), Chair Ann Notthoff (Public Member), Vice Chair Marisa Moret (Public Member) Karen Finn (Designated Representative, Department of Finance) Bryan Cash (Designated Representative, Resources Agency) OVERSIGHT LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Senator Joe Simitian Annette Porini, designee for Senator Simitian Linda Barr, designee for Senator Christine Kehoe OTHERS PRESENT: Sam Schuchat, Executive Officer Pat Peterson, Deputy Attorney General Elena Eger, Staff Counsel 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved and seconded: the minutes of the April 24, 2008 public meeting were approved without change, 5-0. 3. CONSENT ITEMS A. PARKER CREEK STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES - June 5, 2005 Resolution: “The State Coastal Conservancy hereby approves the Access Management Plan for the Tsurai Village Site, attached as Exhibit 2 to the accompanying staff recommendation, and authorizes the disbursement of an amount not to exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) to the City of Trinidad for the installation of drainage improvements to redirect flows away from the Tsurai Village Site, subject to the following conditions: a. Prior to the disbursement of any Conservancy funds, the City shall submit for review and written approval of the Executive Officer of the Conservancy (“Executive Officer”) a work plan, budget and schedule; the names and qualifications of any contractors to be employed for the project; evidence that the City has obtained all necessary permits to carry out the project as designed; and a recorded easement in favor of the City from the owner of the private land on which the project will be implemented. -
Northern California Coast Northern Focus Area
14.1 Description of Area 14.1.1 The Land The Northern California Coast - Northern Focus Area is composed of coastal Del Norte and Humboldt counties. The boundary extends eastward from the Pacific coast to the top of the first inland mountain range, and encompasses many of the region's existing and former wetlands. The focus area also includes a few important riparian and floodplain areas adjacent to major coastally draining rivers (Figure 13). In this northernmost California County, the coastline tends to be composed of rocky cliffs and high bluffs which rise steeply into the coastal mountain ranges with their deeply cut 14.0 canyons. Two major rivers drain the interior mountain ranges and empty into the Pacific Ocean within the boundary of Del Norte County: the Smith River, which has its origins in north- eastern Del Norte County and southern Oregon, and the Klamath River with headwaters much farther to the NORTHERN north and east in south central Oregon. Humboldt County, to the south, includes portions of CALIFORNIA the California Coast Range and the southern Klamath Mountains. The most extensive coastal wetlands are associated with floodplains in the lower Eel River COAST─ Valley and the Humboldt Bay area. Other significant wetland habitats include Mad River Estuary, Little River Valley, Redwood Creek Estuary, Big Lagoon, NORTHERN Stone Lagoon, and Freshwater Lagoon. Major rivers and streams draining the mountain ranges of Humboldt County include the Eel River, Van Duzen FOCUS AREA River, Mad River, Trinity River, Klamath River, Mattole River, Bear River, and Redwood Creek. Like the Klamath River, the Trinity and Eel rivers have large drainage basins within the Coast Range and the Klamath Mountains. -
Mattole River Cumulative Effects
Mattole River Watershed Analysis Cumulative Watershed Effects Public Review Draft September 2011 Cumulative Watershed Effects TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................ vi LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................ vii LIST OF MAPS ........................................................................................................................ viii LIST OF ATTACHMENTS .......................................................................................................... x LIST OF ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................... xi 1.0 ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 OVERVIEW OF WATERSHED ANALYSIS PROCESS .................................................................. 6 2.2 PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF REPORT ....................................................................... -
3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality Opens a New Window
3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section provides information regarding impacts of the proposed project on hydrology and water quality. The information used in this analysis is taken from: ► Water Supply Assessment for the Humboldt Wind Energy Project (Stantec 2019) (Appendix T); ► Humboldt County General Plan (Humboldt County 2017); ► North Coast Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (North Coast IRWMP) (North Coast Resource Partnership 2018); ► Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region (Basin Plan) (North Coast RWQCB 2018); ► the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Mapping Program (2018); ► National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data; and ► California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 118, California’s Groundwater (DWR 2003). 3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING CLIMATE AND PRECIPITATION Weather in the project area is characterized by temperate, dry summers and cool, wet winters. In winter, precipitation is heavy. Average annual rainfall can be up to 47 inches in Scotia (WRCC 2019). The rainy season, which generally begins in October and lasts through April, includes most of the precipitation (e.g., 90 percent of the mean annual runoff of the Eel River occurs during winter). Precipitation data from water years 1981–2010 for Eureka, approximately 20 miles north of the project area, show a mean annual precipitation of 40 inches (NOAA and CNRFC 2019). Mean annual precipitation in the project area is lowest in the coastal zone area (40 inches per year) and highest in the upper elevations of the Upper Cape Mendocino and Eel River hydrologic units to the east (85 inches per year) (Cal-Atlas 1996). The dry season, generally May through September, is usually defined by morning fog and overcast conditions. -
Drought and Equity in California
Drought and Equity in California Laura Feinstein, Rapichan Phurisamban, Amanda Ford, Christine Tyler, Ayana Crawford January 2017 Drought and Equity in California January 2017 Lead Authors Laura Feinstein, Senior Research Associate, Pacific Institute Rapichan Phurisamban, Research Associate, Pacific Institute Amanda Ford, Coalition Coordinator, Environmental Justice Coalition for Water Christine Tyler, Water Policy Leadership Intern, Pacific Institute Ayana Crawford, Water Policy Leadership Intern, Pacific Institute Drought and Equity Advisory Committee and Contributing Authors The Drought and Equity Advisory Committee members acted as contributing authors, but all final editorial decisions were made by lead authors. Sara Aminzadeh, Executive Director, California Coastkeeper Alliance Colin Bailey, Executive Director, Environmental Justice Coalition for Water Carolina Balazs, Visiting Scholar, University of California, Berkeley Wendy Broley, Staff Engineer, California Urban Water Agencies Amanda Fencl, PhD Student, University of California, Davis Center for Environmental Policy and Behavior Kelsey Hinton, Program Associate, Community Water Center Gita Kapahi, Director, Office of Public Participation, State Water Resources Control Board Brittani Orona, Environmental Justice and Tribal Affairs Specialist and Native American Studies Doctoral Student, University of California, Davis Brian Pompeii, Lecturer, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Tim Sloane, Executive Director, Institute for Fisheries Resources ISBN-978-1-893790-76-6 © 2017 Pacific Institute. All rights reserved. Pacific Institute 654 13th Street, Preservation Park Oakland, California 94612 Phone: 510.251.1600 | Facsimile: 510.251.2203 www.pacinst.org Cover Photos: Clockwise from top left: NNehring, Debargh, Yykkaa, Marilyn Nieves Designer: Bryan Kring, Kring Design Studio Drought and Equity in California I ABOUT THE PACIFIC INSTITUTE The Pacific Institute envisions a world in which society, the economy, and the environment have the water they need to thrive now and in the future.