DOCSLIB.ORG

North Fork Eel River Watershed Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North Fork Eel River Watershed Analysis North Fork Eel River Watershed Analysis Version 1.0 June 1996 The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service and the United States Department of Interior (USDI) Bureau of Land Management are diverse organizations committed to equal opportunity in employment and program delivery. USDA and USDI prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, disability, political affiliation and familial status. Persons believing they have been discriminated against should contact the department Secretary, U. S., Department of Agriculture or Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20250 or call 202/720-7327. Preparers David Fuller, Team Leader, Fisheries Biologist, BLM-Arcata Elaine Adams, Biologist, US Fish and Wildlife Service Kathy Heffner-McClellan, Social Scientist, Six Rivers National Forest Tom Keter, Anthropologist, Six Rivers National Forest Lisa Hoover, Botanist, Six Rivers National Forest Jeff Mattison, Wildlife Biologist, Six Rivers National Forest Liz McGee, Assistant Ecologist, Six Rivers National Forest Lisa Mizuno, Fisheries Biologist, Six Rivers National Forest Lance Rieland, Engineer, Six Rivers National Forest Lucy Salazar, Fire Specialist, Six Rivers National Forest Mark Smith, Geologist, Six Rivers National Forest Joanne Spitler, Biologist, US Fish and Wildlife Service Jan Werren, GIS Specialist, Six Rivers National Forest Leslie Wolff, Hydrologist, Six Rivers National Forest Ken Wright, Planning Analyst, Six Rivers National Forest Contributors/Technical Support Marcia Andre, District Ranger, Six Rivers National Forest Anita Bowen, Biological Technician, Six Rivers National Forest Bruce Bryan, Vegetation Mapper, Six Rivers National Forest Gil Craven, Geologist, Six Rivers National Forest Carolyn Cook, Hydrologist, Six Rivers National Forest Scott Downie, Habitat Manager, California Department of Fish and Game Mike Furniss, Hydrologist, Six Rivers National Forest Hank Harrison, Forester, BLM-Arcata Steve Hawks, Wildlife Biologist, BLM-Arcata Tom Jimerson, Forest Ecologist, Six Rivers National Forest Jeff Jones, Vegetation Mapper, Six Rivers National Forest Dave Lamphear, GIS Specialist, USFS Pacific Southwest Research Station John McRae, Botanist, Six Rivers National Forest Kemset Moore, AmeriCorps Watershed Steward Project Sam Morrison, Geologist, USFS Pacific Southwest Research Station Cynthia Nelson, Editor, Six Rivers National Forest John Price, GIS Specialist, BLM-Arcata Paul Roush, Wildlife Biologist, BLM-Arcata Jeff TenPas, Soil Scientist, Six Rivers National Forest Stan Thiesen, Geologist, Six Rivers National Forest Katherine Worn, GIS Specialist, Six Rivers National Forest List of Figures Figure 1. Location of North Fork Eel River watershed located in northwestern California. Figure 2. Public and private land ownership in North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 3. Wildlife Habitat Relationships (WHR) classification of land within North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 4. Size class distribution for commercial tree species within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 5. Canopy closure of commercial tree species within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Source: Timberland Task Force. Figure 6. Closure class of commercial tree species within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Source: Timberland Task Force. Figure 7. Vegetation series map of Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel watershed. (14) Figure 8. Map of seral stage distribution of all vegetation types for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 9. Map of seral stage distribution of commercial tree species for Late-Successional Reserves in Six Rivers National Forest within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 10. Distribution of vegetation series and sub-series relating to oak woodlands for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 11. Fire hazard rating for flame length during August for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River Basin. Figure 12. Fire hazard rating for flame length during June for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River Basin. Figure 13. Fire hazard rating for rate-of-spread during June for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 14. Fire hazard rating for rate-of-spread during August for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 15. Commercial tree species seral stage distribution for Matrix land and major roads for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 16. Northern spotted owl habitat for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 17. Late-Successional Reserves and Northern spotted owl critical habitat for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 18. Deer habitat zones and roads for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 19. Northwest Forest Plan land allocations and wetland habitats for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 20. Dispersal habitat for the Northern spotted owl for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 21. Streams, roads, and subwatershed boundaries within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Figure 22. Bedrock geology and roads for Six Rivers National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. List of Tables (Page number) Table 1. The distribution of Wildlife Habitat Relationship (WHR) vegetation types in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 2. The distribution of vegetation types on BLM land in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 3. The distribution of the vegetation series within the National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 4. The allocation of seral stages for all vegetation types within the National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 5. The seral stages and allocations of the dominant vegetation series within the National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 6. The harvested and naturally occurring acres of each seral stage in the commercial series (tanoak, white fir, Douglas-fir) within the National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 7. Threatened (FT), Endangered (FE), Proposed (PFT) and Special Status wildlife species in the Eel River Basin. Table 8. National Forest range/grazing allotments on National Forest and Bureau of Land Management lands in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 9. The subseries in the white oak series within the National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 10. Number of fire occurrences and acres burned per decade in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 11. Fuel model combinations for the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 12. Fuel model moisture conditions. Table 13. Fire suppression effectiveness. Table 14. Relative proportions of calculated ROS and FL for the June and August weather scenarios for National Forest land within the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 15. The percent of each seral stage in the Douglas-fir series for all lands (includes private) within the Six Rivers national Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed and the South Zone. Table 16. The percent of each seral stage in the tanoak series for all lands (includes private) within the Six Rivers national Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed and the South Zone. Table 17. The percent of each seral stage in the white fir series for all lands (includes private) within the Six Rivers National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed and the South Zone. Table 18. The percent of each seral stage in the Douglas-fir series for Six Rivers National Forest in the North Fork Eel River watershed and the South Zone. Table 19. The percent of each seral stage in the tanoak series for Six Rivers National Forest in the North Fork Eel River watershed and the South Zone. Table 20. The percent of each seral stage in the white fir series for Six Rivers National Forest in the North Fork Eel River watershed and the South Zone. Table 21. Threatened, Endangered, Proposed and Special Status species in the Eel River Basin. Table 22. Northern spotted owl pairs and territorial singles occurring in LSRs, Wilderness, Matrix and private land in the North Fork Eel River watershed. List of Tables continued Table 23. Allocations and seral stages of northern spotted owl Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging habitat within the National Forest boundary in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 24. Road densities by subwatershed in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 25.Late-Successional Reserve acreage in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Table 26. Historic livestock numbers by county. Table 27. Range allotments within the Six Rivers National Forest boundary of the Eel River. Table 28. Estimated stream crossings in the North Fork Eel River watershed. Acronym Definitions AWC - Available Water Capacity BLM - USDI-Bureau of Land Management CDF - California Department of Forestry CDFG - California Department of Fish and Game CFF - Cartographic Feature Files - map components taken from 7.5 quad maps CFI - Continuous Forest Inventory CHU - Critical Habitat Unit CRMP - Coordinated Resource Management Plan CWD - Coarse Woody Debris EUI - Ecological Unit Inventory FLPMA - Federal Land and Policy Management Act FSEIS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Paleoproterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen: Toward a Comprehensive Model
    Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen: toward a comprehensive model. Pierre Trap, Michel Faure, Wei Lin, Nicole Le Breton, Patrick Monié To cite this version: Pierre Trap, Michel Faure, Wei Lin, Nicole Le Breton, Patrick Monié. Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen: toward a comprehensive model.. Precambrian Research, Elsevier, 2012, 222-223, pp.191-211. 10.1016/j.precamres.2011.09.008. insu-00628119 HAL Id: insu-00628119 https://hal-insu.archives-ouvertes.fr/insu-00628119 Submitted on 2 Jan 2012 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen: Toward a comprehensive model Pierre Trapa, Michel Faureb, Wei Linc, Nicole Le Bretonb, Patrick Moniéd UMR-CNRS 6249 Chrono-Environnement, Université de Franche-Comté, 16 route de Gray a 25030 Besançon Cedex, France Institut des Sciences de la Terre d‟Orléans, CNRS, Université d‟Orléans (UMR 6113), b 45071 Orléans Cedex 2, France State Key Laboratory of Lithosphere Evolution, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, c Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China Géosciences Montpellier, UMR CNRS 5243, Université Montpellier II, 34095 Montpellier d Cedex 5, France Abstract In this contribution we present a reconstruction of the overall lithotectonic architecture, from inner zones to external ones, of the Paleoproterozoic Trans-North China Orogen, within the North China Craton.
    [Show full text]
  • Dairy Syncline Mine Project Record of Decision
    United States Department of Agriculture U.S. Forest Service Caribou-Targhee National Forest Final Record of Decision Dairy Syncline Mine Project, Caribou County, Idaho April 2020 Forest Service – Caribou-Targhee National Forest – April 2020 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Upper Main Eel River and Tributaries (Including
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX FINAL Upper Main Eel River and Tributaries (including Tomki Creek, Outlet Creek and Lake Pillsbury) Total Maximum Daily Loads for Temperature and Sediment Approved by date Original signed December 29, 2004 Alexis Strauss Director, Water Division Note: For further information please contact Palma Risler at 415/972-3451 and [email protected] or Dan Pingaro at 415/977-4275 and [email protected] Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Overview - 1 1.2. Watershed Characteristics - 2 1.3. Endangered Species Act Consultation - 4 1.4. Organization - 4 CHAPTER 2: PROBLEM STATEMENT 2.1. Fish Population Problems - 5 2.2. Temperature Problems - 7 2.3. Sediment Problems - 14 2.4. Water Quality Standards - 17 CHAPTER 3: TEMPERATURE TMDL 3.1. Interpreting the Existing Water Quality Standards for Temperature - 18 3.2. Temperature Modeling - 20 3.2.1 Temperature and Solar Radiation Modeling - 21 3.2.2 Selection of Scenario Corresponding to Water Quality Standards - 24 3.3.1 Loading Capacity and TMDL – Solar Radiation for all stream reaches - 26 3.3.2 Shade Allocations - 26 3.3.3 Margin of Safety - 27 3.3.4 Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions - 27 3.4 Instream Heat TMDL – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 28 3.4.1 Selection of Scenario Corresponding to Water Quality Standards - 34 3.4.2 Water Quality Indicators – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 34 3.4.3 Instream Heat Loading Capacity and TMDL - Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek- 34 3.4.4 Instream Heat Allocations – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 35 3.4.5 Margin of Safety - 35 3.4.6 Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions - 35 CHAPTER 4: SEDIMENT TMDL 4.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphometric Delineation of Floodplains and Terraces From
    Earth Surf. Dynam., 5, 369–385, 2017 https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-5-369-2017 © Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Geomorphometric delineation of floodplains and terraces from objectively defined topographic thresholds Fiona J. Clubb1, Simon M. Mudd1, David T. Milodowski2, Declan A. Valters3, Louise J. Slater4, Martin D. Hurst5, and Ajay B. Limaye6 1School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Drummond Street, Edinburgh, EH8 9XP, UK 2School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Crew Building, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JN, UK 3School of Earth, Atmospheric, and Environmental Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK 4Department of Geography, Loughborough University, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK 5School of Geographical and Earth Sciences, East Quadrangle, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK 6Department of Earth Sciences and St. Anthony Falls Laboratory, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Correspondence to: Fiona J. Clubb ([email protected]) Received: 31 March 2017 – Discussion started: 12 April 2017 Revised: 26 May 2017 – Accepted: 9 June 2017 – Published: 10 July 2017 Abstract. Floodplain and terrace features can provide information about current and past fluvial processes, including channel response to varying discharge and sediment flux, sediment storage, and the climatic or tectonic history of a catchment. Previous methods of identifying floodplain and terraces from digital elevation models (DEMs) tend to be semi-automated, requiring the input of independent datasets or manual editing by the user. In this study we present a new method of identifying floodplain and terrace features based on two thresholds: local gradient, and elevation compared to the nearest channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Eel River and Van Duzen River Juvenile Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus Kisutch) Spatial Structure Survey 2013-2016 Summary Report
    Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission in partnership with the State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Humboldt Redwood Company Summary Report to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fisheries Restoration Grant Program Grantee Agreement: P1210516 Lower Eel River and Van Duzen River Juvenile Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Spatial Structure Survey 2013-2016 Summary Report Prepared by: David Lam and Sharon Powers December 2016 Abstract Monitoring of coho salmon population spatial structure was conducted, as a component of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Coastal Salmonid Monitoring Program, in the lower Eel River and its tributaries, inclusive of the Van Duzen River, in 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Potential coho salmon habitat within the lower Eel River and Van Duzen River study areas was segmented into a sample frame of 204 one-to-three kilometer stream survey reaches. Annually, a randomly selected subset of sample frame stream reaches was monitored by direct observation. Using mask and snorkel, surveyors conducted two independent pass dive observations to estimate fish species presence and numbers. A total of 211 surveys were conducted on 163 reaches, with 2,755 pools surveyed during the summers of 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Coho salmon were observed in 13.5% of reaches and 7.5% of pools surveyed, and the percent of the study area occupied by coho salmon juveniles was estimated at 7% in 2013 and 2014, 3% in 2015, and 4% in 2016. i Table of Contents Abstract .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality Opens a New Window
    3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section provides information regarding impacts of the proposed project on hydrology and water quality. The information used in this analysis is taken from: ► Water Supply Assessment for the Humboldt Wind Energy Project (Stantec 2019) (Appendix T); ► Humboldt County General Plan (Humboldt County 2017); ► North Coast Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (North Coast IRWMP) (North Coast Resource Partnership 2018); ► Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region (Basin Plan) (North Coast RWQCB 2018); ► the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Mapping Program (2018); ► National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data; and ► California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 118, California’s Groundwater (DWR 2003). 3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING CLIMATE AND PRECIPITATION Weather in the project area is characterized by temperate, dry summers and cool, wet winters. In winter, precipitation is heavy. Average annual rainfall can be up to 47 inches in Scotia (WRCC 2019). The rainy season, which generally begins in October and lasts through April, includes most of the precipitation (e.g., 90 percent of the mean annual runoff of the Eel River occurs during winter). Precipitation data from water years 1981–2010 for Eureka, approximately 20 miles north of the project area, show a mean annual precipitation of 40 inches (NOAA and CNRFC 2019). Mean annual precipitation in the project area is lowest in the coastal zone area (40 inches per year) and highest in the upper elevations of the Upper Cape Mendocino and Eel River hydrologic units to the east (85 inches per year) (Cal-Atlas 1996). The dry season, generally May through September, is usually defined by morning fog and overcast conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Tectonic Features of the Precambrian Belt Basin and Their Influence on Post-Belt Structures
    ... Tectonic Features of the .., Precambrian Belt Basin and Their Influence on Post-Belt Structures GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 866 · Tectonic Features of the · Precambrian Belt Basin and Their Influence on Post-Belt Structures By JACK E. HARRISON, ALLAN B. GRIGGS, and JOHN D. WELLS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER X66 U N IT ED STATES G 0 V ERN M EN T P R I NT I N G 0 F F I C E, \VAS H I N G T 0 N 19 7 4 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 74-600111 ) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GO\·ernment Printing Office 'Vashington, D.C. 20402 - Price 65 cents (paper cO\·er) Stock Number 2401-02554 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract................................................. 1 Phanerozoic events-Continued Introduction . 1 Late Mesozoic through early Tertiary-Continued Genesis and filling of the Belt basin . 1 Idaho batholith ................................. 7 Is the Belt basin an aulacogen? . 5 Boulder batholith ............................... 8 Precambrian Z events . 5 Northern Montana disturbed belt ................. 8 Phanerozoic events . 5 Tectonics along the Lewis and Clark line .............. 9 Paleozoic through early Mesozoic . 6 Late Cenozoic block faults ........................... 13 Late Mesozoic through early Tertiary . 6 Conclusions ............................................. 13 Kootenay arc and mobile belt . 6 References cited ......................................... 14 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURES 1-4. Maps: 1. Principal basins of sedimentation along the U.S.-Canadian Cordillera during Precambrian Y time (1,600-800 m.y. ago) ............................................................................................... 2 2. Principal tectonic elements of the Belt basin reentrant as inferred from the sedimentation record ............
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK, TECTONIC EVOLUTION, and DISPLACEMENT HISTORY of the ALEXANDER TERRANE Georgee
    TECTONICS, VOL. 6, NO. 2, PAGES 151-173, APRIL 1987 GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK, TECTONIC EVOLUTION, AND DISPLACEMENT HISTORY OF THE ALEXANDER TERRANE GeorgeE. Gehrels1 and Jason B. Saleeby Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Abstract. The Alexander terrane consists of Devonian (Klakas orogeny). The second phase is upper Proterozoic(?)-Cambrian through marked by Middle Devonian through Lower Middle(?) Jurassic rocks that underlie much of Permian strata which accumulated in southeastern (SE) Alaska and parts of eastern tectonically stable marine environments. Alaska, western British Columbia, and Devonian and Lower Permian volcanic rocks and southwestern Yukon Territory. A variety of upper Pennsylvanian-Lower Permian syenitic to geologic, paleomagnetic, and paleontologic dioritic intrusive bodies occur locally but do not evidence indicates that these rocks have been appear to represent major magmatic systems. displaced considerable distances from their The third phase is marked by Triassic volcanic sites of origin and were not accreted to western and sedimentary rocks which are interpreted to North America until Late Cretaceous-early have formed in a rift environment. Previous Tertiary time. Our geologic and U-Pb syntheses of the displacement history of the geochronologic studies in southern SE Alaska terrane emphasized apparent similarities with and the work of others to the north indicate rocks in the Sierra-Klamath region and that the terrane evolved through three distinct suggested that the Alexander terrane evolved in tectonic phases. During the initial phase, from proximity to the California continental margin late Proterozoic(?)-Cambrian through Early during Paleozoic time. Our studies indicate, Devonian time, the terrane probably evolved however, that the geologic record of the along a convergent plate margin.
    [Show full text]
  • Eel River Cooperative Cyanotoxin Analysis Summary 2013-2017
    Eel River Cooperative Cyanotoxin Analysis Summary 2013-2017 By: Eli Asarian and Patrick Higgins Edited by: Diane Higgins Performed for: The Eel River Recovery Project August 2018 Business Sponsors of ERRP Cyanotoxin Analysis Thanks to Individual Crowdfunding Donors and Those Who Contributed Off-line to Support ERRP Cyanotoxin Work: Barbara & David Sopjes Dr. Andrew Stubblefield Mary Power Ree Slocum Bill Dietrich Ben Middlemiss Dean & Sharon Edell Judy Schriebman Jack Crider Daron Pedroja Tim Talbert Gil Anda Ken Miller Will Parrish Dani Walthall Chris McBride Zane and Amanda Ruddy Christina Tran Brett Lovelace Sarah Ottley Ken Vance-Borland Karen & Scott Welsh Thomas Daugherty Pureum Kim Keith Bouma-Gregson Alex Christie Lee McClellan Matthew Amberg Charlie Liphart Eric Damon Walters April Mason Amy Collette Jason Hartwick Marissa Adams Kristin McDonald John Filce Carl Zichella Robert Leher Thanks also to experiment.com, our crowdfunding host that raises funds for scientific research throughout the World: https://experiment.com/projects/when-does-the-eel-river-turn-toxic- patterns-in-cyanotoxin-occurrence-2013-2016. This study was postponed a year so we could collect 2017 cyanotoxin data. Thanks for your patience. Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Background
    [Show full text]
  • Tectonostratigraphic Terrane Analysis of New Brunswick L
    Document generated on 09/30/2021 12:46 p.m. Atlantic Geology Tectonostratigraphic terrane analysis of New Brunswick L. R. Fyffe and A. Fricker Volume 23, Number 3, December 1987 Article abstract the URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/ageo23_3art01 The contents of a computerized lexicon database are displayed in the form of a range chart that demonstrate the spartial and temporal relationships of See table of contents lithtostratigraphic units to tectonostratigraphic terrans of New Brunsiwck. The chart provides a reference basis from which to derive the accretionary history of these terrance. Publisher(s) The tectonostratigraphlc zonation of Hew Brunswick ia based upon the Atlantic Geoscience Society uniqueness of the pre-Taconlan stratigraphy within each fault-bounded terrane. From northwest to southeast, the following terranes and cover sequences are recognized: Matapedia Cover. Blmtree Terrane, Mlramichi ISSN Terrane, Frederlcton Cover, St. Croix Terrane, Hascarene Terrane, and 0843-5561 (print) Avalonian Terrane. 1718-7885 (digital) Overstepping of the Matapedia Cover Sequence indicates that the Elmtree and Mlramichi terranes were docked with the North American craton by the Late Explore this journal Ordovician to Early Silurian. The presence of a similar early Paleozoic stratigraphy, tectonic style and major Silurian unconformity in the St. Croix Terrane suggests that it had become docked to the Mlramichi Terrane prior to this subduction-related Taconian event. Cite this article Detritus and a similar fauna in the cover rocks of the St. Croix Terrane provide Fyffe, L. R. & Fricker, A. (1987). Tectonostratigraphic terrane analysis of New evidence that it was docked to the Hascarene Terrane by the Late Silurian.
    [Show full text]
  • South Fork Eel River & Tributaries PROPOSED WILD & SCENIC
    Management Agency: South Fork Eel River & Tributaries Bureau of Land Management ~ BLM Arcata Field Office PROPOSED WILD & SCENIC RIVERS University of California ~ Angelo Coast Range Reserve These proposed Wild and Scenic Rivers support threatened Location: Mendocino County and endangered populations of salmon and steelhead and CA 2nd Congressional District rare plants. They also provide outstanding research Watershed: opportunities of nearly pristine undeveloped watersheds. South Fork Eel River Wild & Scenic River Miles: South Fork Eel River – 12.3 miles South Fork Eel River—12.3 The South Fork Eel River supports the largest concentration Elder Creek—7 of naturally reproducing anadromous fish in the region. East Branch South Fork Eel River—23.1 Cedar Creek—9.6 Federal officials recently identified the river as essential for the recovery of threatened salmon and steelhead. The Outstanding Values: upper portion of this segment is located on the Angelo Anadromous fisheries, ecological, Biosphere Reserve, hydrological, wildlife, recreation Preserve managed for wild lands research by the University of California. Angelo Reserve access roads are open to For More Information: public hiking. The lower portion flows through the existing Steve Evans—CalWild [email protected] South Fork Wilderness managed by the BLM. The river (916) 708-3155 offers class IV-V whitewater boating opportunities. The river would be administered through a cooperative management agreement between the BLM and the State of California. Elder Creek – 7 miles This nearly pristine stream is a National Natural Landmark, Hydrologic Benchmark, and a UN-recognized Biosphere Reserve. A tributary of the South Fork Eel River, the creek is an important contributor to the South Fork’s anadromous Front Photo: South Fork Eel River fishery.
    [Show full text]
  • Thirsty Eel Oct. 11-Corrections
    1 THE THIRSTY EEL: SUMMER AND WINTER FLOW THRESHOLDS THAT TILT THE EEL 2 RIVER OF NORTHWESTERN CALIFORNIA FROM SALMON-SUPPORTING TO 3 CYANOBACTERIALLY-DEGRADED STATES 4 5 In press, Special Volume, Copeia: Fish out of Water Symposium 6 Mary E. Power1, 7 Keith Bouma-Gregson 2,3 8 Patrick Higgins3, 9 Stephanie M. Carlson4 10 11 12 13 14 1. Department of Integrative Biology, Univ. California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720; Email: 15 [email protected] 16 17 2. Department of Integrative Biology, Univ. California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720; Email: 18 [email protected]> 19 20 3. Eel River Recovery Project, Garberville CA 95542 www.eelriverrecovery.org; Email: 21 [email protected] 22 23 4. Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 24 94720; Email: [email protected] 25 26 27 Running head: Discharge-mediated food web states 28 29 Key words: cyanobacteria, discharge extremes, drought, food webs, salmonids, tipping points 30 31 Although it flows through regions of Northwestern California that are thought to be relatively well- 32 watered, the Eel River is increasingly stressed by drought and water withdrawals. We discuss how critical 33 threshold changes in summer discharge can potentially tilt the Eel from a recovering salmon-supporting 34 ecosystem toward a cyanobacterially-degraded one. To maintain food webs and habitats that support 35 salmonids and suppress harmful cyanobacteria, summer discharge must be sufficient to connect mainstem 36 pools hydrologically with gently moving, cool base flow. Rearing salmon and steelhead can survive even 37 in pools that become isolated during summer low flows if hyporheic exchange is sufficient.
    [Show full text]