DOCSLIB.ORG

Sedimentation of Lake Pillsbury Lake County California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sedimentation of Lake Pillsbury Lake County California Sedimentation of Lake Pillsbury Lake County California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-EE Prepared in cooperation with the State of California Department of fFater Resources Sedimentation of Lake Pillsbury Lake County California By G. PORTERFIELD and C. A. DUNNAM CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-EE Prepared in cooperation with the State of California Department of fFater Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1964 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Paw Abstract___________________________________________ EEl Introduction._____________________________________________________ 2 Location and general features--___-__-____-_-_-_---__--_--_---_- 2 Purpose and scope_____________________________________________ 2 Acknowledgments ________________'__________________--_-_______ 2 Drainage basin.___________________________________________________ 3 Physiography and soils.._______________________________________ 3 Climate ______________________________________________________ 4 Vegetation__ _--_-_____________-_-___---___-----__-_-_-_-____ 5 Dam and reservoir_____-__-__-_____________-______-___-_-__-_-_-_ 5 Dam_________________________________________________________ 5 Datum.______________________________________________________ 7 Reservoir___________________________________________________ 7 Reservoir use_____________________________________________ 8 Reservoir operation________________________________________ 8 Reservoir sedimentation.___________________________________________ 9 General______________________________________________________ 9 Lake Pillsbury_-__.-_-_____-.__--__-_______________________ 10 Resurvey of Lake Pillsbury._-___-____-_____-_-_____---____-___-_-__ 17 Method of sediment survey.:-_-__--__-_________--____-----_----_ 17 Control for sediment survey. _______-____--_____--______-__-____ 17 Survey procedure____________________________________________ 18 Transit-stadia survey__ ________-____-_____-______-_-----___ 18 Echo depth-sounder survey___-_-_-_--__-__--_-___---------_ 18 Construction of contour map__________________-____-_--__--_-_ 20 Computation of lake volume._______________________________ 20 Computation of sediment volume__________________________ 20 Trap efBciency-_---___-_-___-_-_-___---__---_-_----------_ 23 Distribution of sediment_____.-_____-_-___-______--_-___------_--_ 24 North arm__________________________________________________ 24 Eel River arm_________________-_______________-__----_----__ 24 Rice Fork arm____-____--_______--____-_____--__--_-------_--_ 28 Sediment deposits______-______-_____-___-__----_____-__-----_----_ 29 Methods of investigation.______________________________________ 29 Core samples____________________________________________ 29 Sediment-density probe. ___________________________________ 30 Calibration of sediment-density probe._______________________ 31 Determination of results____-_____________-__--____---_---_--- 33 Specific weight-____________________--_-__--------_-------- 33 Particle size_____________________________________________ 35 Specific gravity____________--__-_________-_--_----------_ 35 Specific weight of lake-bottom sediment._________________________ 36 Particle size of lake-bottom sediment___________________________ 37 Predicting sediment distribution in reservoirs _________________________ 40 Summary__ _ ____________________________________________________ 44 References cited___________________________________________________ 46 m IV CONTENTS ILLUSTRATIONS Page PLATE 1. Map of Lake Pillsbury resurvey______________________ In pocket 2. Map of Lake Pillsbury showing lake-bottom contours. _ _ In pocket FIGURE 1. Longitudinal profile of streams tributary to Lake Pillsbury_ EE3 2. Erosion-resistant material near elevation 3,500 feet on Hull Mountain road-_----__---_------_-----_------------_- 4 3. Typical terrain and ground cover in Eel River basin ________ 6 4. Longitudinal cross section through a reservoir showing various types of deposits_____________--_--____--______-______ 10 5. Longitudinal profile of Eel River and particle size of deposited material_________________-_______--_-_--__-_-_--_____ 11 6. Longitudinal profile of Rice Fork and particle size of deposited material___________________________________________ 12 7. Longitudinal profile of Squaw Valley Creek and particle size of deposited material________-___-___--_--_-__-__--___--_ 13 8. Longitudinal profile of Salmon Creek and particle size of de­ posited material______________-_-_-_-_---___-_--__-__- 14 9. Reservoir shoreline in north arm of lake___________________ 15 10. Effect of wave action in north arm and main body of the reservoir ____________________________________________ 16 11. Area-capacity curves, Lake Pillsbury____________________ 21 12. Vertical distribution of sediment _________________________ 22 13. Sediment deposits in the Eel River arm ___________________ 26 14. Typical sediment-producing area along Eel River above the reservoir.___________________________________________ 27 15. Bank slides in Eel River arm near range 25._______________ 28 16. Qamma-ray density probe in shielded carrying case_________ 31 17. Density-probe calibration curve__-_______---_____--__--_- 32 18. Specific weight of deposited sediment in the Eel River arm 38 19. Relation of specific weight of sediments deposited in reser­ voirs to median particle size___________--__________-___ 39 20. Relations of capacity to depth associated with Van't Hul-typ'e design-disposition curves-_-____---_--------_-_-------- 41 21. Comparison of Lake Pillsbury disposition curve with Van't Hul-type design-disposition curves...___________________ 42 22. Relation of capacity to depth of Lake Pillsbury___ ____ 43 TABLES Page TABLE 1. Specific weight and specific gravity of core samples.________ EE34 2. Specific weight of deposited sediment by sediment-density probe.______________________________--__--------_--- 35 3. Particle-size analyses of core samples ___________________ 36 4. Summary of pertinent data------------------------------ 45 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES SEDIMENTATION OF LAKE PILLSBURY, LAKE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA By G. PORTERFIELD and C. A. DUNNAM ABSTRACT A study of sedimentation of Lake Pillsbury was undertaken in May 1959 to determine the quantity, character, and distribution of sediment deposited in the reservoir since the storage of water began in December 1921. The drainage area of Lake Pillsbury is in the steep rugged mountains of the Coast Ranges in northwestern California, and elevations range from 1,828 (maximum lake elevation) to about 7,000 feet mean sea level. The vegetal cover throughout the basin is generally medium to dense and includes several species of grass, brush, fir, pine, and oak. Precipitation varies with season and location in the Pillsbury drainage area, and available data are insufficient to define the average rainfall for the entire basin. At the lake, the monthly precipitation ranges from 0 to about 18 inches, and annual precipitation ranges from about 20 to 75 inches. The average annual precipitation at the Hullville station near the lake for the period 1907-36 was 47.62 inches. Temperatures range from about 15° to 107 °F. The reservoir formed by Scott Dam has a surface area of 2,280 acres. The average depth is 38 feet and the maximum depth, near the dam, is about 100 feet. The original reservoir storage capacity of 94,400 acre-feet has been re­ duced to 86,780 acre-feet during the 37.5 year period (December 1921 May 1959). The loss of capacity represents a sediment deposition of 7,620 acre-feet, which is 8.1 percent of the original storage capacity, or an average annual loss of 0.22 percent. Most of the sediment in Lake Pillsbury is deposited in the upper reaches of the Eel River and Rice Fork Eel River arms. This distribution of sediment is attributed primarily to the properties of the sediment, the reservoir shape and operation, and the ratio of the reservoir capacity to inflow. The dry specific weight of the sediment deposited in the reservoir ranged from 41 to 87 pounds per cubic foot; the lowest specific weights are in the deep water in the main body of the reservoir, and the specific weight generally increased with distance upstream from the dam. The weighted-mean dry specific weight of sediment for the entire lake was 73 pounds per cubic foot. EE1 EE2 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES INTRODUCTION LOCATION AND GENERAL FEATURES Lake Pillsbury, formed by Scott Dam on the Eel River, is in north­ ern Lake County, Calif., 22 miles northeast of Ukiah and 17 miles north of Upper Lake. The drainage basin comprises the upper 288 square miles of the Eel River basin and lies wholly within the bound­ aries of the Mendocino National Forest. Most of the land within the drainage basin is owned by the U.S. Government and is administered by the Forest Service. The lake and some of the adjoining land are privately owned. Lumbering and grazing are the principal pursuits on both private and public lands, and little, if any, land is in cultivation. The lake is operated as a holdover-storage facility, and the water is utilized for power and. irrigation; minimum releases are made as required to support fish and wildlife. The lake is also a popular recreation area having private and public
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • An Estimation of Potential Salmonid Habitat Capacity in the Upper Mainstem Eel River, California
    AN ESTIMATION OF POTENTIAL SALMONID HABITAT CAPACITY IN THE UPPER MAINSTEM EEL RIVER, CALIFORNIA By Emily Jeanne Cooper A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Natural Resources: Environmental and Natural Resource Science Committee Membership Dr. Alison O’Dowd, Committee Chair Dr. James Graham, Committee Member Dr. Darren Ward, Committee Member Dr. Alison O’Dowd, Graduate Coordinator May 2017 ABSTRACT AN ESTIMATION OF POTENTIAL SALMONID HABITAT CAPACITY IN THE UPPER MAINSTEM EEL RIVER, CALIFORNIA Emily Jeanne Cooper In Northern California’s Eel River watershed, the two dams that make up the Potter Valley Project (PVP) restrict the distribution and production of anadromous salmonids, and current populations of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and steelhead trout (O. mykiss) in the upper mainstem Eel River are in need of recovery. In anticipation of the upcoming FERC relicensing of the PVP, this project provides an estimation of the extent of potential salmonid habitat and its capacity for steelhead trout and Chinook Salmon in the upper mainstem Eel River watershed above the impassable Scott Dam. Using three fish passage scenarios, potential Chinook Salmon habitat was estimated between 89-127 km (55-79 mi) for spawning and rearing; potential steelhead trout habitat was estimated between 318-463 km (198-288 mi) for spawning and between 179-291 km (111-181 mi) for rearing. Rearing habitat capacity was modeled with the Unit Characteristic Method, which used surrogate fish density values specific to habitat units (i.e. pools, riffles, runs) that were adjusted by measured habitat conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmonid Habitat and Population Capacity Estimates for Steelhead Trout and Chinook Salmon Upstream of Scott Dam in the Eel River, California
    Emily J. Cooper1, Alison P. O’Dowd, and James J. Graham, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, California 95521 Darren W. Mierau, California Trout, 615 11th Street, Arcata, California 95521 William J. Trush, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, California 95521 and Ross Taylor, Ross Taylor and Associates, 1660 Central Avenue # B, McKinleyville, California 95519 Salmonid Habitat and Population Capacity Estimates for Steelhead Trout and Chinook Salmon Upstream of Scott Dam in the Eel River, California Abstract Estimating salmonid habitat capacity upstream of a barrier can inform priorities for fisheries conservation. Scott Dam in California’s Eel River is an impassable barrier for anadromous salmonids. With Federal dam relicensing underway, we demonstrated recolonization potential for upper Eel River salmonid populations by estimating the potential distribution (stream-km) and habitat capacity (numbers of parr and adults) for winter steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and fall Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) upstream of Scott Dam. Removal of Scott Dam would support salmonid recovery by increasing salmonid habitat stream-kms from 2 to 465 stream-km for steelhead trout and 920 to 1,071 stream-km for Chinook salmon in the upper mainstem Eel River population boundaries, whose downstream extents begin near Scott Dam and the confluence of South Fork Eel River, respectively. Upstream of Scott Dam, estimated steelhead trout habitat included up to 463 stream-kms for spawning and 291 stream-kms for summer rearing; estimated Chinook salmon habitat included up to 151 stream-kms for both spawning and rearing. The number of returning adult estimates based on historical count data (1938 to 1975) from the South Fork Eel River produced wide ranges for steelhead trout (3,241 to 26,391) and Chinook salmon (1,057 to 10,117).
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Study Report for FERC Projects
    Potter Valley Project FERC Project No. 77 Initial Study Report September 2020 ©2020, Potter Valley Project Notice of Intent Parties California Trout Humboldt County Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission Round Valley Indian Tribes Sonoma County Water Agency This Page Intentionally Left Blank POTTER VALLEY PROJECT NOTICE OF INTENT PARTIES Potter Valley Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 77 Initial Study Report September 2020 ©2020, Potter Valley Project Notice of Intent Parties California Trout Humboldt County Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission Round Valley Indian Tribes Sonoma County Water Agency This Page Intentionally Left Blank Potter Valley Project, FERC Project No. 77 Initial Study Report TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Background ....................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 FERC Requirements for Proposed Modification to Approved Studies and New Studies .................................................................................................... 1-4 SECTION 2.0 STATUS OF FERC-APPROVED STUDIES AND PROPOSED STUDY MODIFICATIONS .............................................. 2-1 2.1 AQ 1 – Hydrology .......................................................................................... 2-3 2.2 AQ 2 – Water Temperature ........................................................................... 2-5 2.3 AQ 3 – Water Quality ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix L Wild and Scenic River Evaluation
    APPENDIX L WILD AND SCENIC RIVER EVALUATION INTRODUCTION Congress passed the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1968 to preserve riverine systems that contain certain exceptionally outstanding features such as scenery, recreation, geology, fish and wildlife, historic and cultural resources. Selected rivers and their immediate environments are to be preserved in a free flowing condition and are to be managed for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. In October 1979, an Environmental Message from the President directed the Department of the Interior (USDI) to inventory all potential Wild and Scenic rivers and directed agencies to assess the suitability of the inventoried rivers for additions to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) was conducted by the Heritage, Conservation and Recreation Service, USDI (now the National Park Service). The Middle Fork of the Eel River, which originates on the Mendocino National Forest, was the only river on the Mendocino National Forest included on the preliminary (Phase I) NRI in 1980. In January 1981, the Secretary of the Interior designated five California rivers as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System under Section 2 (a) (il) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The lower 23.5 miles of the Middle Fork of the Eel River was included in this designation and is currently managed as a Wild River. The upper 14.5 miles, which includes the headwaters of the Middle Fork of the Eel River, had not been analyzed for designation. This upper segment lies within the Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel Wilderness.
    [Show full text]
  • SIGNATURE PAGE for RESEARCH NATURAL AREA
    SIGNATURE PAGE for RESEARCH NATURAL AREA ESTABLISHMENT RECORD HALE RIDGE RESEARCH NATURAL AREA MENDOCINO NATIONAL FOREST LAKE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The undersigned certify that all applicable land management planning and environmental analysis requirements have been met and that boundaries are clearly identified in accordance with FSM 4063.21, Mapping and Recordation, and FSM 4063.41 5.e(3) in arriving at this recommendation. Prepared by Date __________________________ David R. Johnson, Biologist, Pacific Southwest Research Station Recommended by Date__________________________ Blaine Baker, District Ranger, Upper Lake Ranger District Recommended by Date__________________________ Daniel K. Chisholm, Forest Supervisor, Mendocino National Forest Concurrence of Date__________________________ James C. Space, Station Director Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station Established by Date_______________________________ G. Lynn Sprague, Regional Forester Pacific Southwest Region 1 TITLE PAGE Establishment Record for Hale Ridge Research Natural Area within Mendocino National Forest, Lake County, California. 2 Legend for Vegetation Map (3) Map Symbol Holland Type Kuchler Type (1966) SAF Type p Sierra Neveda Mixed 243 Conifer Forest k(l,m,h) Knobcone Pine Forest 248 l = low density knobcone m = moderate density knobcone h = high density knobcone cc Chamise Chaparral --- mc Mixed Chaparral --- 3 Legend for Soils Map (4) Map Unit Number Soil Type Slope___ 170 Maymen-Etsel-Speaker Association 30%-50% 201 Sanhedrin-Kekawaka-Speaker Complex 15%-30% 202 Sanhedrin-Kekawaka-Speaker Complex 30%-50% 225 Speaker-Maymen-Marpa Association 30%-50% 4 A. INTRODUCTION The Hale Ridge Research Natural Area (HRRNA) was selected to represent Knobcone Pine Forest1 for the North Coast Ranges physiographic province. The HRRNA encompasses 975 acres (395 ha) on the Upper Lake Ranger District of the Mendocino National Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • To Read Dr. O'dowd and Dr. Trush's 2016
    Friends of the Eel River Blockwater Investigation Final Memo August 5, 2016 Prepared by: Alison O’Dowd & William Trush, Humboldt State University River Institute FOER Blockwater Investigation Final Memo August 5, 2016 Prepared by: Alison O’Dowd and William Trush Humboldt State University River Institute SUMMARY There is currently no quantitative method to guide the 2,500 ac-ft annual blockwater release from the Potter Valley Project into the Mainstem Eel River. The four blockwater releases between WY2012-WY2016 used a variety of strategies in attempts to assist outmigrating juvenile salmonids. This study compared impaired (with dams) and modeled unimpaired flow conditions in the Mainstem Eel River downstream of Cape Horn Dam to see how the flows could be managed to optimize juvenile salmonid habitat during the spring hydrograph recession limb. Annual hydrographs of measured impaired flows exhibited steeper spring recession limbs and lower flows earlier in the summer compared with modeled unimpaired annual flows. The unimpaired hydrograph may impact spring rearing habitat for salmonids (particularly Chinook salmon) in terms of fish mobility, habitat availability and quality, and riffle productivity (as related to invertebrates food resources). Analyses of riffle crest thalweg depths in the Mainstem Eel River over the spring and summer seasons showed that flows in the impaired hydrograph reached critical life history thresholds earlier in the season compared to the modeled unimpaired flows. We recommend the following: 1) for dam releases
    [Show full text]
  • Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog Comments
    The Center for Biological Diversity submits the following information for the status review of the foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) (Docket #FWS-R8-ES-2015-0050), including substantial new information regarding the species' biology, population structure (including potential Distinct Population Segments of the species), historical and recent distribution and status, population trends, documented range contraction, habitat requirements, threats to the species and its habitat, disease, and the potential effects of climate change on the species and its habitat. The foothill yellow-legged frog has experienced extensive population declines throughout its range and a significant range contraction. Multiple threats continue unabated throughout much of the species’ remaining range, including impacts from dams, water development, water diversions, timber harvest, mining, marijuana cultivation, livestock grazing, roads and urbanization, recreation, climate change and UV-radiation, pollution, invasive species and disease. The species warrants listing as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Contact: Jeff Miller, [email protected] Contents: NATURAL HISTORY, BIOLOGY AND STATUS . .. 2 Biology. .2 Habitat . .. .4 Range and Documented Range Contraction . 4 Taxonomy . 9 Population Structure . 9 Historical and Recent Distribution and Status . 15 Central Oregon . .15 Southern Oregon . 18 Coastal Oregon . .20 Northern Coastal California . 25 Upper Sacramento River . 40 Marin/Sonoma . 45 Northern/Central Sierra Nevada . .47 Southern Sierra Nevada . .67 Central Coast/Bay Area . 77 South Coast. 91 Southern California . .. 94 Baja California, Mexico . .98 Unknown Population Affiliation. .99 Population Trends . .. .103 THREATS. .108 Habitat Alteration and Destruction . .. 108 Dams, Water Development and Diversions . .. .109 Logging . .. .111 Marijuana Cultivation . .. .112 Livestock Grazing . .. .112 Mining . .. .. .113 Roads and Urbanization .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix P Water Resources Technical Background Report
    Appendix P Water Resources Technical Background Report Humboldt County General Plan Draft EIR Humboldt County General Plan Water Resources Technical Report DRAFT WATER RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT For: Humboldt County Community Development Division DRAFT REPORT November 2007 Prepared for: County of Humboldt Community Development Division Eureka, CA 95501 Prepared by: Winzler & Kelly Consulting Engineers 633 Third Street Eureka, CA 95501 Tel: 707.443-8326 Fax: 707.444-8330 Appendices Appendix P - Page 1 Humboldt County General Plan Draft EIR Humboldt County General Plan Water Resources Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................1 I. Introduction.....................................................................................................................5 A. Purpose and Objectives..........................................................................................5 B. Water Resources Element Description...................................................................5 II. Existing Conditions.........................................................................................................7 A. Water Resources Background................................................................................7 B. Public Water Systems..............................................................................................10 C. Regulatory Setting..................................................................................................29
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Impact Statement Pine Mountain Late-Successional
    ----------- Draft Environmental Impact Statement Pine Mountain Late-Successional United States Reserve Habitat Protection and Department of Agriculture Enhancement Project Lake and Mendocino Counties, California Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region April 28, 2017 Photo: view from Pine Mountain Lookout. Recreation.gov For Information Contact: Frank Aebly, Ph.D. District Ranger Mendocino National Forest, Covelo and Upper Lake Ranger Districts 10025 Elk Mountain Road, Upper Lake, California (707) 275-1401 Pine Mountain Late-Successional Reserve Habitat Protection and Enhancement Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Lake and Mendocino Counties, California Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Responsible Official: Ann D. Carlson, Forest Supervisor Mendocino National Forest 825 N. Humboldt Avenue Willows, California 95988 For Information Contact: Frank Aebly, Ph.D. District Ranger Mendocino National Forest, Covelo and Upper Lake Ranger Districts 10025 Elk Mountain Road Upper Lake, California (707) 275-1401 2 Abstract Current conditions The Pine Mountain Late Successional Reserve (LSR) is one of the smaller LSRs within the Forest but provides an important link between the Blue Slides LSR seven miles to the southeast and the Sanhedrin LSR, 1.25 miles to the north. The Pine Mountain LSR also provides a critical link to State and other Federal lands to the south and west. It is the last remaining largest southernmost functional patch of late successional habitat in the Inner California Coast Range of California. The area is currently part of Northern Spotted Owl Critical Habitat (Unit 11, Subunit ICC 5), a land allocation designated by US Fish and Wildlife Service, and also includes 1.6 miles of critical habitat for anadromous fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Engineering Senior Theses
    A senior project presented to the Department of Environmental Resources Engineering, Humboldt State University 1973-1975 Turpin, Deborah Scale Modeling of a Pond for Hydraulic Study 1973 Erikson, Karl Legal Aspects of Logging and Water Quality 1974 A Pipe Flow Model of Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District's Pugner, Paul E. 1974 Industrial Water Service Facilities Bundros, Gregory J. River Modeling of Shively, California 1975 Suyama, Wendell Determination of Sea Salt in High Volume Air Samples 1975 Ward, William A. Fish Passage Structures for Anandromous Fish 1975 1976 Banducci, Gary Settlement Monitoring Program Ferndale, California 1976 Donley, Charles Jr. River Modeling of Shively, California 1976 Finney, Brad and Efficiencies of Ideal Light Collectors 1976 Yamamoto, Len Harris, Al The Development of a Wind Generator for Supplementary Power 1976 Zelver, Nick The Filter Press 1976 1977 Davidson, Stephen and Hydrodynamic and Mass Transfer Studies in Sorbing Porous 1977 Kubitschek, John Media Freitas, Chris and Design and Operation of a Hydraulic Model of Humboldt Bay 1977 Newman, Gary Sander, David and Byers, Aerial Photography Surveillance of Water Quality 1977 Richard Soffran, Martin Effect of Cement or Lime to Soil Stability 1977 Capetown Bridge and Gardners Bridge Follow-Up Environmental Spencer, Tim 1977 Impact Study 1978 Operation and Maintenance Manual Arcata Water Pollution Grieb, Alan R. 1978 Control Facilities Hofmann, Joseph A. A Particulate Diffusion Model for the Valley West Air Shed 1978 Innes, Gordon Monte Carlos Simulation of a Series of Sewage Oxidation Ponds 1978 Roper, Dale Allen Proposed Retaining Wall Design for Simpson Timber Company 1978 A Study of Some Physical and Chemical Features of a Pilot Fish Shuster, Melvin 1978 Pond Projected Quantities, Characteristics and Final Disposal Steinman, Larry Alternatives for Solid Waste Management in Humboldt County 1978 California Wortman, Randal T.
    [Show full text]
  • California Bureau of Sanitary Engineering Records
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf529004mx Online items available California Bureau of Sanitary Engineering records Finding aid prepared by Water Resources Collections and Archives staff. Special Collections & University Archives The UCR Library P.O. Box 5900 University of California Riverside, California 92517-5900 Phone: 951-827-3233 Fax: 951-827-4673 Email: [email protected] URL: http://library.ucr.edu/libraries/special-collections-university-archives © 2007 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. California Bureau of Sanitary WRCA 095 1 Engineering records Descriptive Summary Title: California Bureau of Sanitary Engineering records Date (inclusive): 1901-1966 Collection Number: WRCA 095 Creator: California. Bureau of Sanitary Engineering Extent: 30.33 linear feet(76 boxes) Repository: Rivera Library. Special Collections Department. Riverside, CA 92517-5900 Abstract: The collection consists of files of the former Bureau of Sanitary Engineering of the California Department of Public Health, located in Berkeley, California (now known as the Department of Health Services), relating to water quality. Languages: The collection is in English. Access The collection is generally open for research. A portion of the collection is unprocessed, and requires approval from Special Collections & Archives staff to use. Publication Rights Copyright has not been assigned to the University of California, Riverside Libraries, Special Collections & University Archives. Distribution or reproduction of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. To the extent other restrictions apply, permission for distribution or reproduction from the applicable rights holder is also required. Responsibility for obtaining permissions, and for any use rests exclusively with the user.
    [Show full text]