DOCSLIB.ORG

Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – May 2006

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – May 2006 United States Department of Final Environmental Impact Statement Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Browns Project Shasta-Trinity National Forest Trinity River Management Unit Trinity County California May 2006 Desired future condition (foreground) and existing condition (background) along Musser Hill road in the Browns Project area. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – May 2006 Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement Trinity County, California Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Cooperating Agencies: none Responsible Official: J. Sharon Heywood, Forest Supervisor 3644 Avtech Parkway Redding, CA 96002 For further information, contact: Joyce Andersen, District Ranger Forest Service Office 210 Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 phone # 530-623-2121 Abstract: This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) considers three alternatives in detail, including a No Action alternative, for the purpose of improving forest health by reducing overcrowded forest stand conditions and the associated fuel ladders. The proposed action would harvest timber from about 790 acres, treat forest fuels within the harvested acreage, construct 4.6 miles of road, reconstruct 3.6 miles of road, and decommission/obliterate 32 miles of road to reduce area Cumulative Watershed Effects. The Record of Decision on this FEIS will identify any deviations from the proposed action, if any. Trinity River Management Unit – Shasta-Trinity National Forest - i Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – May 2006 ii - Trinity River Management Unit – Shasta-Trinity National Forest Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – Summary – May 2006 Browns Project Summary The Browns Project is being proposed as part of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest Fuels Management and Timber Sale Program. The activities being proposed in this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) involve commercial timber harvesting (within mixed conifer stands) and management of roads (road construction for project access and road closures for watershed restoration benefits). The area affected by the proposal includes the area adjacent to the northern Weaverville community boundary. The activities would occur in the Weaverville watershed. These actions are needed, because the Weaverville wildland-fire interface (WUI) occupies approximately 70% of the project area, and the National Fire Plan “Cohesive Strategy” identifies WUIs as priority areas for treatment. For the purpose of this strategy, risk conditions were assigned “condition class” descriptors to represent relative risk of intense resource damage. The existing Condition Class of the project area is mostly “Class 3, relatively high risk” with a lesser portion of “Class 2, moderate risk.” The desired condition is “Class 1” representing a low relative risk. Therefore, the desired condition of this project would be to develop lower risk conditions from areas currently in moderate-to-high risk conditions. The proposed action considered in the FEIS includes: • Timber harvest (thinning) on 754 acres • Timber harvest (group regeneration) on 39 acres • Timber harvest total volume = 8.8 million board feet • Intensive fuel treatment on all harvested acreage • 4.6 miles of road construction, 3.6 miles of road reconstruction • Road decommissioning on about 10.3 miles of system roads and 20.5 miles of non-system roads A scoping letter for the proposed project was mailed August 1, 2003 to 111 individuals and organizations collectively that might be interested or affected by the Browns Project. In addition, the notice was published in the newspaper of record, the Record Searchlight, on August 6, 2003, and in the Trinity Journal (a local newspaper) on August 20, 2003. The proposed project was also listed quarterly from December 2000 to July 2005 (20 quarters) in the Schedule of Proposed Environmental Actions, a Shasta-Trinity National Forest publication. Both the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the North Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were also informed of the proposed action in the scoping process. Six responses were received during this preliminary scoping period. A Notice of Intent (NOI) was published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2005, which requested public comments to be submitted to the Forest Service by March 21, 2005. A second scoping letter for the proposed project was mailed March 10, 2005, to individuals who responded to the first scoping letter and to organizations that were expected to have interest in the Browns Project. In addition, the notice was published in the newspaper of record, the Record Searchlight, on March 10, 2005, and in the Trinity Journal (a local newspaper) on March 15, 2005. Four responses were received during the scoping period. Trinity River Management Unit – Shasta-Trinity National Forest - iii Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – May 2006 One significant issue was received and it was regarding road building. Specifically, the Environmental Protection Information Center expressed a concern that road construction and reconstruction may severely impact terrestrial and aquatic systems in the area. Therefore, an additional alternative (Alternative 4) has been added for consideration in detailed study – this alternative does not include road construction, but includes reconstruction where the planning team recognized an environmental benefit from reconstructing existing roads. A “request for comments” letter regarding the Draft EIS (DEIS) along with a copy of the DEIS was mailed April 15, 2005, to 22 interested groups and individuals in addition to 8 Federal Agencies. A Notice of Availability of the DEIS was published in the Federal Register on April 29, 2005, which requested public comments to be submitted to the Forest Service within 45 days (June 13, 2005). A Legal Notice for Comment was published in the newspaper of record, the Record Searchlight, on May 4 and May 5, 2005. Five comment letters were received in response to the DEIS; the comments and the Forest Service responses to these comments are included in Appendix F of the FEIS. Most responses received were concerned with minimizing adverse environmental impacts on National Forest lands. Based on the comments received on the DEIS, minor changes were made to the FEIS to better display the effects of the alternatives. Specific changes resulting from comments received are noted in Appendix F. In addition, comments received have resulted in minor changes to the proposed action for the purpose of reducing potential impacts on geologically sensitive areas. Specifically, areas within units 9 and 5 have been excluded from harvest in the selected action identified in the Record of Decision as the “Alternative 3 – ROD.” Differences between the proposed action and the “Alternative 3 – ROD” are: • Timber harvest (thinning) on 743 acres (a decrease of 11 acres) • Timber harvest (group regeneration) on about 37 acres (a decrease of 2 acres) • Timber harvest total volume = 8.2 million board feet (a decrease of 0.6 million board feet) • Intensive fuel treatment on all harvested acreage (a decrease from 793 acres to 780 acres) iv - Trinity River Management Unit – Shasta-Trinity National Forest Browns Project Final Environmental Impact Statement – Contents – May 2006 Table of Contents Browns Project Summary ............................................................................................. iii Chapter 1: Purpose and Need for Action...................................................................... 1 Document Structure.................................................................................................. 1 Background ............................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of and Need for Action .............................................................................. 2 Proposed Action........................................................................................................ 5 Decision Framework ................................................................................................. 6 Management Direction.............................................................................................. 6 Public Involvement.................................................................................................... 7 Issues .........................................................................................................................8 Chapter 2: Alternatives................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Listing of All EMS Agencies with Their Agency Codes
    Agency Name (D1.2) A.B. Shaw Fire Department (1099) A.E. Crandall Hook and Ladder Co., Inc. (0212) Ace Ambulance Service, LLC (Hunter Ambulance) (0884) Adams Fire Company, Inc. (3199) Addison Volunteer Fire Department Ambulance Corps (5015) Afton Emergency Squad (0811) Air Methods Corp. Rocky Mountain Holdings (LifeNet New York; Albany Med Flight; Stat Flight) (0767) Akron Fire Company, Inc. (1426) Akwesasne Mohawk Ambulance (4498) Alabama Fire Department (1899) Alamo Ambulance Service, Inc. (1311) Albany County Sheriff's Department Advanced Life Support (0184) Albany County Sheriff's Office EMS Unit (6229) Albany Department of Fire & Emergency Services, City of (0142) Albany-Schenectady-Greene Co. Ag. Societies, Inc. (Altamont Fair Ambulance) (0139) Albertson Fire Department (2998) Albion Fire Department Emergency Squad (3619) Alden EMS Department (1437) Alert Engine, Hook, Ladder & Hose Co., No. 1, Inc. (0253) Alexander Fire Department, Inc. (1818) Alexandria Bay Volunteer Fire Department (2212) Allegany Fire District, Town of (0775) Allegany Indian Reservation Vol. Fire Department (Seneca Nation Rescue) (0433) Allegany Rescue and EMS, Inc. (0982) Almond Volunteer Fire Department (0225) Alplaus Fire Department (4693) ALS Services, Inc. (7199) Altamont Rescue Squad, Inc. (0117) Altmar Fire Department (3799) Alton Fire Company of Alton, New York, Inc. (5813) Altona Volunteer Fire Department Rescue Squad (0930) Amagansett Fire Department Ambulance (8139) Amber Ambulance Inc. (3313) Amber Fire Department, Inc.(1083) Ambulance Committee of the Moriches, Inc. (East Moriches Community Ambulance) (5158) Ambulance Service of Fulton County, Inc. (1712) AmCare Ambulance Service, Inc. (3217) Amenia Rescue Squad (1320) Amity Rescue Squad, Inc. (0213) Amityville Fire Department (5137) Amsterdam Fire Department (0554) Andes Fire Department, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Cal Fire: Creek Fire Now the Largest Single Wildfire in California History
    Cal Fire: Creek Fire now the largest single wildfire in California history By Joe Jacquez Visalia Times-Delta, Wednesday, September 23, 2020 The Creek Fire is now the largest single, non-complex wildfire in California history, according to an update from Cal Fire. The fire has burned 286,519 acres as of Monday night and is 32 percent contained, according to Cal Fire. The Creek Fire, which began Sept. 4, is located in Big Creek, Huntington Lake, Shaver Lake, Mammoth Pool and San Joaquin River Canyon. Creek Fire damage realized There were approximately 82 Madera County structures destroyed in the blaze. Six of those structures were homes, according to Commander Bill Ward. There are still more damage assessments to be made as evacuation orders are lifted and converted to warnings. Madera County sheriff's deputies notified the residents whose homes were lost in the fire. The Fresno County side of the fire sustained significantly more damage, according to Truax. "We are working with (Fresno County) to come up with away to get that information out," Incident Commander Nick Truax said. California wildfires:Firefighters battle more than 25 major blazes, Bobcat Fire grows Of the 4,900 structures under assessment, 30% have been validated using Fresno and Madera counties assessor records. Related: 'It's just too dangerous': Firefighters make slow progress assessing Creek Fire damage So far, damage inspection teams have counted more than 300 destroyed structures and 32 damaged structures. "These are the areas we can safely get to," Truax said. "There are a lot of areas that trees have fallen across the roads.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland
    NATIONAL SYSTEM OF PUBLIC LANDS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Department of the Interior March 2020 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Draft Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland Restoration in the Great Basin Volume 3: Appendices B through N Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EIS $2,000,000 The Bureau of Land Management’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands. Appendix B. Acronyms, Literature Cited, Glossary B.1 ACRONYMS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Full Phrase ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AML appropriate management level ARMPA Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment BCR bird conservation region BLM Bureau of Land Management BSU biologically significant unit CEQ Council on Environmental Quality EIS environmental impact statement EPA US Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ESR emergency stabilization and rehabilitation FIAT Fire and Invasives Assessment Tool FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act FY fiscal year GHMA general habitat management area HMA herd management area IBA important bird area IHMA important habitat management area MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MOU memorandum of understanding MtCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NIFC National Interagency Fire Center NRCS National Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWCG National Wildfire Coordination Group OHMA other habitat management area OHV off-highway vehicle Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland Restoration in the Great Basin B-1 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims in Chapter 11 Cases of Boy Scouts of America
    Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims in Chapter 11 Cases of Boy Scouts of America There are approximately 101,135sexual abuse claims filed. Of those claims, the Tort Claimants’ Committee estimates that there are approximately 83,807 unique claims if the amended and superseded and multiple claims filed on account of the same survivor are removed. The summary of sexual abuse claims below uses the set of 83,807 of claim for purposes of claims summary below.1 The Tort Claimants’ Committee has broken down the sexual abuse claims in various categories for the purpose of disclosing where and when the sexual abuse claims arose and the identity of certain of the parties that are implicated in the alleged sexual abuse. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a chart that shows the sexual abuse claims broken down by the year in which they first arose. Please note that there approximately 10,500 claims did not provide a date for when the sexual abuse occurred. As a result, those claims have not been assigned a year in which the abuse first arose. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a chart that shows the claims broken down by the state or jurisdiction in which they arose. Please note there are approximately 7,186 claims that did not provide a location of abuse. Those claims are reflected by YY or ZZ in the codes used to identify the applicable state or jurisdiction. Those claims have not been assigned a state or other jurisdiction. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a chart that shows the claims broken down by the Local Council implicated in the sexual abuse.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Megafires and Smoke Impacts
    FUTURE MEGAFIRES AND SMOKE IMPACTS Final Report to the Joint Fire Science Program Project #11-1-7-4 September 30, 2015 Lead Investigators: Narasimhan K. Larkin, U.S. Forest Service John T. Abatzoglou, University of Idaho Renaud Barbero, University of Idaho Crystal Kolden, University of Idaho Donald McKenzie, U.S. Forest Service Brian Potter, U.S. Forest Service E. Natasha Stavros, University of Washington E. Ashley Steel, U.S. Forest Service Brian J. Stocks, B.J. Stocks Wildfire Investigations Contributing Authors: Kenneth Craig, Sonoma Technology Stacy Drury, Sonoma Technology Shih-Ming Huang, Sonoma Technology Harry Podschwit, University of Washington Sean Raffuse, Sonoma Technology Tara Strand, Scion Research Corresponding Author Contacts: Dr. Narasimhan K. (‘Sim’) Larkin Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station [email protected]; 206-732-7849 Prof. John T. Abatzoglou Department of Geography University of Idaho [email protected] Dr. Donald McKenzie Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station [email protected] ABSTRACT “Megafire” events, in which large high-intensity fires propagate over extended periods, can cause both immense damage to the local environment and catastrophic air quality impacts on cities and towns downwind. Increases in extreme events associated with climate change (e.g., droughts, heat waves) are projected to result in more frequent and extensive very large fires exhibiting extreme fire behavior (IPCC, 2007; Flannigan et al., 2009), especially when combined with fuel accumulation resulting from past fire suppression practices and an expanding wildland-urban interface. Maintaining current levels of fire suppression effectiveness is already proving challenging under these conditions, making more megafires a strong future possibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Twenty-First Century California, USA, Wildfires: Fuel-Dominated Vs. Wind- Dominated Fires Jon E
    Keeley and Syphard Fire Ecology (2019) 15:24 Fire Ecology https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-019-0041-0 FORUM Open Access Twenty-first century California, USA, wildfires: fuel-dominated vs. wind- dominated fires Jon E. Keeley1,2* and Alexandra D. Syphard3 Abstract Since the beginning of the twenty-first century California, USA, has experienced a substantial increase in the frequency of large wildfires, often with extreme impacts on people and property. Due to the size of the state, it is not surprising that the factors driving these changes differ across this region. Although there are always multiple factors driving wildfire behavior, we believe a helpful model for understanding fires in the state is to frame the discussion in terms of bottom-up vs. top-down controls on fire behavior; that is, fires that are clearly dominated by anomalously high fuel loads from those dominated by extreme wind events. Of course, this distinction is somewhat artificial in that all fires are controlled by multiple factors involving fuels, winds, and topography. However, we believe that fires clearly recognizable as fuel-dominated vs. wind-dominated provide interesting case studies of factors behind these two extremes. These two types of fires differ greatly in their (1) geographical distribution in the state, (2) past fire history, (3) prominent sources of ignition, (4) seasonal timing, (5) resources most at risk, and (6) requirement for different management responses. Keywords: fire prevention, fire suppression, fuel loads, house protection, land planning, North Winds, population growth, Santa Ana Winds, silvicultural practices Resumen Desde comienzos del siglo veinte, California, EEUU, ha experimentado un incremento substancial en la frecuencia de grandes incendios, frecuentemente con grandes impactos en la gente y en las propiedades.
    [Show full text]
  • Names and Their Locations on the Memorial Wall
    NAMES AND THEIR LOCATIONS ON THE MEMORIAL WALL UPDATED APRIL 6, 2021 New York State Fallen Firefighters Memorial Roll of Honor Hobart A. Abbey Firefighter Forest View/Gang Mills Fire Department June 23, 1972 7 Top Charles W. Abrams Firefighter New York City Fire Department June 22, 1820 21 Bottom Raymond Abrams Ex-Chief Lynbrook Fire Department June 30, 1946 15 Top Theodore J. Abriel Acting Lieutenant Albany Fire Department February 19, 2007 20 Bottom Leslie G. Ackerly Firefighter Patchogue Fire Department May 17, 1948 15 Top William F. Acquaviva Deputy Chief Utica Fire Department January 15, 2001 6 Bottom Floyd L. Adel Firefighter Fulton Fire Department December 4, 1914 4 Top Elmer Adkins Lieutenant Rochester Fire Department June 3, 1962 12 Bottom Emanuel Adler Firefighter New York City Fire Department November 16, 1952 14 Top William J. Aeillo Firefighter New York City Fire Department March 30, 1923 6 Top John W. Agan Firefighter Syracuse Fire Department February 3, 1939 17 Top Joseph Agnello Lieutenant New York City Fire Department September 11, 2001 3 Top Brian G. Ahearn Lieutenant New York City Fire Department September 11, 2001 14 Bottom Joseph P. Ahearn Firefighter New York City Fire Department April 10, 1934 19 Top Duane F. Ahl Captain Rotterdam Fire Department January 18, 1988 11 Top William E. Akin, Jr. Fire Police Captain Ghent Volunteer Fire Company No. 1 October 19, 2010 12 Top Vincent J. Albanese Firefighter New York City Fire Department July 31, 2010 19 Bottom Joseph Albert Firefighter Haverstraw Fire Department January 8, 1906 20 Top Michael F.
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Canaday Hill Rd. Berne, NY 1290 SR 143 Coeymans Hollow, NY 145
    Albany County 9 Canaday Hill Rd. (518) 728-8025 26-Apr Berne, NY Berne Volunteer Fire Company 1290 SR 143 756-6310 27-Apr Coeymans Hollow, NY Coeymans Hollow Volunteer Fire Corp. 145 Adams Street 518-475-7310 26-Apr Delmar , NY Delmar Fire Department 25 Main St (518) 728-8025 26-Apr East Berne, NY East Berne Volunteer Fire Company 15 West Poplar Dr (518) 439-9144 27-Apr Delmar, NY Elsmere Fire Dept 15 West Poplar Dr April 26- 5184399144 Delmar, NY 27 Elsmere Fire Dept 1342 Central Ave. April 26- 518-489-4421 Colonie, NY 27 Fuller Road Fire Department 30 School Road (518) 861-8871 26-Apr Guilderland Center, NY Guilderland Center Volunteer Fire Department 2303 Western Ave 518-456-5000 26-Apr Guilderland, NY Guilderland Fire Department 2198 Berne Altamont RD (518) 728-8025 26-Apr Knox Volunteer Fire Company Knox, NY 1250 Western Ave April 26- (518)-489-4340 Albany, NY 27 McKownville Fire Department 28 County Route 351 518-872-0368 26-Apr Medusa, NY Medusa Volunteer Fire Company 1956 Central Avenue Midway Fire Department 5184561424 27-Apr Midway Fire Department 5184561424 27-Apr Albany, NY 694 New Salem Road (518) 765-2231 26-Apr Voorheesville, NY New Salem Volunteer Fire Department 2178 Tarrytown Rd (518) 728-8025 26-Apr Clarksville, NY Onesquethaw Volunteer Fire Company 4885 State RD 85 Rensselaerville Volunteer Fire Department (518) 966-0338 27-Apr Rensselaerville, NY 900 1st Street Schuyler Heights (518)271-7851 26-Apr Watervliet , NY 301 glenmont rd April 26- Selkirk 518-728-5831 Glenmont, NY 27 550 Albany Shaker Road 518-458-1352 26-Apr Loudonville, NY Shaker Road Loudonville Fire Department P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire History 1980'S 1990'S 2000'S 2010'S Beckwourth Complex
    -120°52' -120°50' -120°48' -120°46' -120°44' -120°42' -120°40' -120°38' -120°36' -120°34' -120°32' -120°30' -120°28' -120°26' -120°24' -120°22' -120°20' -120°18' -120°16' -120°14' -120°12' -120°10' -120°8' -120°6' -120°4' -120°2' -120° -119°58' -119°56' -119°54' -119°52' -119°50' -119°48' -119°46' -119°44' -119°42' -119°40' -119°38' -119°36' -119°34' -119°32' -119°30' -119°28' -119°26' -119°24' -119°22' -119°20' R1 RANCH FIRE STONEY 40°34' 40°34' 2019 FIRE 2004 EAGLE LAKE FIRE FIRE 1984 40°32' 40°32' 40°30' 40°30' EMPIRE FIRE 1998 EMPIRE FIRE 1984 40°28' 40°28' BULL BASIN FIRE 2001 EMPIRE FIRE RUSH FIRE 1985 GOAT FIRE 2012 2000 MUD FIRE 40°26' 40°26' 2017 POITO FIRE 2006 HOG FIRE RODEO LIMBO 2020 FIRE FIRE 1994 2017 CHENEY 40°24' 40°24' INCIDENT FIRE DEVIL FIRE 2006 2001 TUMBLEWEED FIRE 2018 WILLARD FIRE CREEK 2016 INCIDENT FIRE 2006 40°22' 40°22' BASS FIRE BYERS FIRE SHEEP EMPIRE 1985 FIRE A-3 FIRE FIRE FIRE 1996 DRY FIRE 2006 2020 2003 40°20' 40°20' 1999 40°18' 40°18' DRY VALLEY TOHAKUM 2 FIRE FIRE 1984 2017 40°16' 40°16' BIA 6 FIRE 1985 DRY VALLEY FIRE BIA7 FIRE 1985 1998 SAND PASS FIRE 40°14' 40°14' 2007 MOONLIGHT EAGLE FIRE FIRE 2007 1989 WILDCAT FIRE 2009 BOULDER NEEDLES 40°12' 40°12' COOKS FIRE FIRE FIRE 1996 2006 ISLAND 2007 FIRE STREAM COTTONWOOD 2007 FIRE FIRE 2001 2004 40°10' 40°10' WHEELER HUNGRY FIRE FIRE 2007 2006 40°8' 40°8' PLUMAS NF #531 (CLARK) FIRE 1987 CCD TURTLE FIRE 40°6' 40°6' LAVER FIRE 2000 ELEPHANT 1986 FIRE 1981 TURTLE FIRE 1984 40°4' 40°4' WALKER FIRE RACK FIRE 2019 1989 ANDERSON FIRE 2016 FISH FIRE SECOND
    [Show full text]
  • Request-For-Major-Disaster-Declaration
    Stafford Act and State Disaster Declarations in Previous 24 Months Event Number Disaster Name Counties FM-5376 Glass Fire Napa and Sonoma FM-5374 Bobcat Fire Los Angeles FM-5373 SQF Complex Tulare FM-5363 Bear Fire Butte, Plumas, and Yuba FM-5361 Slater Fire Siskiyou FM-5350 El Dorado Fire San Bernardino FM-5348 Creek Fire Fresno and Madera FM-5339 Sheep Fire Lassen DR-4558/CDAA-2020-06 August 2020 Wildfires Lake, Monterey, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, and Yolo FM-5338 SCU Lightning Complex Santa Clara and Stanislaus FM-5336 CZU Lightning Complex San Mateo and Santa Cruz FM-5333 Carmel Fire Monterey FM-5332 Jones Fire Nevada FM-5331 LNU Lightning Complex Lake, Napa, Solano, Sonoma, and Yolo FM-5329 River Fire Monterey FM-5325 Apple Fire Riverside and San Bernardino CDAA-2020-05 Atmospheric River Event Monterey CDAA-2020-04 Sandalwood Fire Riverside CDAA-2020-03 Easy/Maria Fires Ventura DR-4482/CDAA-2020-01 COVID 19 Statewide FM-5303 Cave Fire Santa Barbara FM-5302 Maria Fire Ventura FM-5301 Hillside Fire San Bernardino FM-5300 46 Fire Riverside FM-5299 Hill Fire Riverside FM-5298 Easy Fire Ventura FM-5297 Getty Fire Los Angeles FM-5296 Tick Fire Los Angeles FM-5295/CDAA-2019-06 Kincade Fire Sonoma FM-5293/CDAA-2020-02 Saddleridge Fire Los Angeles EM-3415/CDAA-2019-05 California Earthquakes Kern and San Bernardino CDAA-2019-04 April 2019 Spring Storm Modoc DR-4434/CDAA-2019-03 Late February 2019 Storms, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Flooding, Landslide and Del Norte, El Dorado, Mudslides Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Marin, Mariposa,
    [Show full text]
  • Class B Fire Suppression Foam Usage Survey
    Class B Fire Suppression Foam Usage Survey - New York State Airports If a respondent indicated that the facility used/stored/disposed PFOA/PFOS substances, it does not necessarily mean that there is an environmental/public health concern associated with that facility. Also, if a respondent indicated that they currently/formerly used, stored, disposed of, or released Class B firefighting foam it does not necessarily mean that the foam contains/contained PFOA/PFOS since many Class B foams do not contain these substances. DEC is in the process of reviewing/evaluating the returned surveys to determine if additional follow-up or study is needed. Return rate: 91 surveys were sent to facilities; 90 were returned completed as of June 1, 2017. Questions 1 & 2 relate to name and address; questions 3-5 relate to facility ownership. Q. 6: Is any Class B fire suppression foam currently stored and/or used at the facility? Q. 7: Has any Class B fire suppression foam ever been stored and/or used at the facility? Q. 8: Has Class B fire suppression foam ever been used for training purposes at the facility? Q. 9: Has Class B fire suppression foam ever been used for firefighting or other emergency response purposes at the facility? Q. 10: Has the facility ever experienced a spill or leak of Class B fire suppression foam? Q. 11: Has your facility ever been responsible for the use of Class B fire suppression foam at a location other than the facility (i.e. offsite training, emergency response, or spill)? Survey Facility ID facility name facility address county complete? Q.
    [Show full text]
  • University of California, Irvine Living in Transition
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE LIVING IN TRANSITION: A CULTURAL-ECOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF ADAPTATION TO DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AFTER THE WOOLSEY FIRE (2018) DISSERTATION submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Planning, Policy, and Design by Mariana Garcia Junqueira Dissertation Committee: Professor Victoria Basolo, Co-Chair Associate Professor Keith Murphy, Co-Chair Professor Scott Bollens 2020 © 2020 Mariana Garcia Junqueira TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ vi VITA............................................................................................................................................. vii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ viii Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 1. New Geographies of Displacement ........................................................................................ 24 1.1 Displacement: A Social Dimension of Climate Change ....................................................
    [Show full text]