DOCSLIB.ORG

PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the EAGLE RULE REVISION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

FINAL PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the EAGLE RULE REVISION U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Public Comment Periods: June 23, 2014–September 22, 2014; May 4, 2016–July 5, 2016 Designation: Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Preferred Alternative: Alternative 5: Flyway EMUs, Conservative Take Abstract: This Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) analyzes the potential impacts to the human environment that may result from implementation of proposed revisions by the Service to several eagle permit regulations that authorize take of bald and golden eagles (“eagles”) and eagle nests pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act; 16 USC 668–668d). The preferred alternative would: (1) establish limits on the amount of eagle take that the Service could authorize under permits to levels that were analyzed and shown to be compatible with maintaining stable or increasing eagle populations with risk managed in favor of being protective of eagle populations; (2) set the four migratory bird flyways (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific) as discrete eagle management units (EMUs) within which the numerical take limits and the objective of population stability would apply; (3) establish a standard process for evaluating the impacts of take at the finer scale of local eagle populations with the objective of ensuring authorized take does not place the persistence of these populations at risk of extirpation; (4) require that any take of eagles be minimized to the maximum degree practicable; (5) establish a maximum duration for permits of 30 years, but with permit-take limits set, evaluated, and updated in five-year increments; and (6) set standards and objectives for compensatory mitigation that will be required when authorized take exceeds the EMU and, potentially, local eagle population take limits. Contact: Eliza Savage, Eagle Rule Revision Project Manager, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803 Eagle Rule Revision Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement SUMMARY The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) prohibits take of bald eagles and golden eagles except pursuant to federal regulations. Eagle incidental take permit regulations provide an opportunity to secure avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation measures to reduce and offset detrimental impacts to eagles while providing certainty to project proponents and other persons engaged in activities that result in incidental take of bald and golden eagles. Bald eagle populations continue to expand throughout their United States (U.S.) range. Golden eagles in the coterminous U.S. may be declining toward a lower population size. Unauthorized sources of human-caused mortality may be a significant factor affecting population trends and size for golden eagles. This programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) analyzes five alternatives (including the preferred alternative) for updating eagle management objectives and permit regulations that will provide protection to eagles while streamlining regulatory compliance for those engaged in activities that may incidentally take eagles. There are five chapters that comprise the critical components of the PEIS. Chapter 1, Purpose and Need for Agency Action provides background and describes the purpose and need for the action, the NEPA process, the legal authorities, decisions to be made, and the organization of the PEIS. Chapter 2, Alternatives describes the five alternatives the Service considered: ● (Alternative 1, No Action) Continue implementation of current management practices and eagle permit regulations. ● Management common to all Action Alternatives includes revisions to eagle incidental take permitting regulations, consisting of: modified definitions, mitigation standards, issuance criteria, permit fees and conditions. All the Action Alternatives also include some revisions to eagle nest take regulations, and allow for permits to be issued for take of golden eagles east of the 100th meridian. ● (Alternative 2, Current EMUs, Liberal Take) Eagle populations would be managed using the current eagle management units (EMUs). EMUs for the bald eagle would be in a configuration that roughly approximates Service regions. EMUs for the golden eagle would be based on Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) west of the 100th meridian, with BCRs east of the 100th meridian combined into one EMU. Unmitigated take limits would be set at 0% for golden eagles and 8% of populations for bald eagles in most EMUs, with lower rates proposed in the Southwest (4.5%) and Alaska (0.7%). Compensatory mitigation would be required for, and limited to, permits that would exceed EMU take limits. Compensatory mitigation for take above EMU take limits would be offset at a 1:1 ratio for bald and golden eagles. Summary i Eagle Rule Revision Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement ● (Alternative 3, Current EMUs, Conservative Take) EMUs would be the same as in Alternative 2. Unmitigated take limits would be set at 0% for golden eagles and 6% of populations for bald eagles in most EMUs, with lower rates proposed in the Southwest (3.8%) and Alaska (0.8%). Incidental take permits could be issued for up to 30 years, with permit reviews every five years. Compensatory mitigation designed to offset impacts at a 1:1 ratio would be required for any permitted take that exceeds EMU take limits. Separate and distinct from compensatory mitigation to offset take above the EMU take limit, a minimum level of compensatory mitigation would be required for each take permit. A permit administration fee for longer-term permits would be assessed at $15,000 every five years to support the Service’s ability to conduct the five- year evaluations. ● (Alternative 4, Flyway EMUs, Liberal Take) EMUs for bald eagles would be aligned with the Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific flyways used by the Service and its partner agencies to manage other species of birds, with the Pacific Flyway divided into three EMUs: southwest, mid-latitude, and Alaska. EMUs for golden eagles would also follow the flyways, with the Mississippi and Atlantic flyways combined into one EMU. Unmitigated take limits would be set at 0% for golden eagles and 8% of populations for bald eagles in most EMUs, with lower rates proposed in the Southwest (4.5%) and Alaska (0.7%). The maximum duration of an incidental take permit would remain at five years. The local area population (LAP) cumulative effects analysis would be incorporated into the regulations. Compensatory mitigation would be required for all permits that exceed EMU take limits and for some permits that exceed LAP take limits; compensatory mitigation would be required if necessary for the permit to be compatible with the preservation of eagles, and compensatory mitigation would be at a 1:1 ratio. The definition of “compatible with the preservation of eagles” would be modified to incorporate greater protection at more local scales. ● (Alternative 5, Flyway EMUs, Conservative Take—Preferred Alternative) EMUs for the bald eagle would coincide with the flyways with the same modification as in Alternative 4. Unmitigated take limits would be set at 0% for golden eagles and 6% of populations for bald eagles in most EMUs, with lower rates proposed in the Southwest (3.8%). Incidental take permits could be issued for up to 30 years, with permit reviews every five years. Compensatory mitigation would be required for permits that exceed EMU take limits, and some permits that exceed LAP take limits; compensatory mitigation would also be required if necessary for the permit to be compatible with the preservation of eagles. Compensatory mitigation would be designed to offset take at a ratio of 1:1 for bald eagles and 1.2:1 for golden eagles for take that exceeds EMU take limits. The definition of “compatible with the preservation of eagles” would be modified to incorporate greater protection at more local scales. The LAP cumulative effects analysis would be incorporated into the regulations. The permit administration fee to support the Service’s ability to conduct the five-year evaluations for longer-term permits Summary ii Eagle Rule Revision Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement would be assessed at $8,000 every five years (changed from $15,000 in the May 6, 2016 proposed rule). Chapter 2, Alternatives also describes alternatives that the Service considered but dismissed from a detailed analysis. Chapter 3, Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences analyzes the predicted impacts of each alternative on the environmental categories that could be affected by the proposed action: bald eagles, golden eagles, eagle habitat, migratory birds, other permitted take of eagles, cultural and religious values and resources, socioeconomic resources, and the Earth’s climate. The environmental analysis in Chapter 3 indicates that Alternative 5, the PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, (1) will not have a significant impact on the growth of bald eagle populations; (2) will add protection for local populations of both species due to the revised preservation standard and incorporation of the LAP cumulative effects analysis; (3) will help prevent or arrest a decline in current golden eagle populations and may even reverse possible negative population trends caused by unauthorized human-caused take; (4) will have little impact to eagle habitat, with possibly more beneficial effects from the
Recommended publications
  • Contemporary Archaeologies of the Southwest P R O C E E D I N G S of the Southwe S T S Y M P O S I U M

    Contemporary Archaeologies of the Southwest P R O C E E D I N G S of the Southwe S T S Y M P O S I U M

    Contemporary Archaeologies of the Southwest PRO C EEDING S OF THE SOUTHWE S T S Y M P O S IUM The Archaeology of Regional Interaction: Religion, Warfare, and Exchange across the American Southwest and Beyond EDITED BY MICHELLE HEGMON Contemporary Archaeologies of the Southwest EDITED BY WILLIAM H. WALKER AND KATHRYN R. VENZOR Identity, Feasting, and the Archaeology of the Greater Southwest EDITED BY BARBARA J. MILLS Movement, Connectivity, and Landscape Change in the Ancient Southwest EDITED BY MARGARET C. NELSON AND COLLEEN A. STRAWHACKER Traditions, Transitions, and Technologies: Themes in Southwestern Archaeology EDITED BY SARAH H. SCHLANGER CONTEMPORARY OF ARCHAEOLOGIES THE Edited by William H. Walker and Kathryn R. Venzor U NIVER S I T Y P R E ss O F C O L O R A DO © 2011 by the University Press of Colorado Published by the University Press of Colorado 5589 Arapahoe Avenue, Suite 206C Boulder, Colorado 80303 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America The University Press of Colorado is a proud member of the Association of American University Presses. The University Press of Colorado is a cooperative publishing enterprise supported, in part, by Ad- ams State College, Colorado State University, Fort Lewis College, Mesa State College, Metropolitan State College of Denver, Regis University, University of Colorado, University of Northern Colorado, and Western State College of Colorado. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials. ANSI Z39.48-1992 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Southwest Symposium (1988–) (10th : 2006 : Las Cruces, N.M.) Contemporary archaeologies of the Southwest / edited by William H.
  • Roger T1." Grange, Jr. a Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The

    Roger T1." Grange, Jr. a Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The

    Ceramic relationships in the Central Plains Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Grange, Roger Tibbets, 1927- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 09/10/2021 18:53:20 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/565603 CERAMIC RELATIONSHIPS' IN THE CENTRAL PLAINS ^ > 0 ^ . Roger T1." Grange, Jr. A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 6 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE I hereby recommend that this dissertation prepared under my direction by Roger T, Grange, Jr»________________________ entitled ______Ceramic Relationships in the Central_____ _____Plains_______________________________________ be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement of the degree of _____Doctor of Philosophy________________________ April 26. 1962 Dissertation Director Date After inspection of the dissertation, the following members of the Final Examination Committee concur in its approval and recommend its acceptance:* 5 / ? / ^ t 5 /? / C 2-— A / , - r y /n / *This approval and acceptance is contingent on the candidate's adequate performance and defense of this dissertation at the final oral examination. The inclusion of this sheet bound into the library copy of the dissertation is evidence of satisfactory performance at the final examination. STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in The University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
  • 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 ..........................................
  • Sahnish (Arikara) Ethnobotany

    Sahnish (Arikara) Ethnobotany

    Kindscher, L. Yellow Bird, M. Yellow Bird & Sutton Yellow M. Bird, Yellow L. Kindscher, Sahnish (Arikara) Ethnobotany This book describes the traditional use of wild plants among the Arikara (Sahnish) for food, medicine, craft, and other uses. The Arikara grew corn, hunted and foraged, and traded with other tribes in the northern Great Plains. Their villages were located along the Sahnish (Arikara) Missouri River in northern South Dakota and North Dakota. Today, many of them live at Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota, as part of the MHA (Mandan, Hidatsa, Arikara) Ethnobotany Nation. We document the use of 106 species from 31 plant families, based primarily on the work of Melvin Gilmore, who recorded Arikara ethnobotany from 1916 to 1935. Gilmore interviewed elders for their stories and accounts of traditional plant use, collected material goods, and wrote a draft manuscript, but was not able to complete it due to debilitating illness. Fortunately, his field notes, manuscripts, and papers were archived and form the core of the present volume. Gilmore’s detailed description is augmented here with historical accounts of the Arikara gleaned from the journals of Great Plains explorers—Lewis and Clark, John Bradbury, Pierre Tabeau, and others. Additional plant uses and nomenclature is based on the field notes of linguist Douglas R. Parks, who carried out detailed documentation of the Sahnish (Arikara) Ethnobotany tribe’s language from 1970–2001. Although based on these historical sources, the present volume features updated modern botanical nomenclature, contemporary spelling and interpretation of Arikara plant names, and color photographs and range maps of each species.
  • Subsurface Flow to Eagle Valley from Vicee, Ash, and Kings Canyons, Carson City, Nevada, Estimated from Darcy's Law and the Chloride-Balance Method

    Subsurface Flow to Eagle Valley from Vicee, Ash, and Kings Canyons, Carson City, Nevada, Estimated from Darcy's Law and the Chloride-Balance Method

    Subsurface Flow to Eagle Valley from Vicee, Ash, and Kings Canyons, Carson City, Nevada, Estimated from Darcy's Law and the Chloride-Balance Method By DOUGLAS K. MAURER, DAVID L BERGER, and DAVID E. PRUDIC U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4088 Prepared in cooperation with the CARSON CITY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Carson City, Nevada 1996 OCT 30 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GORDON P. EATON, Director Any use of trade names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 333 West Nye Lane, Room 203 Box 25286 Carson City, NV 89706-0866 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................^ 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and Scope .................................................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Description of Eagle Valley
  • Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 45/Thursday, March 6, 2008/Notices

    Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 45/Thursday, March 6, 2008/Notices

    12212 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 45 / Thursday, March 6, 2008 / Notices known individual was identified. No Nebraska State Historical Society and Box 1286, Hastings, NE 68902, associated funerary objects are present. museum records are consistent with telephone (402) 461–2399, before April Research conducted at the Nebraska information on the site known as the 7, 2008. Repatriation of the human State Historical Society identifies at Hanna Larson Site. The site was remains and associated funerary objects least 15 sites in the area around Palmer. occupied form A.D. 1650 to A.D. 1750 to the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma may One site is known as the Palmer Village and is culturally identified with the proceed after that date if no additional (25HW1), which is a well known site Lower Loup Focus of the Pahuk Aspect claimants come forward. that was occupied by the Skidi band of of the late Ceramic Period. The Hastings Museum is responsible the Pawnee from at least A.D. 1804 to The Lower Loup Phase sites are for notifying the Crow Tribe of Montana; A.D. 1836, and was observed and located in areas also associated with Omaha Tribe of Nebraska; Otoe– recorded by a number of explorers to the historic Pawnee sites. The Lower Loup Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma; area. Museum officials have been able to material culture suggests that they are Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; Ponca document Mr. Brooking and Mr. Hill as ancestors of the Pawnee. Descendants of Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Ponca having conducted excavations at the the Pawnee are members of the Pawnee Tribe of Nebraska; Sac & Fox Nation of Palmer Village.
  • Brief History of Carson City, Heart of Nevada

    Brief History of Carson City, Heart of Nevada

    Brief History of Carson City, Heart of Nevada For nearly 4,000 years before the coming of white settlers, the Washoe Indians occupied the land along the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range that borders Nevada and California. In 1851 a group of prospectors decided to look for gold in the area that is now Carson City. Unsuccessful in that attempt, they opened up a trading post called Eagle Station on the Overland Stagecoach route. It was used by wagon trains of people moving westward. The surrounding area came to be called Eagle Ranch, and the surrounding meadows as Eagle Valley. In time, a number of scattered settlements grew up in the area and the Eagle Ranch became its social center. As a growing number of white settlers came to the area and began to develop the valleys and mountains of the Sierra Nevada, the Washoe people who for so long had occupied the area were overwhelmed. Although lands were allotted to individual Indians by the federal government starting in the 1880s, they did not offer sufficient water. As a result, the Washoe tended to set up camp at the edges of white settlements and ranches in order to work for food. It would not be until the twentieth century that parcels of reservation land were established for them. Many of the earliest settlers in the Carson City area were Mormons led to Eagle Valley by Colonel John Reese. When the Mormons were summoned to Salt Lake City, Utah, by their leader, Brigham Young, many sold their land for a small amount to area resident John Mankin, who later laid claim to the entire Eagle Valley.
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form

    National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form

    NPS Form 10-900-b OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is used for documenting property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin How to Complete the Multiple Property Documentation Form (formerly 16B). Complete each item by entering the requested information. ___X___ New Submission ________ Amended Submission A. Name of Multiple Property Listing Lincoln Highway – Pioneer Branch, Carson City to Stateline, Nevada B. Associated Historic Contexts (Name each associated historic context, identifying theme, geographical area, and chronological period for each.) Early Trails and Overland Routes, 1840’s-1863 Early Road Development in Nevada, 1865-1920’s Establishment of the Lincoln Highway and the Pioneer Branch, 1910-1913 Evolution of the Lincoln Highway and the Pioneer Branch, 1914-1957 C. Form Prepared by: name/title Chad Moffett, Dianna Litvak, Liz Boyer, Timothy Smith organization Mead & Hunt, Inc. street & number 180 Promenade Circle, Suite 240 city or town Sacramento state CA zip code 95834 e-mail [email protected] telephone 916-971-3961 date January 2018 D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR 60 and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation.
  • Baltimore Eagle Denied License by Liquor Board

    Baltimore Eagle Denied License by Liquor Board

    AN INDEPENDENT VOICE FOR THE LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENDER COMMUNITIES OUT April 17, 2015 | Volume XII, Issue 25 Baltimore Eagle Denied License By Liquor Board BY STEVE CHARING uncertain as to the bars fate. Charles Par- We took bed sheets off the One obstacle after another has confounded rish and Ian Parrish purchased the property wall covering structural prob- the new ownership group of the Baltimore for $300,000 and vowed to re-open it again lems... there were goods and Eagle, a mainstay of Baltimores leather com- as the Baltimore Eagle after renovations are memorabilia collected over 30 munity since 1991. At completed. But when Ian Parrish came years. It was 10,000 square feet a hearing at City Hall in to further examine the premises fol- of hoarder space, said Parrish. on April 9, the three- ‘We will appeal, lowing the sale, the magnitude of the Parrish and supporters member Baltimore we will fight, and work needed to complete the project of the project saw the early City Liquor Board was, as he put it, the worst possible signs of trouble at a conten- unanimously denied God willing, we will case. tions meeting with the board the group the re- Parrish indicated that a dumpster on March 12. Attorney Mel- quested liquor-license open our doors a day for a month was needed to re- vin Kodensky, representing transfer, claiming that again.’ – Ian Parrish move the trash. Two large box trucks the Parrish group, pointed the work on renova- of furniture and personal items were out that extensions beyond tions was not com- donated to Habitat for Humanity, and the 180-day requirement had pleted within the requisite 180 days, deeming even more truckloads of items were sent for been granted in the past.
  • Residents Lose Power During Intense Tuesday Storm

    Residents Lose Power During Intense Tuesday Storm

    VolumeVol.Volume 66, No. 65,65, 80 No.No. 207207 MONDAY,MONDAY,THURSDAY, FEBRUARYFEBRUARY AUGUST 6,10,10, 2020 20202020 50¢ A tree fell across wires in Queens Village, knocking out power and upending a chunk of sidewalk. VolumeQUEENSQUEENS 65, No. 207 LIGHTSMONDAY, OUT FEBRUARY 10, 2020 Photo by Teresa Mettela 50¢ 57,000 QueensQueensQueens residents lose power Vol.VolumeVolume 66, No. 65, 65, 80 No. No. 207 207 MONDAY,MONDAY, FEBRUARY FEBRUARY 10, 10, 2020 2020 50¢50¢ VolumeVolumeVol.VolumeVol. 66,66,67, 65, No. No.65,65, No. 80 8029No.No. 207 207207 MONDAY,THURSDAY,MONDAY,MONDAY,THURSDAY,TUESDAY, FEBRUARY FEBRUARYFEBRUARYFEBRUARY AUGUST AUGUSTAUGUST MAY 25, 6,10, 6,10,20216,10, 10,2020 20202020 20202020 50¢50¢50¢ Volume 65, No. 207 MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2020 50¢ VolumeVol.TODAY 66, No.65, 80No. 207 MONDAY,THURSDAY, FEBRUARY AUGUST 6,10, 2020 2020 A tree fell across wires in50¢ TODAY AA tree tree fell fell across across wires wires in in TODAY QueensQueensQueens Village, Village, Village, knocking knocking knocking Public defenders call on Newoutoutout power power power York and and and upending upending upending A treeaa chunka chunkfell chunk across of of ofsidewalk. sidewalk. sidewalk.wires in VolumeVolumeVolumeQUEENSQUEENSQUEENSQUEENS 65, 65,65, No. No.No. 207 207207 LIGHTSLIGHTSduring intenseMONDAY,MONDAY, OUTOUTOUT FEBRUARY FEBRUARYFEBRUARY 10, 10,10, 2020 20202020 QueensPhotoPhoto PhotoVillage, by by byTeresa Teresa Teresa knocking Mettela Mettela Mettela 50¢50¢50¢ QUEENS out power and upending 57,000to57,000 cancel Queens QueensQueensQueensQueensQueens
  • Eagle Valley Hydrographic Basin 8-104

    Eagle Valley Hydrographic Basin 8-104

    STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES JASON KING, P.E. STATE ENGINEER EAGLE VALLEY HYDROGRAPHIC BASIN 8-104 GROUNDWATER PUMPAGE INVENTORY WATER YEAR 2016 Prepared by: Michael Randall TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 1 HYDROGRAPHIC BASIN SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................ 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ..................................................................................... 3 GROUNDWATER LEVELS ......................................................................................................... 3 METHODS TO ESTIMATE PUMPAGE ...................................................................................... 4 MUNICIPAL SUPPLY IN ADDITION TO EAGLE VALLEY GROUNDWATER ................... 5 TABLES ......................................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................ 8 APPENDIX A. EAGLE VALLEY 2016 GROUNDWATER PUMPAGE BY APPLICATION NUMBER. .......................................................................................................................
  • HIGHLIGHTS of THIS ISSUE Tablecontents of Appears Inside

    HIGHLIGHTS of THIS ISSUE Tablecontents of Appears Inside

    TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1973 WASHINGTON, D.C. Volume 38 ■ Number 190 Pages 27273—27343! HIGHLIGHTS OF THIS ISSUE This listing does not affect the legal status of any document published in this issue. Detailed table of contents appears inside. COUNTRY MUSIC MONTH, OCTOBER 1973— Presidential Proclamation .................. ..................... -.............................. 27279 PHASE IV— CLC adopts regulations regarding incidental manu­ facturing and service activities conducted by retailers October October 2, 1973— Pages 27273-27343 and wholesalers; effective 9—17—73.................................. 27289 CLC revises methods for computing base costs and current costs for food manufacturing activities; effec­ tive 9-9-73 ......................................... -................. - .............. 27289 CLC adjust ceiling prices charged by retailers of gaso­ line, diesel fuel and heating oil; effective 9—28 and 9-307-73 ................................................... -............................. 27290 AIRPORT CERTIFICATION— FAA extends time for filing of certain reports by holders of airport operating cer­ tificates; effective 1 0 -4 -7 3 ........................................................ 27292 SEAT BELT RETRACTORS— DOT proposes decreasing retraction force required for emergency-locking type seat belts; comments by 11—2 -7 3 ................................ ----- 27303 HISTORIC PLACES— NPS amends list of properties. - 27307 RAILROAD SAFETY— FRA proposes safety appliance standards for locomotives engaged in switching service;