DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND FLOODING This section summarizes existing hydrologic conditions in the study area, presents the regulatory guidance for hydrologic resources, and evaluates potential adverse environmental effects of project implementation on hydrology. The examination of hydrology is based primarily on (1) previous hydrologic and hydraulic analyses prepared for the project, including Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project: Processes and Functions of the Upper Truckee Marsh (Conservancy and DGS 2003) and Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project Alternatives Evaluation Report (Conservancy and DGS 2005); and (2) the preliminary engineering schematic conceptual design prepared for the alternatives. Additional important information is referenced from other relevant published and unpublished academic studies and reports and other documents issued by federal, state, and local agencies. For a discussion of geomorphology and water quality issues, please refer to Section 3.9, “Geomorphology and Water Quality.” Cumulative hydrology and flooding impacts are addressed in Section 3.18, “Cumulative Impacts.” Consistency with TRPA goals and policies is presented in Section 3.10, “Land Use.” 3.8.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT REGULATORY SETTING Federal The following federal laws and regulations related to hydrology and flooding are relevant to the proposed alternatives and described in detail in Chapter 5, “Compliance, Consultation, and Coordination”: ► Clean Water Act ► Floodplain regulations ► Truckee River Operating Agreement ► Executive Order 11988 State The following state law related to hydrology and flooding is relevant to the proposed alternatives and described in detail in Chapter 5, “Compliance, Consultation, and Coordination”: ► Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act TRPA 1987 Regional Plan Goals and Policies The Goals and Policies document of the 1987 Regional Plan presents the overall approach to meeting the environmental thresholds. A key component is the Land Use Element, which identifies fundamental philosophies directing land use and development in the Tahoe Basin. It addresses topics such as suitable development locations and maintenance of the region’s environmental, social, physical, and economic well-being. Code of Ordinances Proposed project construction activities are regulated by Section 60.4, “Best Management Practice Requirements,” of the TRPA Code of Ordinances (TRPA Code), specifically in relation to best management UTR and Marsh Restoration Project DEIR/DEIS/DEIS AECOM and Cardno ENTRIX California Tahoe Conservancy/DGS, Reclamation, and TRPA 3.8-1 Hydrology and Flooding practices (BMPs), especially temporary, permanent, and standard BMPs. In accordance with the Handbook of Best Management Practices, and as required in Section 33.5, “Grading and Construction Schedules,” of the TRPA Code, temporary BMPs shall be implemented on construction sites and maintained throughout the construction period (TRPA 2003:25-1). Permanent BMPs must be applied within the parcel or all project area boundaries, unless the project is exempt. TRPA states that a project that involves Stream Environment Zone (SEZ) restoration may be exempt from the aforementioned requirements. SEZ is defined by TRPA as the major and minor streams, intermittent streams, drainage ways, meadows and marshes, primary and secondary riparian vegetation, and other water influence zones areas within the Lake Tahoe Region that provide natural treatment and conveyance of surface runoff (TRPA 2004:28). Standard BMP requirements that are applicable to the project deal mainly with drainage conveyance. Drainage conveyances through a parcel shall be designed for at least a 10-year, 24-hour storm. Drainage conveyances through an SEZ shall be designed for a 50-year storm, at a minimum. Chapter 35, “Natural Hazard Standards,” of the TRPA Code also addresses floodplain management. TRPA defines a floodplain as that portion of a river valley, adjacent to the channel, that is built of sediments deposited during the present geological/climatic regime. Hydrologic statistics are used to estimate the magnitude of peak streamflow expected on a 100-year recurrence interval, and the area that could be inundated from that event is defined as the 100-year floodplain. TRPA reviews all additional development in 100-year floodplains and regulates any necessary public uses located in the floodplains. The 100-year floodplain is determined by the limits delineated by the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). TRPA prohibits development, grading, and filling of lands within the 100-year floodplain, with certain exceptions, including specific public outdoor recreation facilities and water quality control facilities. TRPA may permit erosion control, habitat restoration, wetland rehabilitation, SEZ restoration, and similar projects within a 100-year floodplain. To receive a permit from TRPA, the proponent of a restoration project within the floodplain must show that the project is necessary for environmental protection, must demonstrate that there is no reasonable alternative to reduce the extent of encroachment, and must fully mitigate all impacts (TRPA 1980:28-3). TRPA’s development restrictions and exemption findings for 100-year floodplains do not apply to the shorezone of Lake Tahoe, except where the study area is determined to be within the 100-year floodplain of a tributary stream, which is where this study area lies. Therefore, the restrictions and exemptions for shorezone protection in Chapter 81, “Permissible Uses and Accessory Structures in the Shorezone and Lakezone,” of the TRPA Code apply in addition to those for floodplain protection mentioned above. (See Section 3.9, “Geomorphology and Water Quality,” for further discussion.) Plan Area Statements TRPA’s plan area statements (PASs) outline land use classifications, special policies, planning considerations, permissible uses, and maximum allowances for the Tahoe Basin. The PASs in which the study area is located are PAS 099 (Al Tahoe), PAS 100 (Truckee Marsh), PAS 102 (Tahoe Keys), PAS 103 (Sierra Tract Commercial), PAS 104 (Highland Woods), and PAS 111 (Tahoe Island). The criteria and permissible uses for each PAS covering the study area are described in Section 3.10, “Land Use,” of this DEIR/DEIS/DEIS. Considerations include commercial and residential uses that infringe on the SEZ and restrictive highway crossings over the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek that alter the natural functioning capacity of the SEZ. The relevant special policies outlined in this PAS are: (1) Stream zones should be restored where U.S. Highway 50 (U.S. 50) crosses the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek. (2) SEZs should be restored in the vicinity of the crossings of Trout Creek at U.S. 50 and at Black Bart Road. (3) New roadway alignments through SEZs are to be discouraged. AECOM and Cardno ENTRIX UTR and Marsh Restoration Project DEIR/DEIS/DEIS Hydrology and Flooding 3.8-2 California Tahoe Conservancy/DGS, Reclamation, and TRPA El Dorado County Land under the jurisdiction of El Dorado County is located upstream of the portion of the Upper Truckee River located within the study area, so the El Dorado County Code’s provisions on grading (Chapter 15.14) do not directly apply to the project. However, the project’s compliance with TRPA and City of South Lake Tahoe (CSLT) grading requirements and water quality and flooding obligations required by the Clean Water Act will also provide consistency with El Dorado County requirements. City of South Lake Tahoe The study area is located entirely within CSLT’s jurisdictional limits. Chapter 8, “Building Regulations,” of the CSLT Ordinance requires that projects prepare a grading plan for review and grading-permit approval by the CSLT building official. The grading plan must include the present contours of the land and the proposed final grade and location of improvements. The purpose of the review is for CSLT to safeguard adjoining properties and public streets and ways from damage by unnatural flows of surface waters, and to prevent construction of homes and other buildings in areas likely to become flooded. CSLT is the floodplain administrator for FEMA in the project area, responsible for implementing the federal policies and regulations for floodplain management. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Hydrology The study area’s hydrology is the result of numerous physical environmental parameters. Among the important parameters are watershed characteristics and climatic conditions affecting the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek, streamflow magnitudes and regimes, runoff from adjoining urban drainage areas, direct precipitation in the study area, Lake Tahoe surface-water elevations, and groundwater elevations and gradients. Surface Water Watersheds The study area is situated at the downstream end of the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek watersheds (Exhibit 3.8-1), the two largest watersheds that drain to Lake Tahoe. The watershed areas of the river and creek are 56.5 and 41.2 square miles, respectively; these areas comprise 18 percent and 13 percent of the total area tributary to Lake Tahoe (Rowe and Allander 2000:7–8). The general characteristics of these two watershed areas provide a background for understanding specific hydrologic events and patterns observed in the study area. The watersheds of the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek share several important characteristics related to surface-water and groundwater hydrology. The geology of both basins
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Native Trout Waters of California Details Six of the State’S Most Scenic, Diverse, and Significant Native Trout Fisheries
    NATIVE TROUT WATERS OF CALIFORNIA Michael Carl The Ecological Angler www.ecoangler.com TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUTION – THE ORIGINAL SIX 4 ABOUT THE BOOK 4 CLAVEY RIVER 5 BACKGROUND 6 TROUT POPULATION DATA 6 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 7 DIRECTIONS TO REACH SEGMENT 3 AND 4 (E.G., BRIDGE CROSSING CLAVEY RIVER): 7 AREA MAP 8 CLAVEY RIVER FLOW STATISTICS 9 FISHING TECHNIQUES 9 EAGLE LAKE 10 BACKGROUND 11 BIG TROUT FOOD – TUI CHUBS 11 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 11 DIRECTIONS TO EAGLE LAKE FROM RED BLUFF, CALIFORNIA: 11 AREA MAP 12 PRODUCTIVE TIMES AND ZONES TO FISH 13 FISHING TECHNIQUES 13 SPALDING TRACT – TOPO MAP 14 PIKES POINT – TOPO MAP 15 GOLDEN TROUT CREEK 16 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 17 ABUNDANCE OF CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT 17 CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT GENETIC DATA 17 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 18 DIRECTIONS TO COTTONWOOD PASS TRAILHEAD 18 AREA MAP 19 PHOTO JOURNAL – COTTONWOOD PASS TO TUNNEL MEADOW 20 FISHING TECHNIQUES 23 HEENAN LAKE 24 BACKGROUND 25 FLY ANGLER STATISTICS – 2007 SEASON (8/3/07 TO 10/28/07) 26 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 27 AREA MAP 27 DIRECTIONS 27 PRODUCTIVE ZONES TO FISH 28 FISHING TECHNIQUES 28 UPPER KERN RIVER 29 BACKGROUND 30 KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 DISTRIBUTION OF KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 31 MAP – LLOYD MEADOW ROAD TO FORKS OF THE KERN 32 SPOTLIGHT – FORKS OF THE KERN 33 DIRECTIONS AND TRAIL DESCRIPTION 33 RECOMMENDED FISHING GEAR 33 UPPER TRUCKEE RIVER 35 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 36 ABUNDANCE AND SIZE OF LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT 37 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, ACCESS & DISTANCE 37 DIRECTIONS TO REACH TRAILHEAD: 38 AREA MAP 39 TRAIL DESCRIPTION 40 FISHING TECHNIQUES 40 Introduction – The Original Six The Native Trout Waters of California details six of the state’s most scenic, diverse, and significant native trout fisheries.
    [Show full text]
  • 31. Grass Lake (Beguin and Major 1975, Burke 1987, Berg 1991A
    31. Grass Lake (Beguin and Major 1975, Burke 1987, Berg 1991a) Location This established RNA is in the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit in the Eldorado National Forest. It lies immediately W. of Luther Pass on State Highway 89 and is approximately 12 miles (19 km) SSE. of South Lake Tahoe. It lies within sects. 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, and 24 T11N, R18E MDBM (38°47'N., 119°59'W.), USGS Freel Peak quad (fig. 64). Ecological subsection – Glaciated Batholith and Volcanic Flows (M261Ek). Target Element Moss Bog Distinctive Features Significance of the Bog: Peatlands and bogs are rare in California. Grass Lake is Figure 64—Grass the largest Sphagnum bog in California and is considered the best representative Lake RNA floating bog in the Sierra Nevada (fig. 65). Grass Lake has been the focus of several scientific surveys including palynological and phytosociological research. Dashed line = Ecological study area; Solid gray line Varied and Pristine Environment: This is a large site with a complex association = RNA Boundary of habitats ranging from aquatic and meadow types through upland forest types. This diversity, along with a largely intact watershed surrounding the marshlands and meadows, contributes to the value of this site. This site supports a number of boreal plant species unusual in the Sierra Nevada. In addition, several species of plants occur locally at substantially lower elevations than typical elsewhere in the Sierra Nevada. Along with a few uncommon or disjunct plants, the wetlands support three species of carnivorous plants and four species of orchids. The plant associations are relatively pristine with virtually no introduced plants in the bog and meadow associations.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan
    Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan El Dorado and Placer Counties, California and Douglas and Washoe Counties, and Carson City, Nevada September 2007 Prepared by: Lake Tahoe Response Plan Area Committee (LTRPAC) Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan September 2007 If this is an Emergency… …Involving a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other contaminants impacting public health and/or the environment Most important – Protect yourself and others! Then: 1) Turn to the Immediate Action Guide (Yellow Tab) for initial steps taken in a hazardous material, petroleum product, or other contaminant emergency. First On-Scene (Fire, Law, EMS, Public, etc.) will notify local Dispatch (via 911 or radio) A complete list of Dispatch Centers can be found beginning on page R-2 of this plan Dispatch will make the following Mandatory Notifications California State Warning Center (OES) (800) 852-7550 or (916) 845-8911 Nevada Division of Emergency Management (775) 687-0300 or (775) 687-0400 National Response Center (800) 424-8802 Dispatch will also consider notifying the following Affected or Adjacent Agencies: County Environmental Health Local OES - County Emergency Management Truckee River Water Master (775) 742-9289 Local Drinking Water Agencies 2) After the Mandatory Notifications are made, use Notification (Red Tab) to implement the notification procedures described in the Immediate Action Guide. 3) Use the Lake Tahoe Basin Maps (Green Tab) to pinpoint the location and surrounding geography of the incident site. 4) Use the Lake and River Response Strategies (Blue Tab) to develop a mitigation plan. 5) Review the Supporting Documentation (White Tabs) for additional information needed during the response.
    [Show full text]
  • Eight Eastside Rivers Wild and Scenic River Study Report, Record Of
    USDA Record of Decision ~ United States Eight Eastside Rivers Department of Agriculture Wild and Scenic River Study Report Forest Service PacifIC Southwest And Final Environmental Impact Statement Region ~t;k:nal Fores and Tahoe National Forest and lake Tahoe Basin L k To h B - M t U -t Management Unit a e.8 oe aSln anagemen nl m February 1999 CONTENTS Page I. Decision I II. Alternatives Considered 3 III. Public Participation 4 IV. Rationale for the Decision 6 Rationale for Selecting Two Rivers 7 Rationale for Not Selecting Rivers 10 V. EnvironmentaHy Preferable Alternative 12 VI. Compatibility with Goals and Plans ofOther Agencies and Organizations 13 VII. Implementation 13 VIII. Findings Required By Law 14 IX. Administrative Review 15 X. Contact Persons 16 XI. Signature Page 17 Exhibit A Response to comments on the Final EIS Friends ofthe River and associated groups comments A-I Loree Joses comments A-6 Chris Gansberg, Jr. Chair, Alpine County Board ofSupervisors comments A-7 Derrick Adamache comments A-8 John R. Swanson comments A-9 Kenneth W. Holt, MSEH, National Center for Environmental Health comments A-9 Record of Decision Eight Eastside Rivers Wild and Scenic River Study Report and Final Environmental Impact Statement USDA FOREST SERVICE TAHOE NATIONAL FOREST and LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Sierra, Nevada, Placer, EI Dorado, and Alpine Counties, California I. DECISION It is our decision to adopt the Preferred Alternative, Alternative E, as presented in the Eight Eastside Rivers Wild and Scenic River Study Report and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The heart of this decision is our recommendation that Sagehen Creek and the Upper Truckee River be designated Wild and Scenic Rivers pursuant to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.s.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology and Management of Threatened and Endangered Western Trouts
    Biology and Management of Threatened and Endangered Western Trouts August 1976 USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-28 Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Abstract Behnke, R. J., and Mark Zarn. 1976. Biology and management of threatened and endangered western trouts. USDA For. Sew. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-28, 45 p. Rocky Mt. For. and Range Exp. Stn., Fort Collins, Colo. Discusses taxonomy, reasons for decline, life history and ecology, and sug- gestions for preservation and management of six closely related trouts native to western North America: Colorado River cutthroat, Salmo clarki pleuriticus; green- back trout, S. c. stomias; Lahontan cutthroat, S. c. henshawi; Paiute trout, S. c. seleniris; Gila trout, S. gilae; and Arizona native trout, S. apache. Meristic characters, distribution and status, habitat requirements and limiting factors, protective measures, and management recommendations are presented for each taxon. Keywords: Native trout, Salrno clarki pleuriticus. Sali?zo ckurki stoi~zius. Sulnzo clarki herzshawi, Salmo clarki seleniris, Salrno gilue. Sulrno uprrchc. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-28 August 1976 Biology and Management of Threatened and Endangered Western Trouts R. J. Behnke Colorado State University Mark Zarn Conservation Library Denver Public Library Information reported here was prepared under contract by the Conservation Library of the Denver Public Library, through the Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. The report is printed as prepared by the authors; opinions are not necessarily those of the U.S. Forest Service. TABLE OF CONTENTS I . GJ3NERAL MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES FOR RAE3 AND ENDANGJIRED WESTERN TROUTS Introduction ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • REGULAR BOARD MEETING AGENDA Thursday, September 5, 2019 - 2:00 P.M
    SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT REGULAR BOARD MEETING AGENDA Thursday, September 5, 2019 - 2:00 p.m. District Board Room 1275 Meadow Crest Drive, South Lake Tahoe, California Randy Vogelgesang, President BOARD MEMBERS Kelly Sheehan, Vice President Chris Cefalu, Director James R. Jones, Director Nick Exline, Director John Thiel, General Manager Shannon Cotulla, Assistant General Manager 1. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR MEETING – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (At this time, please silence phones and other electronic devices so as not to disrupt the business of the meeting.) 2. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the Board on any short non-agenda items that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the District. No discussion or action can be taken on matters not listed on the agenda, per the Brown Act. Each member of the public who wishes to comment shall be allotted five minutes, and no more than three individuals shall address the same subject.) 3. CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA OR CONSENT CALENDAR (For purposes of the Brown Act, all Action and Consent items listed give a brief description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed. Recommendations of the staff, as shown, do not prevent the Board from taking other action.) 4. ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR (Any item can be removed to be discussed and considered separately upon request. Comments and questions from members of the public, staff or Board can be taken when the comment does not necessitate separate action.) 5. CONSENT ITEMS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION/ACTION 6.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project
    DRAFT Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Statement Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Volume III Appendices SCH# 2006082150 Lead Agencies: California State Parks Lake Tahoe Bureau of Reclamation Environmental Improvement Program August 2010 DRAFT Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Statement Upper Truckee River Restoration and Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Volume III Appendices SCH# 2006082150 Lead Agencies: California State Parks Lake Tahoe Environmental Bureau of Reclamation Improvement Program P.O. Box 16 P.O. Box 5310 2800 Cottage Way, Room E-2606 Tahoe City, CA 96145 Stateline, NV 89449 Sacramento, CA 95825 Attn: Cyndie Walck Attn: Mike Elam Attn: Myrnie Mayville CEQA Coordinator TRPA Project Manager NEPA Coordinator (530) 581-0925 (775) 588-4547 (916) 978-5037 P 05110049.01 August 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Volume III Appendices A Public Scoping Report B Proposed River and Floodplain Treatments by Alternative C Conceptual Treatment Descriptions and Typical Sketches D Upper Truckee LVSRA WMSP Bridge Report E Lake Tahoe Golf Course Economic Feasibility Analysis F Water Quality Data Tables G Aquatic Resources Technical Memorandum H Native American Contacts I Air Quality Modeling Data J Noise Modeling Data Upper Truckee River Restoration and State Parks/Reclamation/TRPA Golf Course Reconfiguration Draft EIR/EIS/EIS i Table of Contents This page intentionally left blank. State Parks/Reclamation/TRPA
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Projects and Environmental Improvement Projects (Eips) in the Upper Truckee Meadows Community Watershed
    Conservation Projects and Environmental Improvement Projects (EIPs) in the Upper Truckee Meadows Community Watershed: General Background The Upper Truckee River Community Watershed (UTRCW) is located in the southern side of the Lake Tahoe Basin primarily in eastern El Dorado County and partially in northern Alpine County. The UTRCW contains the subwatersheds of Camp Richardson (2,652 acres) as well as the Upper Truckee River (36,224 acres), of which is the largest watershed in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The total drainage area of the UTRCW is 69.7 square miles, and the main drainages are The Upper Truckee River, Angora Creek, Sawmill Pond Creek, Big Meadow Creek, and Grass Lake Creek. The northern portion of the watershed consists of the urban areas of South Lake Tahoe and Meyers, whereas the southern portion is primarily US Forest Service land managed by the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. The main channel of the Upper Truckee River is 21.4 miles long and originates in the volcanic bluffs surrounding Meiss Meadow near Carson Pass. The river then flows northward through a series of meadows and lakes until it reaches an 800-foot glacial step over, where it enters the head of Christmas Valley. The river flows through Christmas Valley until is it met by Angora Creek, downstream of the present-day Lake Tahoe Golf Course (LTGC). After converging with another unnamed tributary near the tenth hole of the LTGC, the UTR continues to flow northward through Sunset Ranch, the Lake Tahoe Airport, and to the eastern side of the Tahoe Keys through Cove East where it drains to Lake Tahoe.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Water Quality
    Indicator Name of Adopted TRPA Threshold Applicable State and Unit of Standard Type TRPA Indicator Category Standard Standard (Resolution 82-11) Federal Standards Measure Concentration: Reduce dissolved inorganic Annual Mean Total Nitrogen milligrams/liter Nitrogen nitrogen (N) loading from all Concentration < 0.15 - 0.23 Numerical Total annual load (mg/L) Load: loading sources by 25% of 1973-81 mg/L depending on the kilograms/year annual average water body. (kg/yr) Achieve the following long-term Phytoplankton water quality standard: Annual grams primary Numerical None grams/m2/yr. mean phytoplankton primary Carbon/m2/yr. productivity productivity: 52gmC/m2/yr. Transparency - Annual Pelagic Lake mean Secchi disk Achieve the following long-term Tahoe transparency: 29.7m (CA Secchi disk water quality standard: Winter Numerical State standard) Clarity- Secchi disc depth Meters (m) transparency (December - March) mean Secchi Vertical Extinction disk transparency: 33.4m. Coefficient (NV State Standard) This threshold [numeric standard] is currently being Recognition of exceeded and will likely continue Threshold Policy to be exceeded until sometime N/A N/A N/A Standard after full implementation of the exceedance loading reductions prescribed by the thresholds. Indicator Name of Adopted TRPA Threshold Applicable State and Unit of Standard Type TRPA Indicator Category Standard Standard (Resolution 82-11) Federal Standards Measure Annual mean total Reduce the loading of dissolved phosphorus concentration < phosphorus, iron, and other algal 0.005-0.015 mg/L, Concentration: Pollutant nutrients from all sources as depending on the water Management Total annual load mg/L Load loading required to achieve ambient body. Annual mean iron kg/yr standards for primary concentration < 0.01-0.03 productivity and transparency.
    [Show full text]
  • Tahoe's Seven Summits
    Birds return to Lake Tahoe, page 4 Summer 2014 Drought offers TAHOE’S SEVEN SUMMITS good news, bad By Jeff Cowen news for Lake Tahoe In Depth By Jim Sloan The Lake may be this Region’s Tahoe In Depth most famous geographic feature, but it is Tahoe’s peaks that define our From the shoreline, a long-term landscapes and, at times, the course or severe drought seems to put of our lives. Daily, we glimpse them Lake Tahoe in dire straits. The water towering over our tedium, indelible recedes, streams dry up and the reminders of nature’s greatness and our shoreline beaches expand to expose own impermanence. Succumbing to a bathtub ring along the 72-mile their power, we climb them. shoreline. Some climbers are peak collectors, But from the water, things don’t “bagging” the major summits one by always look so bad. During a one. Others climb on a lark, impulsively drought, many of the pollutants joining friends and unprepared for the that affect Lake Tahoe’s clarity can’t Photo © Steve Dunleavy experience ahead. Regardless of our Pyramid Peak rises above the fog-choked Tahoe Basin. find their way to the Lake. Droughts paths, once we reach their summits, we slow down the rate of urban runoff, feel at once tiny and expansive, earth and rodents. Trees become shorter and neighborhoods. reducing erosion and the flow of fine and time stretching in all directions wider, until they disappear entirely. Our Climbers of even our most benign sediment and other water-clouding below us, the experience undeniably bodies change too.
    [Show full text]
  • South Tahoe Area Trail Map (From Kingsbury Grade to Highway 89) VAN SICKLE C Si Kl BI-STATE PARK N E Tahoe Rim Trail a Tra V Il to Kingsbury Grade & Stagecoach Lodge
    South Tahoe Area Trail Map (From Kingsbury Grade to Highway 89) VAN SICKLE c Si kl BI-STATE PARK n e Tahoe Rim Trail a Tra V il To Kingsbury Grade & Stagecoach Lodge HGHWAY 50 5.8 L a k e T a h o e elev. 6,225’ East Peak SKI RUN BLVD 9,590’ Heavenly CA Lodge Future 6,500’ Heavenly Mountain Resort Bike 8.5 Park l i a AL TAHOE BLVD r T e * T n i a l r Monument Peak h e 10,060’ o HGHWAY 89 HGHWAY 50 w e o Monument Pass P R i m 8,900’ 3.1 T r a i l 2.5 Co il ld Tra Cr e ek o ad High Meadow R dow 7,800’ a l e i High M a r PIONEER TRAIL1.6 T d e ra G d a o S r t il a a 1.8 r 3.83 R il C La ke Tr a HGHWAY 50 e d a r 1.9 T r Star Lake a C i elev. 9,100’ or l Sidewinder ra l Trail T Trimmer Peak ail r r T a m .9 9,910’ i i l R C ONEIDAS ST o e n h o n Ta e Freel Pass MAP LEGEND: F o c 9,700’ u t n o Multi-Use Trail t r NORTH a Trai in l1.7 P l 5.1 Freel Peak ace Dirt Road Road 10,880’ Fountain Place 7,800’ Narrow Paved Road Neighborhood Street Neighborhood Trails S to Meyers a 3.8 x o Primary Street n Arm stro C n g Trai Creek r l e e k 200’ Interval Contour ( M r .
    [Show full text]