DOCSLIB.ORG

Ca Late Breaking Good News Legislative Corner Nv

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

We are human power in action We promote wilderness values We preserve and protect our public lands for enjoyment by all muscle-powered winter recreationists JOIN SNOWLANDS AT THESE WINTER and SPRING EVENTS! March 15 Los Altos, Banff Film Festival March 22 South Lake Tahoe, Spirit of Snow Film Fest Benefit at LTCC (details page 3) April 19 Reno, Tony Rowell: Images of Adventure at the Patagonia Outlet (details on back page) April 22 Reno, Earth Day at Idlewild Park April 28 North Tahoe/Truckee, the Village at Squaw Valley Earth Day May 4 & 5 Reno, REI Expo May 5 South Lake Tahoe, Earth Day at Montbleu Casino LATE BREAKING GOOD NEWS Snowlands is pleased to see that the Carson CA Ranger District temporarily closed the mead- ow in Hope Valley due to low snow. This is a sign of good management. As winter 2006/07 trends towards setting re- cords for low precipitation, we are closely watching our Forests to insure that fragile Sierra landscapes are not damaged by unwise use. A highly popular recreation area below Carson Pass, Hope Valley has low lying wet meadowlands that are especially vul- nerable when the snow blanket is thin or too weak (as with sugar snow) to protect the underlying veg- etation from heavy impact. On Feb 4 – Super Bowl Sunday – conditions were grim, with maybe 4 inches of snow on the flats above 7000’ along Highway 88, south of Lake Tahoe. The Carson Ranger District posted one sign near the Blue Lakes Sno-Park access road: ATTEN- TION SNOWMOBILE ACCESS IN MEADOW IS CLOSED DUE TO INADEQUATE SNOW COVER. Picketts Peak looms grandly over the snow- PLEASE STAY ON GROOMED ROAD UNTIL YOU mobile “low-snow” closure sign in Hope Valley REACH ADEQUATE SNOW. Three days later, according to Snowlands volun- LEGISLATIVE CORNER teer Jeff Erdoes, “...most summits and slopes were generally void of snow cover in the AM, but the By Gail Ferrell first flakes of a long-awaited weather disturbance NEVADA ORV BILL - NO RESPONSIBILITY appeared by noon. This (temporary closure) ap- The current Nevada Legislative session be- pears to me to be a significant move on the part of NV gan in early February 2007 and motorized the Forest Service and I think this can be a good interests, including dealers of snowmobiles and thing if ordinary snowmobile motorists voluntarily other ORV’s as well as ORV users, introduced a sec- respect the closure.” ond Off Road Vehicle (ORV) bill. This follows on SB400, enacted without teeth (continued on page 8) Spring 2007 • ©2007 Snowlands Network President’s Precipice Chairman’s Corner by Ellen Lapham by Marcus Libkind “Life is nothing if not a leap of faith”. The death of Kelly James and the presumed deaths of friends Brian Hall and Jerry Cooke on 11,239-foot With the perspective of time, I now elect to call Mount Hood this past December are a tragic re- this column ‘Precipice’, not minder of the dangers one perspective. Many a time faces when venturing into I have perched on rock, the backcountry in winter. ice or snow, wondering Of course their objective what the next few seconds was much more formidable would bring. In all cases, I than a several-mile ski or took the jump, placed the snowshoe trip close to a pick, or launched my skis highway. Nevertheless, we into space- trusting for a should never forget that good outcome (whiteout backcountry winter travel snowstorms will do that to can be dangerous. you!). What got me thinking about this incident was Every time I reached bottom (or the top) I was a talk show host that posed the question, “why OK. This has given me the perspective on why we do people climb mountains?” I was not surprised take on such big projects that seem to have no bot- at the called-in answers that ranged from “for the tom. Or any visible, reachable summit. challenge” to “for the spiritual experience.” It is because we can and we must! I, however, thought a more interesting question In this Bulletin you will read about Snowlands would be, “what is the value of climbing moun- initiatives (e.g. stewardship, a Tahoe Meadows tains, skiing or snowshoeing in the backcountry, or regional recreation center) and those long-term any other mountain sport?” Here’s my short list of projects that have been over a decade in process answers: (Forestdale Road, Hope Valley). I applaud all our • Learn to plan. continued on page 11 volunteers, members and financial supporters for sticking with us, taking the leap of faith, that we In this Issue: can and will succeed to save our winter recreation lands - a meadow, a view, a trail, a quiet acre (or Snowlands at Work 10,000 of them) - for the long term. Hope Valley ............................................................1 I hope YOU will take that leap too! Nevada ORV Bill ....................................................1 Ellen President’s Precipice .............................................2 Chairman’s Corner .................................................2 PS: We have a new staff member on our journey: Alpine County Winter Recreation Plan ..................3 Annette Glabe, who joined us last May. She learned Echo Summit Sno-Park .........................................3 about Snowlands by doing: in her first week she Tahoe Meadows.....................................................4 manned our booth at the REI store in Reno, and, Hoover Wilderness Additions .................................4 as I write this, she is with snowshoe leader Cathy- California Fuel Tax Study .......................................5 Works in Nevada City at Trail Marking Along Highway 88 ............................6 Mammoth Lakes Trail System ...............................7 a demo night. Annette Loon Lake 4x4 Conflict ..........................................7 keeps our database up to Lassen National Park.............................................8 date, handles our books, Ski Tour: Castle Point ............................................9 and runs our outreach Fast Women On Skis ...........................................10 events with aplomb (her Mt Shasta.............................................................11 professional expertise is Affiliate Members .................................................11 event management). She Snowmobile Noise ...............................................12 is a former ski bum who Sponsors..............................................................13 is learning the delights of New Director ........................................................14 Meet Monte Hendricks .........................................14 the backcountry on snow- Snowlands newest staff Snowlands Stewardship Program........................15 shoes. Please say hi to her member Annette Glabe Join Snowlands....................................................15 when you call or email us! 2 ©2007 Snowlands Network • www.snowlands.org Spring 2007 Hope Rings Out for Hope Valley Snowlands Network chairman Marcus on snowmobiles, motorized regions are created CA Libkind has good reason to hope for the in the Monitor Pass area and on Highway 4. The Forestdale Creek area, southeast of Carson Pass on Plan also proposes much needed parking im- Highway 88! After 15 years of advocating for its re- provements. See www.snowlands.org for addi- turn to its natural, quiet setting for backcountry ski- tional details and our full ALERT. ing and snowshoeing, this might just happen. “If adopted it will be a win-win situation,” Snowlands was joined by Friends of Hope Val- Marcus says. He also points out that we are here ley, the California/Nevada Snowmobile Associa- today because people like John Bowers, Deb- tion and the Lake Tahoe Snowmobile Association bie Waldear of the Friends of Hope Valley, John in support of the Alpine County Winter Recreation and Patty Brissenden of Sorensen’s Resort, and Plan. It includes the greater Hope Valley and the he persevered for 15 years, including filing two much loved Forestdale Creek area. successful lawsuits. “As a result, the Forest Ser- On February 6, 2007, the Carson Ranger Dis- vice finally decided to work with the snowmobile trict, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, released a community and us to create a workable winter Scoping Notice for the proposed Winter Recreation recreation plan that all can consider a win.” Plan. Snowlands Network mailed a special alert Marcus, Debbie and the Brissendens were and hopes that you took the time to write in sup- joined by Jeff Erdoes and Jim Donald at six meet- port of the Plan. ings of the Alpine County Ad Hoc Winter Recre- The proposed Plan embodies a balance between ation Dialog. They met with their counterparts in motorized and non-motorized winter recreation the snowmobile community and representatives opportunities. It creates non-motorized areas in of the Forest Service, Alpine County and the Cali- the Forestdale Creek area and on the north side of fornia Department of Fish and Game. Highway 88 in the vicinity of Crater Lake, Scotts Lake and Stevens Peak. To offset these limitations The Spirit Of Snow UPDATE: Films Celebrating Our ECHO SUMMIT SNO-PARK After a season of letter writing and public Winter Passion CA concern for the Echo Summit and Echo Lake Sno-Parks, the issues of management, insurance March 22 and snow removal were dealt with in late 2006. South Lake Tahoe As in the past, the Echo Lakes Sno-Park, oper- The Tahoe Adventure Club and ated by California State Parks, is open for day and Lake Tahoe Community Col- overnight trips into the Lakes and Desolation Wil- lege present a film night dedi- derness. However, Echo Summit Sno-Park on High- cated to the wonders of being on way 50 is now a private operation. The Eldorado snow, up high, in the mountains. national Forest web site states (www.fs.fed.us/r5/ FILMS that will delight, educate eldorado/documents/other/recreate.htm) “Echo and excite to benefit Snowlands Summit is no longer a part of the Sno-Park Pro- Network. Featuring The Lost gram. A private company, Adventure Mountain, is People of Mountain Village - a droll stroll though currently operating, with a day-use charge of $10.00 an abandoned mountain resort and a top film at per passenger vehicle and $50.00 for larger vehicles Telluride Mountainfilm. Plus other exciting films such as motor homes and trailers.
Recommended publications
  • HISTORY of the TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST a Compilation

    HISTORY of the TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST a Compilation

    HISTORY OF THE TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST A Compilation Posting the Toiyabe National Forest Boundary, 1924 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Chronology ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Bridgeport and Carson Ranger District Centennial .................................................................... 126 Forest Histories ........................................................................................................................... 127 Toiyabe National Reserve: March 1, 1907 to Present ............................................................ 127 Toquima National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ....................................................... 128 Monitor National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ........................................................ 128 Vegas National Forest: December 12, 1907 – July 2, 1908 .................................................... 128 Mount Charleston Forest Reserve: November 5, 1906 – July 2, 1908 ................................... 128 Moapa National Forest: July 2, 1908 – 1915 .......................................................................... 128 Nevada National Forest: February 10, 1909 – August 9, 1957 .............................................. 128 Ruby Mountain Forest Reserve: March 3, 1908 – June 19, 1916 ..........................................
  • Reevaluating Late-Pleistocene and Holocene Active Faults in the Tahoe Basin, California-Nevada

    Reevaluating Late-Pleistocene and Holocene Active Faults in the Tahoe Basin, California-Nevada

    CHAPTER 42 Reevaluating Late-Pleistocene and Holocene Active Faults in the Tahoe Basin, California-Nevada Graham Kent Nevada Seismological Laboratory, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada 89557-0174, USA Gretchen Schmauder Nevada Seismological Laboratory, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada 89557-0174, USA Now at: Geometrics, 2190 Fortune Drive, San Jose, California 95131, USA Jillian Maloney Department of Geological Sciences, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92018, USA Neal Driscoll Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093, USA Annie Kell Nevada Seismological Laboratory, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada 89557-0174, USA Ken Smith Nevada Seismological Laboratory, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada 89557-0174, USA Rob Baskin U.S. Geological Survey, West Valley City, Utah 84119, USA Gordon Seitz &DOLIRUQLD*HRORJLFDO6XUYH\0LGGOH¿HOG5RDG060HQOR3DUN California 94025, USA ABSTRACT the bare earth; the vertical accuracy of this dataset approaches 3.5 centimeters. The combined lateral A reevaluation of active faulting across the Tahoe and vertical resolution has rened the landward basin was conducted using a combination of air- identication of fault scarps associated with the borne LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) three major active fault zones in the Tahoe basin: imagery, high-resolution seismic CHIRP (acous- the West Tahoe–Dollar Point fault, Stateline–North tic variant, compressed high intensity radar pulse) Tahoe fault, and Incline Village fault. By using the proles, and multibeam bathymetric mapping. In airborne LiDAR dataset, we were able to identify August 2010, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency previously unmapped fault segments throughout (TRPA) collected 941 square kilometers of airborne the Tahoe basin, which heretofore were difcult LiDAR data in the Tahoe basin.
  • Emigrant Wilderness: a Profile ROG 16-25 12/2019

    Emigrant Wilderness: a Profile ROG 16-25 12/2019

    United States Department of Agriculture Emigrant Wilderness: A Profile ROG 16-25 12/2019 The 113,000-acre Emigrant Wilderness is located in the Stanislaus National Forest, on the upper west- ern slope of the central Sierra Nevada mountain range. Bordered on the south by Yosemite National Park and on the east by the Hoover Wilderness on the Toiyabe National Forest, this wilderness measures roughly 25 miles long and 15 miles wide. Major watersheds drain to the Stanislaus and Tu- olumne rivers. The area is entirely within Tuolumne County. Driving distance is approximately 138 miles from San Francisco and 125 miles from Lake Tahoe. The Emigrant Wilderness is a glaciated landscape of great scenic beauty. The northeastern section of the wilderness is characterized by volcanic ridgelines and peaks. The remaining sections are sparsely vegetated granite ridges, with lakes and meadows scattered around the area. Elevations range from below 5,000 feet near the Cherry Reservoir to the majestic 11,750-foot Leavitt Peak. The range of ele- vation in the most popular high use areas lies between the 7,500-foot to 9,000-foot levels. Precipitation averages 50 inches annually; 80 percent is in the form of snow. The snowpack typically lingers into June, and sometimes even later after a very wet winter. Summers are generally dry and mild, but after- noon thundershowers occur periodically and nighttime temperatures can dip below freezing. Always be prepared for cold and wet weather! History as the Emigrant Basin Primitive Area. The Wilder- Various Native American tribes (among them ness Act of 1964 established the National Wilder- the Me-Wuk) populated this area for 10,000 ness Preservation System, “to secure for the Amer- years, spending the summer and early autumn ican people of present and future generations the months hunting game and gathering acorns in the benefits of an enduring source of wilderness.” On high country.
  • Wilderness Inventory and Evaluation Planning

    Wilderness Inventory and Evaluation Planning

    U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Wilderness May 2015 Update Wilderness Inventory and Evaluation Background: The Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests are revising their land and resource management plans using the 2012 Planning Rule. This rule requires the agency to identify and evaluate lands that may be suitable for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). In 1964, Congress created the NWPS to protect some of the most natural and undisturbed places in America. Only Congress can designate wilderness; however, federal land managers, citizens or other groups can make wilderness recommendations to Congress. In August 2014, the Forest Service shared a preliminary wilderness inventory with the public and tribes to gather feedback on the lands that had been inventoried to determine those areas that should or should not be further considered for wilderness recommendation. Forest Service Current Work: The inventory and evaluation (steps 1 and 2 of the 4-step wilderness inventory process) on the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests have been completed. The results will be included as an appendix in the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) being prepared for these forest plan revisions. Not all lands included in the inventory and subsequent evaluations are required to be carried forward. In total, the Forest Service is considering 10 areas for analysis as recommended wilderness. Of these areas, 3 are potential new recommended wilderness areas, and 7 are potential recommended additions to current
  • Big Meadow to Echo Lake Please Fill out This Form and Send It to the Address Below

    Big Meadow to Echo Lake Please Fill out This Form and Send It to the Address Below

    TRAIL COURTESY Join the TAHOE RIM TRAIL ASSOCIATION Big Meadow to Echo Lake Please fill out this form and send it to the address below. 18.3 Miles Membership Benefits SEGMENT HIGHLIGHTS • Newsletter Subscription • Course Discounts • Alpine Lakes • Merchandise Discounts • Member-Only Outings • Open meadows with wildflower displays Big Meadow USE REGULATIONS Annual Membership Levels (check one) Bikes are PROHIBITED on the co-located Pacific TRAILHEADS Student/Senior: $30 Trail Partner: $100* to Echo Lake Crest Trail/Tahoe Rim Trail, from Meiss Meadows to Grass Lake Spur: On Hwy 89, 6.8 mi. south of US Individual: $45 Trail Caretaker: $250* ǂ 50/Hwy 89 junction in Meyers. Limited parking, no Echo Lake and beyond. A USFS permit is required Family: $60 Trail Builder: $500 facilities. for all entry into Desolation Wilderness. Trail Steward: $1,000ǂ 267 * Includes short sleeve T-shirt 431 Big Meadow: On Hwy 89, 5.3 mi. south of the US 50/ CAMPING REGULATIONS ǂ Includes fleece vest Hwy 89 junction in Meyers. Trailer parking available. Camp within 300' of the trail, at least 200' from Vest or T-shirt size (circle one) S M L XL | Gender: M / F 89 Vault toilets. all water sources including alpine lakes, and at 28 28 least 100' from all trails. Please camp in previously ______________________________________________ Echo Summit: Hwy 50 at Echo Summit. Parking impacted sites. A seasonal, developed USFS Name(s) lot on the south side of the road. Trailer parking campground is located at Big Meadow trailhead. ______________________________________________ 50 available. Vault toilets. Mailing Address Camping is prohibited between US 50 and 89 ______________________________________________ Desolation Wilderness.
  • LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Travel Analysis Process

    LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Travel Analysis Process

    LAKE TAHOE BASIN United States MANAGEMENT UNIT Department of Agriculture Forest Service Travel Analysis Process January 2012 Kjar, J. Craig. 2011. Travel Analysis Process. Boise, Idaho. Prepared for U.S. Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, South Lake Tahoe, California. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 – Setting Up the Analysis ....................................... 1 Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 1 Scale ............................................................................................................................................ 1 How the Report Will be Used ..................................................................................................... 2 Roles of Specialists ..................................................................................................................... 2 Identification of Information Sources ......................................................................................... 2 Analysis Plan .............................................................................................................................. 3 Chapter 2 - Describing the Situation ....................................... 4 Existing Road System and Direction .......................................................................................... 4 Forest Highways and Scenic Byways ......................................................................................... 6 Forest Highways
  • 5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction with the Watershed

    5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction with the Watershed

    Upper Carson River Watershed Stream Corridor Assessment 5. Human Interaction With the Watershed 5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction With the Watershed The purpose of this section is to summarize human activities that have had some effect on the Carson River watershed in Alpine County, California. Regional prehistory and ethnography are summarized by Nevers (1976), Elston (1982), d’Azevedo (1986), and Lindstrom et al. (2000). Details of regional history can be found in Maule (1938), Jackson (1964), Dangberg (1972), Clark (1977), Murphy (1982), Marvin (1997), and other sources. A book published by the Centennial Book Committee (1987) contains an excellent selection of historic photographs. Particularly useful is a study on the historical geography of Alpine County by Howatt (1968). 5.1.1 Prehistoric Land Use Human habitation of the Upper Carson River Watershed extends thousands of years back into antiquity. Archaeological evidence suggests use of the area over at least the last 8,000 to 9,000 years. For most of that time, the land was home to small bands of Native Americans. Their number varied over time, depending on regional environmental conditions. For at least the last 2,000 years, the Washoe occupied the Upper Carson River Watershed. Ethnographic data provides clues as to past land use and land management practices (see extended discussions in Downs 1966; Blackburn and Anderson 1993; Lindstrom et al. 2000; Rucks 2002). A broad range of aboriginal harvesting and hunting practices, fishing, and camp tending would have affected the landscape and ecology of the study area. Shrubs such as service berry and willow were pruned to enhance growth.
  • Wilderness Trail Names and Quotas for Inyo National Forest

    Wilderness Trail Names and Quotas for Inyo National Forest

    Wilderness Trail Names and Quotas for Inyo National Forest • Quota is the number of people that can start at the listed location each day. • Permit is only valid to start on specific entry date and location reserved. • (JMT) or (PCT) indicates trail connects to the John Muir Trail or Pacific Crest Trail. • Information about quotas, commercial use, wilderness permit requirements on page 3. • For help identifying what quota applies for a trip, contact our wilderness permit office. Trail Name Trail Total Reserve Reserve Commercial Code Quota (6 month (2 weeks Quota – Notes* advance) advance) Baker Lakes JM22 8 5 3 Special Approval Baxter Pass (JMT) JM29 8 5 3 Special Approval Beck Lake AA12 15 9 6 *Single quota Big Pine Creek North Fork JM23 25 15 10 15 (PO); 8 (O/G) Big Pine Creek South Fork JM24 12 7 5 *Single quota Birch Lake JM25 8 5 3 Special Approval Bishop Pass (JMT) JM21 36 22 14 15 Blackrock GT66 Non Quota--Unlimited Bloody Canyon AA03 8 5 3 Special Approval Convict Creek JM04 10 6 4 *Single quota Cottonwood Lakes JM39 60 36 24 15 Cottonwood Pass (PCT) GT60 40 24 16 Non-quota Deer Lakes JM0 10 6 4 *Single quota Duck Pass (JMT) JM01 30 18 12 15 Fern Lake AA13 10 6 4 *Single quota Fish Creek AA14 15 9 6 15 Gable Lakes JM12 8 5 3 Special Approval George Creek - Mt. Williamson JM33 8 5 3 Special Approval George Lake JM18 10 6 4 *Single quota Gibbs Lake AA02 8 5 3 *Single quota Glacier Canyon AA01 8 5 3 *Single quota Golden Trout Lakes (Onion JM30 10 6 4 Special Approval Valley) Haiwee Pass (PCT) SS64 Non Quota--Unlimited High Trail –PCT
  • Bridgeport Winter Recreation Area Management Plan

    Bridgeport Winter Recreation Area Management Plan

    2010 Bridgeport Winter Recreation Area Management Plan Bridgeport Ranger District Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest 5/07/2010 2010 Bridgeport Winter Recreation Area Management Plan Table of Contents Signature Page______________________________________________________________ii Table of Contents ___________________________________________________________ iii 1. Introduction ______________________________________________________________1 1.1 Document Structure_____________________________________________________ 3 1.2. Area Description _______________________________________________________ 3 2. Background ______________________________________________________________3 3. Existing Condition _________________________________________________________ 4 3.1. Recreation ____________________________________________________________ 4 3.2. Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail ________________________________________5 3.3. Wilderness____________________________________________________________5 3.4. Access _______________________________________________________________ 6 3.5. Natural Resources _____________________________________________________6 3.6. Mountain Warfare Training Center ________________________________________7 3.7. Special Uses __________________________________________________________8 4. Desired Condition _________________________________________________________8 5. Management Strategies ____________________________________________________ 10 5.1. Organizational Structure _______________________________________________10 5.2. Employee
  • Regional Transportation Plan

    Regional Transportation Plan

    MONO COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Mono County Local Transportation Commission Mono County Community Development Department Town of Mammoth Lakes Community Development Department MONO COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS Fred Stump, Chair (Mono County) Shields Richardson, Vice-Chair (Mammoth Lakes) Jo Bacon (Mammoth Lakes) Tim Fesko (Mono County) Larry Johnston (Mono County) Sandy Hogan (Mammoth Lakes) STAFF Mono County Scott Burns, LTC Director Gerry Le Francois, Principal Planner Wendy Sugimura, Associate Analyst Jeff Walters, Public Works Director Garrett Higerd, Associate Engineer Courtney Weiche, Associate Planner C.D. Ritter, LTC Secretary Megan Mahaffey, Fiscal Analyst Town of Mammoth Lakes Haislip Hayes, Associate Civil Engineer Jamie Robertson, Assistant Engineer Caltrans District 9 Brent Green, District 9 Director Ryan Dermody, Deputy District 9 Director Planning, Modal Programs, and Local Assistance Denee Alcala, Transportation Planning Branch Supervisor Eastern Sierra Transit Authority (ESTA) John Helm, Executive Director Jill Batchelder, Program Coordinator TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 1 Transportation Directives .......................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of Needs and Issues ..................................................................................................................
  • Yosemite, Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks 5

    Yosemite, Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks 5

    ©Lonely Planet Publications Pty Ltd Yosemite, Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks Yosemite National Park p44 Around Yosemite National Park p134 Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks p165 Michael Grosberg, Jade Bremner PLAN YOUR TRIP ON THE ROAD Welcome to Yosemite, YOSEMITE NATIONAL Tuolumne Meadows . 80 Sequoia & PARK . 44 Hetch Hetchy . 86 Kings Canyon . 4 Driving . 87 Yosemite, Sequoia & Day Hikes . 48 Kings Canyon Map . 6 Yosemite Valley . 48 Cycling . 87 Yosemite, Sequoia & Big Oak Flat Road Other Activities . 90 Kings Canyon Top 16 . 8 & Tioga Road . 56 Winter Activities . 95 Need to Know . 16 Glacier Point & Sights . 97 Badger Pass . 60 What’s New . 18 Yosemite Valley . 97 Tuolumne Meadows . 64 If You Like . 19 Glacier Point & Wawona . 68 Month by Month . 22 Badger Pass Region . 103 Hetch Hetchy . 70 Itineraries . 24 Tuolumne Meadows . 106 Activities . 28 Overnight Hikes . 72 Wawona . 109 Yosemite Valley . 74 Travel with Children . 36 Along Tioga Road . 112 Big Oak Flat & Travel with Pets . 41 Big Oak Flat Road . 114 Tioga Road . 75 Hetch Hetchy . 115 Glacier Point & Badger Pass . 78 Sleeping . 116 Yosemite Valley . 116 VEZZANI PHOTOGRAPHY/SHUTTERSTOCK © VEZZANI PHOTOGRAPHY/SHUTTERSTOCK DECEMBER35/SHUTTERSTOCK © NIGHT SKY, GLACIER POINT P104 PEGGY SELLS/SHUTTERSTOCK © SELLS/SHUTTERSTOCK PEGGY HORSETAIL FALL P103 VIEW FROM TUNNEL VIEW P45 Contents UNDERSTAND Yosemite, Sequoia & TAHA RAJA/500PX TAHA Kings Canyon Today . .. 208 History . 210 Geology . 216 © Wildlife . 221 Conservation . 228 SURVIVAL GUIDE VIEW OF HALF DOME FROM Clothing & GLACIER POINT P104 Equipment . 232 Directory A–Z . 236 Glacier Point & SEQUOIA & KINGS Badger Pass . 118 Transportation . 244 CANYON NATIONAL Health & Safety . 249 Big Oak Flat Road & PARKS .
  • August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest

    August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest

    August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest Service, Region 5 Sent via: [email protected] Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans To the Forest Plan Revision Team: These comments on the Draft Forest Plans and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans are submitted on behalf of the organizations noted below. Collectively, we have been engaged in the forest plan revision process for these three national forests since initiated in 2012. Many of our organizations also have a long history of engagement in forest planning beginning with the first plans adopted in the late 1980s to early 1990s for national forests in the Sierra Nevada. We have embraced the new Planning Rule and taken seriously its invitation to provide feedback early in the process and throughout the development of the revised plans. We remain committed to working with your agency to develop revised forest plans that protect sensitive resources, provide for ecological integrity, and provide high quality recreational experiences. Our detailed review of the draft plans and DEIS indicate that there are significant gaps in assessment, development of plan components and evaluation of environmental consequences that preclude a meaningful analysis of the effects of the draft plans and alternatives on the environment. We ask that you revise the draft plans and revise or supplement the DEIS and circulate these documents for a 90-day comment period. Please contact Susan Britting (530-295-8210; [email protected]) if you have questions about these comments.