DOCSLIB.ORG

Scott Zylstra: “Late Cretaceous Metamorphic and Plutonic of Proterozoic Metasediments of Ontario Ridge, Eastern San Gabriel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Scott Zylstra: “Late Cretaceous Metamorphic and Plutonic of Proterozoic Metasediments of Ontario Ridge, Eastern San Gabriel LATE CRETACEOUS PLUTONIC AND METAMORPHIC OVERPRINT OF PROTEROZOIC METASEDIMENTS OF ONTARIO RIDGE, EASTERN SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS, CALIFORNIA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science In Geological Sciences By Scott B. Zylstra 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many thanks to Drs. Jonathan Nourse and Nicholas Van Buer for countless hours in research, assistance and editing on this project; to Zhan Peng, Anthony LeBeau and Karissa Vermillion for laboratory assistance; to the MENTORES program and the Cal Poly Geology Department for funding; to Joshua Schwartz and Carl Jacobson for valuable insight; and to Jennifer, Gwendolyn and Lydia Jean Zylstra, without whom this work would not be possible (and with whom sometimes has been scarcely possible). iii ABSTRACT The rifting of Rodinia, particularly in western Laurentia, has been a longstanding geologic problem, as Proterozoic rocks in the western U.S. are few and far between. The eastern San Gabriel Mountains contain a large metasedimentary package that has never been dated or thoroughly mapped. We present U-Pb detrital zircon geochronology results of 439 grains dated at CSUN’s LA-ICPMS; also 24 plutonic grains and 19 metamorphic rims of detrital grains analyzed on Stanford’s SHRIMP-RG, along with a detailed map, cross section and stratigraphic column for these Ontario Ridge metasediments. Probability plots of 206Pb/207Pb ages for five quartzite samples show three distinct peaks at ~1200, 1380-1470 and 1740-1780 Ma. Maximum depositional age is constrained by 3 grains between 906 to 934 Ma, which are 11-28% discordant. The ~1200 Ma peak distinguishes the Ontario Ridge quartzites, and is rarely seen in the western U.S. There are a few minor possible western sources, or, due in part to similarities with the Big Bear Group (Barth and Wooden, 2009), the rocks may represent sediment shed from Rodinia’s conjugate rift pair with western Laurentia. (Barth and Wooden, 2009). The detrital age signature also appears to match preliminary data from the Potato Mountain block (Premo et al., 2007), displaced ~8 km from the main metasediment body by the left-lateral San Antonio Canyon fault. The metasediments are intruded by pre-metamorphic granodiorite of Icehouse Canyon (85.9±0.6 Ma) and post-metamorphic quartz diorite of Ontario Peak (75.8±0.9 Ma). Two quartzites, metamorphosed to upper-amphibolite facies, contain zircons with iv metamorphic rims (75.7±1.2 Ma: 12 grains and 76.7±2.4 Ma: 7 grains), consistent with the last documented plutonic and metamorphic event in the San Gabriel Mountains. These new data provide important keys for future research into the Proterozoic and Mesozoic history of southwestern North America, including the breakup of Rodinia. v TABLE OF CONTENTS SIGNATURE PAGE ......................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... viii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 Location and Access: .................................................................................................. 1 Previous Work ............................................................................................................ 3 Purpose and Objectives .............................................................................................. 4 Research Questions and Hypotheses ..................................................................... 5 METHODS ..................................................................................................................... 8 Geologic Mapping ....................................................................................................... 8 Sample Collection ....................................................................................................... 9 Zircon Separation........................................................................................................ 9 U/Pb Analyses at California State University: Northridge ...........................................13 U/Pb Analyses at Stanford .........................................................................................15 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................17 Rock Units of the Eastern San Gabriel Mountains ......................................................17 Young Quaternary ..................................................................................................17 Older Quaternary ....................................................................................................19 Tertiary Volcanics ...................................................................................................20 Tertiary/Cretaceous Mylonites ................................................................................20 Cretaceous Granitoids ............................................................................................27 Triassic Plutonics ...................................................................................................34 Ontario Ridge Metasediments ................................................................................34 Cucamonga Granulite .............................................................................................57 Precambrian Basement ..........................................................................................58 Stratigraphy of the Ontario Ridge Metasediments ......................................................59 Member 10 .............................................................................................................60 Member 9 ...............................................................................................................61 Member 8 ...............................................................................................................61 vi Member 7 ...............................................................................................................62 Member 6 ...............................................................................................................63 Member 5 ...............................................................................................................64 Member 4 ...............................................................................................................65 Member 3 ...............................................................................................................66 Member 2 ...............................................................................................................66 Member 1 ...............................................................................................................67 Geochronology of the Ontario Ridge Study Area........................................................68 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................78 Precambrian Basement..............................................................................................78 Ontario Ridge Metasediments ....................................................................................79 General Distribution and Thickness ........................................................................79 Structure .................................................................................................................82 Original Stratigraphy ...............................................................................................87 Age .........................................................................................................................91 Cretaceous Plutonics and Metamorphism ................................................................112 CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................................................114 Recommendations ...................................................................................................116 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................118 APPENDICES .........................................................................................................122 21 Summary of U-Pb Zircon Analyses: Stanford University SHRIMP lab Summary of U-Pb-Th Detrital Zircon Analyses: CSUN ICP-MS lab Plate 1: Geologic Map of Ontario Ridge Metasediments Plate 2: Stratigraphic Section of Ontario Ridge Metasediments Plate 3: Structural Cross Section Through Ontario Ridge Metasediments vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Overview .............................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Snow and pines .................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Glass mount ....................................................................................................... 13 Figure 4: Metamorphic zircon ..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cucamonga Creek and Tributaries, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California
    STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CUCAMONGA CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES CALIFORNIA 1. ' As District Engineer, Los Angeles District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, I have reviewed and evaluated, in what I believe to be the public interest, the project Tor Cucamonga Creek, West Cucamonga Creek, and Deer Creek channel improvements, from the Sari Gabriel Mountains to Prado Reservoir, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, which is outlined in the project description section of this environmental statement. In evaluating this project, I have considered all project documents, comments by concerned agencies and individuals, and possible alternatives. 2. My staff has (a) compiled an environmental statement that covers the fundamental and basic environmental impacts; (b) computed the cost and economic impacts of the proposed project; (c) considered the project effects on the surrounding community; (d) considered alternatives; and (e) prepared engineering plans for the project. I have reviewed their findings and the comments of Federal, State, local agencies, and interested parties. \ 3. In my evaluation the following points were considered: a. ' Economic considerations. The proposed project will provide flood damage reduction for floods up to standard-project-fiood magnitude to developed areas consisting of valuable residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial property, important -r-utilities, arterial and interstate highways, an international airport, and transcontinental railroad lines serving the area. b. ‘ Engineering considerations. The project is designed to provide flood protection by providing debris basins and increased channel capacity. The channel is also designed to divert runoff into spreading basins for ground water recharge. c. ' Social well-being considerations. The well-being of the people in the project area will be improved because of flood protection that will reduce the possibility of loss of life, injury', disease, and inconvenience.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern California National Forests Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) Analysis (Reference FSH 1909.12-2007-1, Chapter 72) Cucamonga B San Bernardino National Forest
    Southern California National Forests Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) Analysis (Reference FSH 1909.12-2007-1, Chapter 72) Cucamonga B San Bernardino National Forest Overview • IRA name o Cucamonga B o 11,882 acres • Location and vicinity, including access by type of road or trail o The Cucamonga B Inventoried Roadless Area is located within the western portion of the Front Country Ranger District of the San Bernardino National Forest. It is bounded on the west primarily by the existing Cucamonga Wilderness; on the south by National Forest System Road (NFSR) 1N34 Cucamonga Truck Trail; on the east side by private land in Lytle Creek, NFSR 2N57, and 2N58; and on the north by NFSR 3N06. Cucamonga B is separated from the Cucamonga C Inventoried Roadless Area by Day Canyon. This area is comprised of the upper Lytle Creek and Cucamonga Creek watersheds. It lies west of the rural community of Lytle Creek, with the more larger, more urbanized Rancho Cucamonga and Upland communities located in the valley about one mile south. • Geography, topography and vegetation (including the ecosystem type(s) o Cucamonga B contains steep, heavily dissected ridges with dense chaparral ecosystems and some riparian areas in the lower elevations and mixed conifer in the upper elevations. Elevations range from about 3,000 to 7,800 feet with an aspect that varies. Topography is steep from Lytle Creek west up towards the boundary with the Angeles National Forest. o A few minor, intermittent streams are present along with some of the perennial North, Middle and South Forks of Lytle Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Cucamonga Peak 7.5' Quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. FOREST SERVICE (San Bernardino National Forest) OPEN-FILE REPORT 01-311 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR and the CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Version 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS 117 37' 30" MODERN SURFICIAL DEPOSITS—Sediment recently transported and Lookout (Kt), west of Lytle Creek 117 30' CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS 34 15' 34 15' deposited in channels and washes, on surfaces of alluvial fans and alluvial plains, Kssm Mylonitized tonalite of San Sevaine Lookout (Cretaceous)—Gneissic and and on hillslopes. Soil-profile development is non-existant to minimal. Includes: mylonitic tonalite; mylonitic deformation discontinuously distributed Qw Very young wash deposits (late Holocene)—Unconsolidated coarse-grained sand throughout unit. Consists of mixture of Kssm1 and Kss Tonalite of San Sevaine Lookout (Cretaceous)—Hornblende-biotite tonalite, to bouldery alluvium of active channels and washes flooring drainage bottoms Kssm1 within mountains and on alluvial fans along base of mountains. Most alluvium possibly ranging to granodiorite and quartz diorite. Foliated, gray, medium- to Qw Qf Qc Qls is, or recently was, subject to active stream flow. Includes some low-lying coarse-grained; generally equigranular, but locally sub-porphyritic, containing terrace deposits along alluviated canyon floors and areas underlain by colluvium small, poorly formed feldspar phenocrysts. Foliation defined by oriented ? ? Qf1 along base of some slopes hornblende and biotite, commonly as dark, multi-grained, flattened inclusions. Very young alluvial fan deposits (late Holocene)—Unconsolidated deposits of Contains large septa of marble, gneiss, and schist, the latter two incorporated in Qyf5 Qf Holocene coarse-grained sand to bouldery alluvium of modern fans having undissected varying degree into the tonalite; some rock contains scattered garnets having kelyphytic rims.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Ling Yen Mountain
    Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Ling Yen Mountain Temple Project Community of Etiwanda, San Bernardino County, California USGS Cucamonga Peak and Devore, CA 7.5’ Topographic Quadrangle Maps Section 15 and of Township 1 North, Range 6 West 76.98-Acre Project Area Prepared for: The Altum Group 73‐710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 219 Palm Desert, California 92260 Contact: Ms. Nancy Ferguson, Environmental Planning Manager Prepared by: 650 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 460 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Principal Investigator: Jennifer M. Sanka, M.A., RPA, Associate Project Manager/Archaeologist Authors: Jennifer M. Sanka, M.A. and William R. Gillean, B.S., with contributions provided by M. Kelley Russell, M.S. Fieldwork Conducted By: Jennifer M. Sanka and William R. Gillean Fieldwork Conducted: May 30 and 31, 2013 Report Date: July 25, 2013 Keywords: USGS Cucamonga Peak and Devore, CA 7.5’ Topographic Quadrangles, 76.98-Acres, Pedestrian Survey, Rancho Cucamonga, Etiwanda, CA-SBR-7694H, 36-026028/CA-SBR-16499H (LYMT-001) Table of Contents Management Summary ........................................................................................................................ iii 1.0 Introduction and Project Description .................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Project Area Environmental Setting .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Studies of the Nervous System of the Crayfish
    A GIS INVESTIGATION OF PAIRED WATERSHEDS: ICEHOUSE CANYON AND UPPER SAN ANTONIO CANYON, EASTERN SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science In Geological Sciences By Susan L. Perez 2015 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the faculty, both current and emeritus, of California State Polytechnic University for all their patience, support, and mentorship during my undergraduate and graduate careers. Without them, this thesis would not have been possible. But I would like to especially thank Dr. Jon Nourse, my advisor; you have been the best teacher and friend and I so greatly appreciate it. I only wish I could spend more time with you learning geology, a subject that we love. Thanks go to the three men in my life, Raul, Alexander, and Lorenzo for their love and support during this effort. I needed the help with dinners, thesis formatting issues, and the IT help using ArcMap when it seemed like all data was lost. And a final thank you to Mom and Dad; I miss you and wish you both were here to see this thesis. iii ABSTRACT Two paired watersheds, Upper San Antonio and Icehouse Canyons, located in the eastern San Gabriel Mountains were studied using a geographical information system (GIS) to examine the effects of rock and soil present, vegetation, hill shade, slope, aspect, and solar insolation variables on the baseflow recession rates. Baseflow recession is the response of a watershed to influxes of precipitation during dry conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Peak Bagging
    Peak Bagging: (complete award size: 8" x 6") Program and Awards Offered by the HIGH ADVENTURE TEAM Greater Los Angeles Area Council Boy Scouts of America The High Adventure Team of the Greater Los Angeles Area Council-Boy Scouts of America is a volunteer group of Scouters which operates under the direction of GLAAC-Camping Services. Its mission is to develop and promote outdoor activities within the Council and by its many Units. It conducts training programs, sponsors High Adventure awards, publishes specialized literature such as Hike Aids and The Trail Head and promotes participation in summer camp, in High Adventure activities such as backpacking, peak climbing, and conservation, and in other Council programs. Anyone who is interested in the GLAAC-HAT and its many activities is encouraged to direct an inquiry to the GLAAC-Camping Services or visit our web site at http://www.glaac-hat.org/. The GLAAC-HAT meets on the evening of the first Tuesday of each month at 7:30 pm in the Cushman Watt Scout Center, 2333 Scout Way, Los Angeles, CA 90026. These meetings are open to all Scouters. REVISIONS Jan 2016 General revision. Peak Bagger Peak list: Tom Thorpe removed Mt. San Antonio, added Blackrock Dick Rose Mountain. Mini-Peak Bagger list: removed Dawson Peak and Pine Mountain No. 1. Renamed "Suicide Peak" to "Suicide Rock". Updated "General Requirements" section. Jan 2005 New document incorporating Program Announcements 2 and 3. Prepared by Lyle Whited and composed by John Hainey. (Mt. Markham, summit trail) Peak Bagging Program and Awards
    [Show full text]
  • Inventoried Roadless Areas and Wilderness Evaluations
    Introduction and Evaluation Process Summary Inventoried Roadless Areas and Wilderness Evaluations For reader convenience, all wilderness evaluation documents are compiled here, including duplicate sections that are also found in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix D Inventoried Roadless Areas. Introduction and Evaluation Process Summary Inventoried Roadless Areas Proposed Wilderness by and Wilderness Evaluations Alternative Introduction and Evaluation Process Summary Roadless areas refer to substantially natural landscapes without constructed and maintained roads. Some improvements and past activities are acceptable within roadless areas. Inventoried roadless areas are identified in a set of maps contained in the Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), Volume 2, November 2000. These areas may contain important environmental values that warrant protection and are, as a general rule, managed to preserve their roadless characteristics. In the past, roadless areas were evaluated as potential additions to the National Wilderness Preservation System. Roadless areas have maintained their ecological and social values, and are important both locally and nationally. Recognition of the values of roadless areas is increasing as our population continues to grow and demand for outdoor recreation and other uses of the Forests rises. These unroaded and undeveloped areas provide the Forests with opportunities for potential wilderness, as well as non-motorized recreation, commodities and amenities. The original Forest Plans evaluated Roadless Area Review and Evaluation (RARE II) data from the mid- 1980s and recommended wilderness designation for some areas. Most areas were left in a roadless, non- motorized use status. This revision of Forest Plans analyzes a new and more complete land inventory of inventoried roadless areas as well as other areas identified by the public during scoping.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX E REPLACEMENT Cultural
    The replacement for Appendix E now includes the Tribal Consultation Letters, which were omitted in error, to supplement the previously included Cultural Resources Report. These Tribal Consultation Letters were addressed in Chapter 4, Environmental Impact Analysis, of the EHNCP Draft EIR. APPENDIX E REPLACEMENT Cultural Resources Report APPENDIX E.1 Cultural Resources Report CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT for the ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Sargent Town Planning 706 South Hill Street, 11th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90014 Contact: David Sargent Prepared by: Adriane Dorrler, BA, Micah Hale, PhD, RPA, and Kate Kaiser, MSHP 38 N. Marengo Avenue Pasadena, CA 91101 JANUARY 2019 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, California NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE (NADB) INFORMATION Authors: Adriane Dorrler, BA, Micah Hale, PhD, RPA, and Kate Kaiser, MSHP Firm: Dudek Project Proponent: Sargent Town Planning 706 South Hill Street, 11th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90014 Contact: David Sargent Report Date: January 2019 Report Title: Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, California Type of Study: Cultural Resources Inventory and Significance Evaluation New Sites: Temporary Designations: 9020-AD-02, 9020-AV-01, 9020-BC-01, 9020- ISO-PH-01, 9020-ISO-AD-01, 9020-ISO-KS-01 Updated Sites: None
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a Revised Cultural Resources Technical Report
    APPENDIX A Revised Cultural Resources Technical Report CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT for the ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Sargent Town Planning 706 South Hill Street, 11th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90014 Contact: David Sargent Prepared by: Adriane Dorrler, BA, Micah Hale, PhD, RPA, Kate Kaiser, MSHP, Linda Kry, BA, and Rachel Hoerman, PhD, RPA 38 N. Marengo Avenue Pasadena, CA 91101 JUNE 2019 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, California NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE (NADB) INFORMATION Authors: Adriane Dorrler, BA, Micah Hale, PhD, RPA, and Kate Kaiser, MSHP Firm: Dudek Project Proponent: Sargent Town Planning 706 South Hill Street, 11th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90014 Contact: David Sargent Report Date: June 2019 Report Title: Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, California Type of Study: Cultural Resources Inventory and Significance Evaluation New Sites: Temporary Designations: 9020-AD-02, 9020-AV-01, 9020-BC-01, 9020- ISO-PH-01, 9020-ISO-AD-01, 9020-ISO-KS-01 Updated Sites: None USGS Quads: Rancho Cucamonga Peak, Mount Baldy, Devore, CA 1:24,000; T 1N / R 6W, 7W Acreage: Approximately 4,388 acres Keywords: survey, intensive, positive results, evaluation, historic refuse scatter, bedrock milling station, 4,388 acres, City of Rancho Cucamonga 9020 i January 2019 Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, California INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 9020 ii January 2019 Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan Rancho Cucamonga, California TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No.
    [Show full text]
  • High Adventure Awards of California Inland Empire Council
    CHAPTER 2 High Adventure Awards of California Inland Empire Council COLORADO RIVER 50-MILER Requirements: Available to any registered member of the Boy Scouts of America who travel any 50 mile stretch of the Colorado River in a canoe, unpowered boat, raft or other inflatable. 1. Unit must have a properly approved Tour Permit. 2. Follow normal procedures for B.S.A. aquatic activities, including safety afloat. 3. Comply with the General Requirements. FIG. 2-1 COLORADO RIVER 50-MILER 3” DIA. DE ANZA TRAIL Requirements: 1. Complete one or more backpacks from (a) or (b): a. Between the first crossing of Coyote Creek north of Borrego Springs to the location of a former corral over a mile north of the top of climb, north of the Turkey Tracks, camping for the night at the Middle Willows. Backpack may be made in either direction. b. Make two backpacks on separate weekends: (1) From the first crossing of Coyote Creek north of Borrego Springs to the Middle Willows, Camping for the night at the Middle Willows and returning to Borrego Springs. (2) From the former corral over a mile north of the climb, north of the Turkey Tracks, to the Middle Willows, camping there for the night and returning to the former corral. 2. Chemical fuel stoves shall be used. Open fires and fuel gathering are strictly prohibited in the Anza-Borrego Desert State Park. 3. Comply with the General Requirements. FIG. 2-2 DE ANZA TRAIL 3½“ x 3” 2-1 MT. BADEN-POWELL Requirements: 1. Comply with the General Requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Critical Biological Zones in Southern California's
    1 Recommended Critical Biological Zones in Southern California’s Four National Forests: Los Padres · Angeles · San Bernardino · Cleveland Lake Fulmor, San Jacinto Mountains, San Bernardino National Forest. Photo by Monica Bond Monica Bond Curt Bradley 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary . 3 Introduction and Methods . 5 Los Padres National Forest . 6 Angeles National Forest . 10 San Bernardino National Forest . 15 Cleveland National Forest . 20 Literature Cited . 23 Map of Recommended CBZs . 24 We thank the following highly knowledgeable scientists for their input: • Chris Brown – U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, San Diego • David Goodward – San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society • Frank Hovore – Frank Hovore and Associates, Santa Clarita • Timothy Krantz – University of Redlands and San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society • Fred Roberts – California Native Plant Society • Sam Sweet – Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology, U.C. Santa Barbara • Michael Wangler – Department of Science and Engineering, Cuyamaca College 3 Executive Summary With majestic mountains, dramatic coastlines, and a remarkable diversity of wildlands from alpine forests to desert scrublands, Southern California’s four national forests – Los Padres, Angeles, San Bernardino, and Cleveland – are beloved by millions of backpackers, hikers, birdwatchers, hunters and fisherman, and outdoor enthusiasts. Scientists recognize our region as one of the richest areas of plant and animal life on the planet. It is home to roughly 3,000 plant and 500 animal species, many of which are found nowhere else on Earth. Our national forests form the backbone for the conservation of the natural beauty and extraordinary biological diversity of the region. One of the great pleasures of hiking in the forests is to see this diversity, from rare butterflies, fish, frogs, and birds to mule deer, bighorn sheep, and bobcats.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleontological Identification Report and Evaluation Report
    PALEONTOLOGICAL IDENTIFICATION REPORT AND EVALUATION REPORT West Valley Connector Project April 2018 Paleontological Identification Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 Project Location and Setting ................................................................................ 3 1.2 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................... 4 1.3 Methods ............................................................................................................... 7 2.0 Project Description ...................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Proposed Project .................................................................................................. 9 2.1.1 Phase I/Milliken Alignment ....................................................................... 9 2.1.2 Phase II/Haven Alignment ...................................................................... 10 2.2 Project Alternatives ............................................................................................ 10 2.2.1 No Build Alternative ................................................................................ 10 2.2.2 Build Alternatives ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]