DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register. / Vol. 48, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 21, 1983 / Rules and Regulations 42973

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register. / Vol. 48, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 21, 1983 / Rules and Regulations 42973 Federal Register. / Vol. 48, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 21, 1983 / Rules and Regulations 42973 Dated: September 15, 1983. persons to submit objections to the viticultural area as a delimited grape- Joseph P. Ifile, establishment of the regulations. growing region distinguishable by Associate Commissionerfor Regulatory EPA is issuing a second 30-day geographical features. Subpart C of Part Affairs. extension to provide time for persons 9 lists approved AmeriCan viticultural IFR Doc. 83-25656 Filed 9-20-83; 8:45 am] who may wish to file objections and areas. Under § 4.25a(e)(2), any BILLING CODE 4160-01-M afford the Agency additional time to interested person may petition ATF to respond and clarify other issues that establish a grape-growing region as an ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION may be raised before the final tolerance American viticultural area. The petition regulations are established. 4hould include: AGENCY Dated: September 2, 1983. (a) Evidence that the name of the James M. Conlon, proposed viticultural area is locally 21 CFR Parts 193 and 561 and/or nationally known as referring to Acting Director,Office of PesticidePrograms. IFAP 1H5321/R139B; PH-FRL 2438-2] the area specified in the petition; (FR Doc. 83-25699 Filed 9-20-83: 8:45 am) (b) Historic or current evidence that BILLING CODE 6560-50-M Tolerances for Pesticides in Food and the boundaries of the viticultural area Animal Feed; Dicamba; Extension of arq as specified in the petition; Time for Filing Objections (c) Evidence relating to the DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY geographical features (climate, soil, AGENCY: Environmental Protection elevation, physical features, etc.), which Bureau of Alcohol, Agency (EPA). Tobacco and distinguish the viticultural features of ACTION: Rule; extension of time for filing Firearms the proposed area from surrounding objections. areas; 27 CFR Part 9 (d) A description of the specific SUMMARY: This notice provides a second boundaries of the viticultural area, 30-day extension for interested persons [T.D. ATF-145; Reference Notice Numbers to submit objections to EPA's 360, 404] based on features which can be found establishment of regulations permitting on United States Geological Survey the combined residues of the herbicide North Coast Viticultural Area (U.S.G.S.) maps of the largest applicable dicamba and its metabolite in or on the scale; and AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, commodity sugarcane molasses. Tobacco (e) A copy of the appropriate U.S.G.S. and Firearms (ATF), Treasury. maps with the boundaries prominently DATE: Written objections should be ACTION: Final rule, Treasury decision. marked. submitted on or before October 21, 1983. Labeling of North Coast Wines. The ADDRESS: Written objections may be SUMMARY: This rule establishes a term North Coast has been used for submitted to the: Hearing Clerk (A-110), viticultural area located in Napa, several years on wine labels as an Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. Sonoma, Mendocino, Solano, Lake, and appellation of origin for wines derived 3708, 401 M St., SW., Washington, D.C. Marin Counties, California, named from grapes grown in the coastal 20460. "North Coast." This final rule is the mountain ranges north of San Francisco. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: .result of a petition submitted by the In 1974, in response to a request from By mail: Robert Taylor, Product California North Coast Grape Growers the California North Coast Grape Manager (PM) 25, Registration Association, and of written comments Growers Association, ATF took the Division (TS-767C), Environmental and oral testimony given regarding the position that North Coast or North Coast Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., proposed viticultural area. Counties, when used as an appellation Washington, D.C. 20460. The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and of origin on wine labels, meant that the Office location and telephone number: Firearms believes the establishment of grapes originated in Napa, Sonoma, and Rm. 245, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis North Coast as a viticultural area and its Mendocino Counties. T.D. ATF-53 set Highway, Arlington, VA 22202, (703- subsequent use as an appellation of out new rules for wine labeling using 557-1800). origin in wine labeling and advertising appellations of origin. As of January 1, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA will allow wineries to designate their 1983, the only appellations authorized issued a regulation published in the specific grape-growing area and will for domestic wines are the terms Federal Register of March 16, 1983 (48 help consumers identify the wines they "United States," state or multistate FR 11113) permitting the combined purchase. appellations, county appellations, residues of the herbicide dicamba (3,6- EFFECTIVE DATE: October 21, 1983. multicounty appellations, or viticultural dichloro-o-anisic acid) and its sugarcane FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: areas representing distinctive grape- metabolite 3,6-dichloro-5-hydroxy-o- Charles N. Bacon, FAA, Wine and Beer growing areas established under 27 CFR anisic acid in or on the food (21 CFR Branch, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and 4.25a(c). However, Industry Circular 82- 193.465) and feed (21 CFR 561.427) Firearms, Washington, DC 20226, 4, May 24, 1982, allowed the appellation commodity sugarcane molasses at 2.0 Telephone: 202-566-7626. "North Coast" to be used to indicate parts per million. EPA, in the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: wine made with grapes originating in Register of July 27, 1983 (48 FR 34024) Napa, Sonoma, and Mendocino issued a notice which provided Background Counties, until the final outcome of the additional information about the level of ATF regulations in 27 CFR Part 4 petition for a "North Coast" viticultural DMNA (dimethyl-N-nitrosoamine) allow the establishment of definite area. contamination as an impurity and the viticultural areas. These regulations also Petition for North Coast. In September methodology used in calculating the risk allow the name of an approved of 1979, the California North Coast in response to objections by the viticultural area to be used as an Grape Growers Association (CNCGGA) National Resources Defense Council, appellation of origin on wine labels and petitioned ATF to establish a North Inc. The July 27, 1983 notice also in wine advertisements. Section 9.11, Coast viticultural area comprising the provided a 30-day period for interested Title 27, CFR, defines an American entire counties of Napa, Sonoma, and 42974 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 21, 1983 / Rules and Regulations Mendocino. This petition was made individual consumers favoring Lake included these same districts. The Wine under 27 CFR 4.25a(e) to establish a County and additional petitions, bearing Institute also prepared production distinctive grape-growing or viticultural 401 signatures, which favored the statistics for the wine industry. These area. inclusion of one or both counties in the statistics published in the Wine Press Notice Number 360. ATF proposed a North Coast. magazine showed "Mendocino, Napa North Coast viticultural area composed Five individual responses, all filed by and Sonoma" as one of the five of these three counties in Notice No. 360 or on behalf of the California North reporting districts. IPinally, Heintz cited issued December 15, 1980, [45 FR 82275]. Coast Grape Growers Association the 1975 New York Times Book of Wine In that notice ATF stated we would favored restricting North Coast to Napa, as expressly restricting North Coast to consider comments concerning possible Sonoma, and Mendocino Counties. Napa Sonoma and Mendocino Counties. alternative boundaries, and comments Herbert M. Rowland, Jr. of Ignatio, The California North Coast Grape concerning viticultural and geographical California, submitted a comment Growers Association also pointed to characteristics distinguishing the proposing the inclusion of Marin County their own incorporation in 1964, as an viticultural area from surrounding areas. in the North Coast viticultural area; two association of grape growers located in Only 11 written comments were other respondents supported including the three-county area, and to their received in response to Notice No. 360; Marin County. registered trademark "North Coast" as however, 35 persons testified during a Based on all available evidence, ATF further evidence that North Coast refers public hearing on January 12, 1981, in is issuing this final rule adopting the. only to Napa, Sonoma, and Mendocino Santa Rosa, California. During this North Coast viticultural area as Counties. CNCGGA noted that in 1974, hearing, representatives of the including portions of Napa, Sonoma, ATF recognized the term "North Coast" CNCGGA testified in favor of a North Mendocino, Lake, Solano, and Marin to mean the counties of Napa, Sonoma, Coast viticultural area restricted to Counties. Following is a summary of the and Mendocino. Today some wineries in. Napa, Sonoma, and Mendocino evidence concerning the North Coast California use North Coast as an Counties. Representatives of grape viticultural area. appellation of origin on labels for wine growers in Lake and Solano Counties made with grapes grown in these three presented testimony seeking the Name inclusion of the western grape-growing William F. Heintz, a wine historian counties. areas of those counties testifying on behalf of the CNCGGA, Charles L. Sullivan, a historian, in the North testified on behalf of the Lake County Coast viticultural area. Finally, some presented evidence of the use of the grape growers from Napa County term North Coast in describing a region Wine Producers. He prdsented evidence expressed concern over approval of a in California. He testified that "Northern that Lake County was grouped with North Coast viticultural area because Coast Range" was first used in 1884 in a Mendocino County as a wine producing the [then] proposed Napa Valley University of California bulletin region in the 1880s, and was later also viticultural area had not received final describing soil analyses from Napa, grouped with Napa and Sonoma approval. On the basis of all written Solano and Yolo Counties. In 1888, John Counties.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trinity County Resident Named Volunteer of the Year by California Association of Resource Conservation Districts
    Winter 2010 Vol. XVIII No. 4 Trinity County Resident Named Volunteer of the Year by California Association of Resource Conservation Districts enneth Baldwin of Trinity County was named KVolunteer of the Year by the California Associ- ation of Resource Conservation Districts (CARCD) during its recent annual meeting. Baldwin, a Registered Professional Forester and a long-time resident of Trinity County, was recognized for generously volunteering his expertise on behalf of numerous conservation projects, including the Weaverville Community Forest. Presenting the award is CARCD president Pat Quist. Baldwin has resided in Trinity County since early 1972. He is a partner in Baldwin, Blomstrom, Wilkinson and Associates, a forestry and environ- mental consulting firm based in Arcata with a sat- ellite office in Trinity County. Among the projects Baldwin has helped with in recent years are devel- opment of the Trinity County Community Wild- fire Protection Plan, and fire management plans for the downriver communities of Salyer, Hawk- ins Bar, Grays Flat and part of Willow Creek. Other projects include the fire management plans for the Grass Valley Creek Watershed and for the communities of Covington Mill, Long Canyon and Lake Forest Estates. Baldwin and Also In This Issue: his associates also shaped the Programmatic Timberland Environmental Impact Report Burn Days & Burn Permits ..................2 for 4800 acres in the Weaver Basin which New Watershed Stewards Member .....3 will reduce costs for forest health and fuels River Day at Coffee Creek ................ 4-5 reduction projects on private lands. Trinity River Revegetation Efforts ... 6-7 Baldwin has provided the District with much CWPP Update ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • California Solar Leader
    California solar leader California's Lake County, GE, and SunPower partnered on a multi-site 2.2- megawatt solar power system that-combined with an existing solar power installation-now makes Lake County home to the largest solar power installations on county facilities in California. By Vicky Boyd You could call Lake County ‘the little county that could.' Situated northeast of San Francisco, Lake County is not the most populous county in California, nor is it the richest. But progressive thinking on the part of the board of supervisors and Lake County Sanitation District has allowed the county to become a leader in sustainable resource development and use. In fact, Lake County is now a net energy producer. "The board of supervisors has taken a leadership role of becoming sustainable and becoming energy efficient. They did it prior to a lot of other counties, and we continue to do it," says Denise Rushing, Lake County supervisor representing District 3. "They were very receptive to solar and focused on energy efficiency." As a result, the county now has 3.1 megawatts of solar-generated power, making it the largest solar-energy system on county property in California. But the county probably wouldn't have been able to finance and build such large projects on its own. Rushing credits the SunPower Access Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) as the catalyst. Under that agreement, GE Energy Financial Services financed, and will own, a 2.1 MW project. SunPower Corp. of San Jose designed and built the project and will maintain it for 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Bothin Marsh 46
    EMERGENT ECOLOGIES OF THE BAY EDGE ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE CMG Summer Internship 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface Research Introduction 2 Approach 2 What’s Out There Regional Map 6 Site Visits ` 9 Salt Marsh Section 11 Plant Community Profiles 13 What’s Changing AUTHORS Impacts of Sea Level Rise 24 Sarah Fitzgerald Marsh Migration Process 26 Jeff Milla Yutong Wu PROJECT TEAM What We Can Do Lauren Bergenholtz Ilia Savin Tactical Matrix 29 Julia Price Site Scale Analysis: Treasure Island 34 Nico Wright Site Scale Analysis: Bothin Marsh 46 This publication financed initiated, guided, and published under the direction of CMG Landscape Architecture. Conclusion Closing Statements 58 Unless specifically referenced all photographs and Acknowledgments 60 graphic work by authors. Bibliography 62 San Francisco, 2019. Cover photo: Pump station fronting Shorebird Marsh. Corte Madera, CA RESEARCH INTRODUCTION BREADTH As human-induced climate change accelerates and impacts regional map coastal ecologies, designers must anticipate fast-changing conditions, while design must adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change. With this task in mind, this research project investigates the needs of existing plant communities in the San plant communities Francisco Bay, explores how ecological dynamics are changing, of the Bay Edge and ultimately proposes a toolkit of tactics that designers can use to inform site designs. DEPTH landscape tactics matrix two case studies: Treasure Island Bothin Marsh APPROACH Working across scales, we began our research with a broad suggesting design adaptations for Treasure Island and Bothin survey of the Bay’s ecological history and current habitat Marsh.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Vulnerability Assessment for Mendocino County ______
    FIRE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT FOR MENDOCINO COUNTY ____________________________________________ _________________________________________ August 2020 Mendocino County Fire Vulnerability Assessment ________________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION I- OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 6 A. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 6 B. Project Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 6 C. Mendocino County Description and Demographics ................................................................ 7 D. Planning Area Basis .................................................................................................................. 8 SECTION II- COUNTY WILDFIRE ASSESSMENT ............................................................ 9 A. Wildfire Threat ......................................................................................................................... 9 B. Weather/Climate ........................................................................................................................ 9 C. Topography ............................................................................................................................. 10 D. Fuel Hazards ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • State Parks Along California's North Coast Natural Beauty Along the Coast
    State Parks Along California's North Coast Natural Beauty Along the Coast California State Parks along the northern California coast offer visitors a chance to enjoy spectacular beauty with rugged beaches and redwood forests. Benbow Lake State Recreation Area (HUMBOLDT COUNTY), located two miles south of Garberville on Highway 101, has more than 600 acres of forest, 32,000 square feet of water, and a half-mile of beach. It's the perfect place for hiking, swimming, fishing, sailing and horseback riding. Occupying a mile of the South Fork of the Eel River, the park has three miles of hiking trails and a campground. Canoes and paddleboats may be available for rent from a concessionaire in the park. During the summer, the park is home to Shakespeare and art festivals. For more information, call (707) 923-3238 or (707) 247-3318. As with all visits to California State Parks, it's always a good idea to call before your visit to check on conditions. Richardson Grove State Park (HUMBOLDT COUNTY), located eight miles south of Garberville on Highway 101, features a forest of towering coast redwoods along the South Fork of the Eel River. The park is one of the oldest state parks. It was acquired in the 1920s and named after the state's 25th governor, Friend W. Richardson. There are developed campsites and a visitor center, built from an old lodge. The park is popular for fishing, with winter runs of silver and king salmon. For more information, call the park at (707) 247-3318. Sinkyone Wilderness State Park (HUMBOLDT and MENDOCNIO COUNTIES)\ Access to the park from the south is 50 miles north of Fort Bragg via Highway 101 and County Road 431 to Usal Beach.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-02 Hscminutes FINAL
    Harbor Safety Committee of the San Francisco Bay Region Thursday, February 14, 2019 Port of San Francisco, Pier 1, Bayside Conference Room The Embarcadero, San Francisco, CA Capt. Lynn Korwatch (M), Marine Exchange of the San Francisco Bay Region (Marine Exchange), Chair of the Harbor Safety Committee (HSC); called the meeting to order at 10:03. Marcus Freeling (A), Marine Exchange, confirmed the presence of a quorum of the HSC. Committee members (M) and alternates (A) in attendance with a vote: John Berge (M), Pacific Merchant Shipping Association; Ted Blanckenburg (A), AmNav Maritime Services; Capt. Marie Byrd (A), United States Coast Guard; Capt. Bob Carr (M), San Francisco Bar Pilots; Sejal Choksi-Chugh (M), San Francisco Baykeeper; Jeff Ferguson (M), NOAA; Aaron Golbus (M), Port of San Francisco; Scott Grindy (M), San Francisco Small Craft Harbor; Chris Hendry (M), Chevron Shipping Company; Ben Huber (M), Westar Marine Services; Capt. Thomas Kirsch (M), Blue and Gold Fleet; John Koeppen (A), Owner/Operator Fishing Vessel Lulu; Jim Mazza (A), US Army Corps of Engineers; Jim McGrath (M), Bay Conservation and Development Commission; Jeff Robbins (M), General Steamship Corporation; Julian Rose (M), Marathon Petroleum; Jeff Vine (M), Port of Stockton. The meetings are always open to the public. Approval of the Minutes- A motion to accept the minutes of the January 10, 2019 meeting was made and seconded. The minutes were approved without dissent. Comments by Chair- Capt. Lynn Korwatch Welcomed the committee members and audience. Coast Guard Report- Capt. Marie Byrd Advised that Capt. Ceraolo will be at the March HSC meeting to say farewell before he leaves Sector San Francisco.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Spend 50 Perfect Hours in San Rafael
    EAT + DRINK STYLE CULTURE PLAY TECH TRAVEL OAKLAND BEST OF SAN FRANCISCO EVENTS WINE COUNTRY TAHOE HIGHWAY 1 EAST BAY MARIN How to Spend 50 Perfect Hours in San Rafael By Katie Morell on November 06, 2015 9:00 AM Like 129 Tweet 6 22 Download the Big Eat App Download the Big Drink App The Big Drink 2014: 50 Cocktails to Try Before You Die The Big Eat 2014: 100 Things to Try Before You Die The 2012 Big To-Do SF: 100 Things To Do Before You Die The Big Veg 2011: 50 Vegetarian (Or Vegan) San Rafael is the perfect Bay Area getaway with plenty of outdoor activity options, a cute Things to Eat Before You Die downtown scene, and fascinating cultural attractions. The Big Sweet SF: 50 Treats to Eat Before You Die 50 Things to Do in Wine Country Before You Die Four Awesome Northern California Hot Springs Download the Big Eat App Download the Big Drink App The Big Drink 2014: 50 Cocktails to Try Before You Die The Big Eat 2014: 100 Things to Try Before You Die The 2012 Big To-Do SF: 100 Things To Do Before You Die The Big Veg 2011: 50 Vegetarian (Or Vegan) Things to Eat Before You Die The Big Sweet SF: 50 Treats to Eat Before You Die 9:00 a.m. – Wake up among crisp, soft, white sheets at Acqua Hotel, a boutique property located right on Richardson Bay in Mill Valley. Grab a cup of coffee and, while still 50 Things to Do in Wine Country Before You Die sporting your pajamas, walk out onto your terrace and enjoy the water view.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnohistory and Ethnogeography of the Coast Miwok and Their Neighbors, 1783-1840
    ETHNOHISTORY AND ETHNOGEOGRAPHY OF THE COAST MIWOK AND THEIR NEIGHBORS, 1783-1840 by Randall Milliken Technical Paper presented to: National Park Service, Golden Gate NRA Cultural Resources and Museum Management Division Building 101, Fort Mason San Francisco, California Prepared by: Archaeological/Historical Consultants 609 Aileen Street Oakland, California 94609 June 2009 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY This report documents the locations of Spanish-contact period Coast Miwok regional and local communities in lands of present Marin and Sonoma counties, California. Furthermore, it documents previously unavailable information about those Coast Miwok communities as they struggled to survive and reform themselves within the context of the Franciscan missions between 1783 and 1840. Supplementary information is provided about neighboring Southern Pomo-speaking communities to the north during the same time period. The staff of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) commissioned this study of the early native people of the Marin Peninsula upon recommendation from the report’s author. He had found that he was amassing a large amount of new information about the early Coast Miwoks at Mission Dolores in San Francisco while he was conducting a GGNRA-funded study of the Ramaytush Ohlone-speaking peoples of the San Francisco Peninsula. The original scope of work for this study called for the analysis and synthesis of sources identifying the Coast Miwok tribal communities that inhabited GGNRA parklands in Marin County prior to Spanish colonization. In addition, it asked for the documentation of cultural ties between those earlier native people and the members of the present-day community of Coast Miwok. The geographic area studied here reaches far to the north of GGNRA lands on the Marin Peninsula to encompass all lands inhabited by Coast Miwoks, as well as lands inhabited by Pomos who intermarried with them at Mission San Rafael.
    [Show full text]
  • California's North Coast Fishing Communities Historical
    California’s North Coast Fishing Communities Historical Perspective and Recent Trends Caroline Pomeroy, Cynthia J. Thomson, Melissa M. Stevens Published by California Sea Grant College Program Scripps Institution of Oceanography University of California San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive #0231 La Jolla CA 92093-0231 (858) 534-4446 www.csgc.ucsd.edu Publication No. T-072 This document was supported in part by the National Sea Grant College Program of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and produced under NOAA grant number NA10OAR4170060, project number C/P-1 through the California Sea Grant College Program. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of any of those organizations. Sea Grant is a unique partnership of public and private sectors, combining research, education, and outreach for public service. It is a national network of universities meeting changing environmental and economic needs of people in our coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes regions. California’s North Coast Fishing Communities Historical Perspective and Recent Trends Final Report to the California State Coastal Conservancy Award 06–128 August 2010 Caroline Pomeroy1, Cynthia J. Thomson2, Melissa M. Stevens1,2 1 California Sea Grant, University of California, Santa Cruz, Center for Ocean Health, 100 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 2 NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Fisheries Ecology Division, 110 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 CONTENTS Project Summary Regional Profile Crescent City Profile Trinidad Profile Eureka Profile Fort Bragg/Noyo Harbor Profile Appendix A: Acronyms Appendix B: Glossary Appendix C: Methodological Detail Appendix D: Project Team Biographies Project Summary ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We gratefully acknowledge the support and input provided by North Coast fishing community members, including local fishermen, fish buyers, fishery-support business owners and staff, harbor managers and staff and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Mountains (Eastern Klamath Study), the Northern California Coast Ranges
    mountains (Eastern Klamath study), the Northern California Coast Ranges (North Coast study), and the Sierra Nevada section (Southern Sierra study). The majority of the fisher's historical distribution in California (Grinnell et al. 1937) occurred in these 3 ecological sections, with smaller portions found in the Northern California Coastal Section (the coast redwood [Sequoia sempervirens] belt) and the Southern Cascades sections (Figure 1). STUDY AREAS VEGETATION AND CLIMATE When compared to the fisher's entire geographic range, the 3 study areas examined here shared grossly similar climate and vegetation characteristics. Weather patterns across the 3 study areas are typical of California's Mediterranean climate: summers are hot and dry while winters are cool and moist, with precipitation often falling as snow in the higher elevations (Table 1). Natural vegetation communities found on all 3 study areas included montane hardwood forests, mixed conifer forests, true fir forests, and chaparral communities in the lower and drier portions of each study area (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988). Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests made up an important 5 component of both northern California studies, but were absent from the southern Sierra study area. Despite these gross similarities, proximity to the Pacific Ocean and latitude (Figure 2) have resulted in important differences among the areas. The North Coast study area was located within 60 km of the Pacific Ocean and generally received more precipitation than either the Eastern Klamath or Southern Sierra study areas. Habitats tended to become more xeric with increased distance from the Pacific Ocean, resulting in a more diverse array of habitats available to fishers in the eastern section of the North Coast and throughout the Eastern Klamath study areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Demonstration Projects for Sea Level Rise Resiliency Marin Bay Waterfront Adaptation and Vulnerability Evaluation (Baywave) Marin County Department of Public Works
    First Steps to Address Sea Level Rise in Marin County Demonstration Projects on the Eastern Shoreline—Past, Present, and Future Marin County’s demonstration projects for sea level rise resiliency Marin Bay Waterfront Adaptation and Vulnerability Evaluation (BayWAVE) Marin County Department of Public Works June 2017 Credits This project was prepared with generous funding from the California State Coastal Conservancy’s Climate Ready Grant Program. Authored by: Roger Leventhal, P.E. Senior Engineer Marin County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 3501 Civic Center Drive, Suite 304 San Rafael, CA 93913 (415) 473-3249 [email protected] Additional contributors: Marilyn Latta, California State Coastal Conservancy; Veronica Pearson and James Raives, Marin County Parks Technical Writer: Jack Curley Designer: Laura Lovett | By Design Editor: Mark Nichol Photo credits: Pg. 2, Top to bottom: China Camp marsh, Rene Rivers; Egret among oyster shell reefs, S. Kiriakopolos; Removing vegetation on Arambu Island, Richardson Bay Audubon Society Pg. 7: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pg. 9–10: CLE Engineering Pg. 11: Richardson Bay Audubon Society Pg. 12: County of Marin DPW Pg. 13: CLE Engineering Pg. 14: Rachel Kamman Pg. 15: S. Kiriakopolos Pg. 16: J. Poskazner Pg. 17: San Francisco Estuary Institute For more information about the county’s sea level rise efforts, visit: www.MarinSLR.org 1 What is a Demonstration Project? Demonstration projects are small-scale projects con- structed and monitored to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a design concept or new restoration approach intended for implementation on a much larger scale. Demonstration projects are constructed to provide essential information to engineers, scientists, builders, and the public, and to help inform and guide actions to be taken in Marin County or elsewhere in San Francisco Bay in the near future to address the threats posed by sea level rise.
    [Show full text]
  • Ater Resource Plan Functionally Equivalent Document
    S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 7 MARIN COUNTY STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM Storm Water Resource Plan Functionally Equivalent Document prepared by This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Organization of Report ................................................................................................ 1-1 2. Organization, Coordination, Collaboration (Guidelines Section VI.B) ........................ 2-1 2.1 Stakeholder/Public Participation and Outreach Efforts ............................................... 2-1 2.1.1 MCSTOPPP Monthly Agency Staff Committee Meetings ..................................... 2-1 2.1.2 North Bay Watershed Association Board of Directors Meetings ............................ 2-2 2.1.3 MCSTOPPP Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Meetings .................................. 2-2 2.1.4 MCSTOPPP Website ............................................................................................... 2-3 2.2 Required Decisions that Must be Made by Local, State or Federal Agencies ............. 2-3 2.3 Stormwater and Dry Weather Runoff Management Objectives .................................. 2-4 2.4 Relationships to Other Plans ........................................................................................ 2-4 2.4.1 San Francisco Bay Area Integrated Regional Water Management Plan ................. 2-4 2.4.2 Other Plans ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]