DOCSLIB.ORG

GREEN GULCH RANCHI UPPER LONG VALLEY Water and Land Management Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GREEN GULCH RANCHI UPPER LONG VALLEY Water and Land Management Project 1 506-00104 rIT GREEN GULCH RANCHI UPPER LONG VALLEY Water and Land Management Project A*ffil|ru*ons Q- ENvTnoNMENTAL INroRvrarIoN pERTATNTNG To rHE GnrnN Gur,cn RlNcn/UppBR LoNc V.qlr,ny W^q.rrn an-l LlNn MIN,q,cEMENT Pnomcr Preparedfor: Edmund T. Allen III, P.C. Green Gulch Ranch Partnership 5640 East Caballo Drive Paradise Valley, Arizona 85253 -2208 (602) 483-04sr Prepared by: Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. L475 Terminal Way, Suite B Reno, Nevada 89502 (702)78s-8888 July 1996 I I Ex vt noxrrlENTAL lxroRrvrnuoN pERTAINING To rH E Gnnnn GulcH Rlxcn/UpppR LoNc Vallny W.q,rnn lxo Lnxn MlxlcnunNt PRolocr I TanlB or Cournxrs I 1.0 INrRooucrroN........... ...... l-1 1.1 Purpose and Summary............ ................. 1-l I 1.2 Project Location... .................. l-1 2.0 ExrsrrNc CoNorrroNs................ ........2-I I 2.1 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses ......... ...............2-l 2.2 Existing General Plan and Zoning Designations............. ............2-I 2.3 Existing and Surrounding Land Ownership........ .......2-l I 2.4 Environmental Setting ....-......2-l 2.4.1 Geology and Soils... ...2-2 I 2.4.2 Surface Water Resources. .............2-3 2.4.3 Groundwater............ ....................2-4 2.4.4 Vegetation and Wildlife ................2-4 I 2.4.5 Cultural Resources. .....2-6 3.0 Pnorecr D8scRrproN............... ..........3-1 I 3.1 Project Objectives ..................3-1 3.2 Project Description .................3-1 3.2.1 Civil Engineering Design...... .......3-2 I 3.2.2 Environmental Planning and Design .............3-3 4.0 Pnorpcr DpvEr.opvENT SrRATEGy.......... ...........4-I I 4.1 Required Applications and Construction Permits..... ...................4-1 4.2 Environmental Documentation ................4-I I 4.3 Schedule... ............4-l I 5.0 Cor.rcr.usroNs ............ ......5-l APPENDICES I Appendix I Project Team Qualifications t 'Lrsr oF TABLES Table 4-l Potential Applications and Permitting Requirements I T T I t T.lnln or Coxrnxrs (continued) I Lrsr on FrcuRrs I Figure 1-1 Regional Location Map Figure 1-2 Vicinity Map I iff:3.1 iriil,,i:*n'' Figure 4-1 Entitlement Processing Schedule t I r Lrsr on AcRoNvl,rs I AF Acre Feet r AFY Acre Feet per Year r AMSL Above Mean Sea Level BLM Bureau of Land Management I CDFG California Department of Fish and Game I 't Caltrans California Department of Transportation I cDwR Califomia Department of Water Resources I CEQA California Environmental Quality Act r CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base I CUP Conditional Use Permit I CRWQCB California Regional Water Quality ControlBoard I CWRCB California Water Resources Control Board I EIR Environmental lmpact Report T FWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service t GPM Gallon per Minute I KV Kilovolt I NEPA National Environmental Policy Act I t NRI{P National Register of Historic Places - SHPO State Historic Preservation Office I SPPC Sierra Pacific Power Company I T&E Threatened and Endangered Species UPRR Union Pacific Railroad Ir USFS United States Forest Service ! iii t t Green Gulch Ranch/Upper Long Valley Water and Land Management Project I July 1996 I 1.0 INTRODUCTION I 1.1 Purpose and Summary The purpose of this report is to analyze the opportunities and constraints associated with developing the 2,200 acre Green Gulch Ranch (project site) whlle maintaining the rural I ambiance of the Upper Long Valley in California. The Green Gulch Ranch/Upper Long Valley Land and Water Management Project Qtroposed project) proposes to develop approximately 3,300 acre feet per year (afy) of groundwater in the Upper Long Valley of California and convey I this water in a buried pipeline approximately 11.6 miles to one of several valleys north of Reno. The study methodology of this report consists of gathering existing data, conducting research, I and reviewing planning and engineering documents prepared by both the public and private sectors in order to document information associated with the proposed project. The data contained in this report, including the appendices, represents the first phase of planning I necessary to determine the development potential of the project site. t 1.2 Project Location The proposed project site is located in the northeastern portion of the unincorporated area of I Sierra County, California as shown on Figure 1-1. On a regional scale, the 2,200 acre site is located approximately 16 miles north of the City of Reno, Nevada and 65 miles south of Susanville, California. In a local context, the site is located in the southern portion of Long I Valley, north of Peavine Mountain, south of Highway 70 and the Lassen County boundary, east of the Sierra Valley and the Bald Mountains, and west of Highway 395 as shown on Figure 1-2. t Regional access to the site is provided by Highway 395, Highway 70, and Long Valley Road. Highway 395 provides access to the City of Reno to the south and Susanville to the north. Highway 70 provides access to Quincy and Oroville to the west. Long Valley Road is a local t road providing access to Toiyabe National Forest land to the west. T I I I I I 1-l I I !uutiiiiluttiii riirl l ii:::::::::::;i:::i.;na l I .st'$l,iitE- I O HERLONG , I f I Ll f L I I .f rE tilf Ela :t<-l 3i=E )to ot- 4lJ 6f-5te I f stTE"-*l r I T a f I SIERRA COUNTY ____t NEVADA COUNTY I .INCLINEVILLAGE -a SOUTH LAKE I TAHOE I REGIONAL LOCATION MAP €)- INTERSTATE €- HtcHwAy Figure 1-1 _G)_ ROUTE STATEBOUNDARY COUNTY BOUNDARY File: Lon98.5/960663 GREEN GULCH RANCHruPPER LONG VALLEY Oalei 7125196 O WATER AND LAND MANAGEMENT PROJECT -... NOT TO SC ALE Roviewed By:CAH I o.T |rlO o rr q( r- JUJ o z U SP E =E oo. @ =l.? ZF 8 I Fl! q2 z o J[! o @ .- d' z trE oo: J o @ uJ trJ 0L N o 3 N i o H€-i I .9 ts tIJ g o :5tm0 o cc E :mvu-Os-.= .= O v/ o= o z 0=oYrrO!X il '::t;oao v:g.ia=: o : 6d6,sg&;t : fz9o j E =8tro o F.E ztr c> UJ IIJ i is$a + UJF tJJ u)td o3EE u/o] uno/,y' v'o* f,6 '\j':rl_-,..\,, Poorllo! I ouad, or J uo un D \<r" {Ptn -6 'lrl,-,. o, -,-'-,]j 6 \\v\\ j \..\ "-Y sll0g iarc s6u1,ld5 p1o3 ur\olJapJog :l' :l rl a'v ',i {t""" *, ! \\; t l^v l.1f,uoN :l cl" .^ra s6ulrdg :l 9u"- ' i rf,r^n^ u\r\r- ptoc rl A-LI\I IUJ VUdIIS jl :l lNOOCl NSSSVt rl ,'F I rl'\ +{ uoilcunf J qol nlalloH ! o/olJoo/ oJ R N ti ATNNOS 3OHSVM a a --t -l --l --t rn m -rl I i : : frl :\r> r :.C2 fr o z xsMoJJDN,, aql a///Auosns' of II I I rII I rII I II I ITI r I Green Gulch Ranch/Upper Long Valley Water and Land Management Project I July 1996 I 2.0 ExrsrrNC CONDITIONS I 2.1 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses The project site currently consists of relatively low density non-intensive land uses including a cattle ranch, grazing, residential, and undeveloped uses. The site is void of urban development I and site improvements are limited to a few semi-improved roads and structures. The project site accommodates several easements including a local electrical distribution line and several road way right-of-ways. Sierra Pacific Power Company (SPPC) is currently proposing a 345 kilovolt I (kV) powerline easement that, if approved, would traverse the site in a north to south fashion. Several streams traverse the site as shown on Figure l-2. These streams are further described in I Section 2.4 of this report. Surrounding the 2,200 acre project site are a variety of land uses including a land management area maintained by the California Department of Fish and Game to the north; a Union Pacifrc I Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way, highway commercial uses, and Highway 395 to the east; ranchland and the Toiyabe National Forest to the south; and the Bald Mountains to the west. A T large ski resort is currently proposed on the west side of the Bald Mountains, west of the project site. It should be noted that immediately east of the project site in the State of Nevada, the Washoe County Comprehensive Planning Department is aware of plans to expand development I in Bordertown to include a hotel. t 2.2 Existing General Plan and ZoningDesignations A major portion of the Upper Long Valley is currently designated as "General Forest" (GF) according to the Sierra County General Plan while the overlying zoning designation is I Agriculture (A-1) according to the Sierra County Zoning Ordinance. The project site retains the same general plan and zoning designations as most portions of the Upper Long Valley including GF and A-1, respectively. The property development standards in the A-1 zoning district I includes a lot area of 160 acres. The General Forest District was established to promote development in Siena County which is t compatible with and preserves the natural environment and provides for the long-run maintenance of natural resources. Permitted uses include growing and harvesting of agricultural T and forest products, grazing of livestock, single family residences and accessory buildings. A variety of uses are conditionally permitted including such uses as public parks and recreation uses, reservoirs for water storage, public utility buildings and uses, camping and picnic uses, golf t courses, and guest ranches.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Field Trip Summary Report for Sierra Nevadas, California: Chico NE, SE
    \ FIElD TRIP SUMMARY FOR SIERRA NEVADAS, CALIFORNIA CHICO NE, SE AND SACRAMENTO NE I. INTRODUCTION Field reconnaissance of the work area is an integral part for the accurate interpretation of aerial photography. Photographic signatures are compared to the actual wetland's appearance in the field by observing vegetation, soil and topo~raphy. This information is weighted with seasonality and conditIOns at both dates of photography and ground truthing. The project study area was located in northern California's Sierra Nevada Mountains. Ground truthing covered the area of each 1:100,000: Chico NE, Chico SE, and Sacramento NE. This field summary describes the data we were able to collect on the various wetland sites and the plant communities observed. II. FIELD MEMBERS Barbara Schuster Martel Laboratories, Inc. Dennis Peters U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service III. FIELD DATES July 27 - August 2, 1988 IV. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Type: Color Infrared Transparencies Scale: 1:58,000 V. COLLATERAL DATA U.S. Geological Survey Quadrangles Soil Survey of HI Dorado Area. California, 1974. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. Soil Survey of Nevada County Area. California, 1975. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. 1 Soil Survey of Sierra Valley Area. California. Parts of Sierra. Plumas. and Lassen Counties, 1975. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. Soil Survey - Tahoe Basin Area. California and Nevada, 1974. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. Soil Survey - Amador Area. California, 1965. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Cooking in Prehistory: Evidence from the Sugar Loaf
    COOKING IN PREHISTORY: EVIDENCE FROM THE SUGAR LOAF SITE IN SIERRA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA AND THE EASTERN SIERRA ____________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Chico ____________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Anthropology ____________ by Marilla M. Martin Fall 2014 COOKING IN PREHISTORY: EVIDENCE FROM THE SUGAR LOAF SITE IN SIERRA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA AND THE EASTERN SIERRA A Thesis by Marilla M. Martin Fall 2014 APPROVED BY THE DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES AND VICE PROVOST FOR RESEARCH: _________________________________ Eun K. Park, Ph.D. APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: ______________________________ _________________________________ Guy Q. King, Ph.D. Antoinette Martinez, Ph.D., Chair Graduate Coordinator _________________________________ Frank Bayham, Ph.D. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I must first thank my thesis committee, Dr. Antoinette Martinez and Dr. Frank Bayham for their constant encouragement from the beginning of my journey through graduate school until now. You have both made this process meaningful, fun, and productive. Next, I must recognize the enormous support and patience I have received from all the members of my work family at the Bureau of Land Management, Eagle Lake Field Office. Jill Poulsen, Amy King, Valda Lockie, and Missi Nelson, all your kind words and support got me through this process. David Jack Scott, thank you for frequently inquiring to see if my thesis was done yet, I’m happy to report that it finally is! Thank you to my work mentor, my friend, and one of many proofreaders, Sharynn-Marie Blood for your unwavering support, time, and patience. The BLM also provided financial assistance that made this thesis possible.
    [Show full text]
  • California & Oregon
    1 CALIFORNIA & OREGON 5TH – 19TH AUGUST 1999 This was a two-week trip with Alan Johnston. The idea was to travel up the Californian & Oregon coast, then go inland, travelling south through the Bend area, Crater Lake, Klamath Basin and back into California through the Sierra Valley and Yuba pass, then head down to Monterey and Bodega Bay for two pelagics, with the last few days birding around Point Reyes and San Francisco. Itinerary Day 1 – 5th August. Landed at San Francisco Airport. Drove up the USF 101 & SH 1 to Bodega Bay, birding around Stinson Beach and Bolinas Bay. Motel in Santa Rosa. Day 2 – 6th August. Left Santa Rosa and drove up the USF 101 to Crescent City. Birded at the Caltrans Rest Area, Woodley Island Marina, Arcata Marsh, Trinidad Head & the Elk Head Trail. Spent the evening around Crescent City and at Lake Earl. Motel in Crescent City. Day 3 – 7th August. Crescent City to Newport. This was the Oregon part of the trip. Drove up the USF 101 to Newport. Due to torrential rain we didn’t really bird after a good scout around Crescent City Harbour and area. Stopped at Gold Beach Harbour, Mt. Humbug SP, Takenitch Lake campsite, Siuslaw River Mouth and at a pond north of Glendana. Motel in Newport. Day 4 – 8th August. Newport to Sisters, via Corvalis and Albany along the USF 20. Birded early morning at the south jetty and the Marine Science Centre, then late morning at Yaquina Head. On the way to Sisters, birded Foster Reservoir campsite, Peter Green Reservoir, Hummer feeders at Soda Fork, Lost Lake, Indian Ford campsite/road area and Cold Springs campsite.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Sierra to the Sea the Ecological History of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Watershed
    From the Sierra to the Sea The Ecological History of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Watershed © 1998 The Bay Institute of San Francisco Second printing, July 2003 The Bay Institute of San Francisco is a non-profit research and advocacy organization which works to protect and restore the ecosystem of the San Francisco Bay/Delta estuary and its watershed. Since 1981, the Institute’s policy and technical staff have led programs to protect water quality and endangered species, reform state and federal water management, and promote comprehensive ecological restoration in the Bay/Delta. Copies of this report can be ordered for $40.00 (includes shipping and handling) from: The Bay Institute of San Francisco 500 Palm Drive Novato, CA 94949 Phone: (415) 506-0150 Fax: (415) 506-0155 www.bay.org The cover is taken from an engraving showing the entrance to the middle fork of the Sacramento River near modern-day Steamboat Slough, in C. Ringgold’s 1852 series of navigational charts and sailing directions for San Francisco Bay and Delta. Printed on recycled paper From the Sierra to the Sea The Ecological History of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Watershed July 1998 The Bay Institute FROM THE SIERRA TO THE SEA: THE ECOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA WATERSHED Table of Contents Page CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................. vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... ES-1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION I. Background.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A General History of Sierra County
    A General History of Sierra County Author: William G. Copren EARLY BEGINNINGS The area now comprising Sierra County, California has been occupied for over 5,000 years. Ancient petroglyphs, which are scattered from Kyburz Flat to Lacey Meadows and Hawley Lake, bear witness to the existence of early Native Americans in the region. The Miwok tribe lived here, mostly on the west side of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The Washoe tribal area included the region that is now Eastern Sierra County, including the Sierra Valley. IMMIGRATION In 1844 the first American immigrants passed through what is now southeastern Sierra County on their way up the Truckee River. By the next year migrant groups had found a route through Stampede and Dog Valleys that avoided the need to move their dray animals in the river. The Donner Party apparently used this trail to reach their winter camps in 1846. By 1847 thousands of migrants had moved Big Lucy over this trail to California. That year, members of Stephen Kearney’s Washoe Indian Woman Mormon Battalion returned to the East along this route. In 1848 gold with papoose was discovered at Sutter’s Mill precipitating the Gold Rush of 1849. Despite the frantic quest for gold, none of the travelers thus far had remained in this area. SETTLEMENT Cut-eye Foster’s Bar on the western boundary of Sierra County appears to be the first location occupied by migrant miners in late 1848 or early 1849. Miles and Andrew Goodyear were mining at the present site of Goodyears Bar in early 1849, and they sent workers up to the forks at the North Fork of the Yuba River.
    [Show full text]
  • Loyalton Resource Supply Assess Report Final Redacted 20210204
    BIOMASS FUEL AND LOG SUPPLY AVAILABILITY AND COST ASSESSMENT FOR A BIOMASS POWER FACILITY AND SAWMILL COLLOCATED AT LOYALTON, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Prepared by: February 4, 2021 Final Report REDACTED VERSION ACKNOWLEDGMENTS TSS Consultants wishes to thank individuals and organizations for their significant efforts in support of this investigation. These include, but are not limited to: • Amy Berry, Chief Executive Officer, Tahoe Fund • John B. Jones, Jr., Board Member, Tahoe Fund • Jim Boyd, Board Member, Tahoe Fund • Jim Turner, Chief Operations Officer, Sierra Valley Enterprises • Jon Shinn, Forest Products Manufacturing Consultant • Steve Frisch, President, Sierra Business Council USFS Vegetation Management, Contracting and Biomass Utilization Staff: o Larry Swan, Regional Office o Tim Howard, Regional Office o Dan Smith, Eldorado National Forest o Brian Garrett, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit o Victor Lyon, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit o David Fournier, Tahoe National Forest o Annabelle Monti, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest o Will Brendecke, Plumas National Forest • Coreen Francis, State Forester, California and Nevada, Bureau of Land Management • Mike Vollmer, Forester, Nevada Division of Forestry • Steve Brink, Vice President, California Forestry Association • Bob Rynearson, Forester, W.M. Beaty and Associations • Mike Mitsel, Forester, Sierra Pacific Industries • Dan Porter, The Nature Conservancy • Craig Thomas, The Fire Restoration Group • Niel Fischer, Forest Manager, Collins Pine Company • Nic Enstice, Sierra Nevada
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan Concept Document
    SIERRA VALLEY GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN CONCEPT DOCUMENT Prepared for: Sierra Valley Groundwater Management District Groundwater Sustainability Agency for the Sierra Valley Groundwater Basin PO Box 88 Chilcoot, CA 96105 http://www.sierravalleygmd.org/ Last Revised: June 1, 2020 Sierra Valley Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan Concept Document Prepared by: Greg Hinds, Hinds Engineering Email: [email protected] Phone: 530-401-0000 Author’s Notes: This document is a compilation of available and relevant information assembled for the purpose of streamlining the development of the Sierra Valley Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (SV GSP). This document also includes draft text for GSP components that are required to be developed through the stakeholder engagement process. Such text is suggested for use as a starting place for said process. This document was originally being prepared as a draft GSP beginning in early 2018 when the prospect of obtaining grant funding for GSP development was uncertain. In early 2019, after a second round of SGMA grant funding was announced and the Sierra Valley Groundwater Management District (SVGMD) began to feel confident they would be able to apply for and receive funding for GSP development, the document title was changed and the approach to the development of this document evolved. It was decided by the SVGMD Directors that continuing to develop this document would be worthwhile, given the uncertainty associated with the timeline of the grant award and the likelihood that the time remaining for GSP development after receiving the award would be relatively limited. It was also decided that the format should be kept consistent with GSP formatting for ease of use of this document in the development of the actual SV GSP.
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Valley Aquifer Delineation and Ground Water Flow
    Sierra Valley Aquifer Delineation and Ground Water Flow Prepared for Randy Wilson, Director Plumas County Planning Department 520 Main Street, Quincy, CA 95971 530-283-7011 and Sierra Valley Groundwater Management District Loyalton, CA By Burkhard Bohm Hydrogeologist CHG lic. #337 Plumas Geo-Hydrology PO Box 1922, Portola, CA 96122 530-836-2208 Final Report December 27, 2016 Page 1 of 69 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 6 Previous work conducted in SV ................................................................................... 6 Scope of the current study ........................................................................................... 7 2. Groundwater Recharge Areas in Sierra Valley ......................................................... 8 Groundwater recharge area defined ............................................................................ 8 Aerial contributions of groundwater recharge ............................................................... 8 Ground water recharge centers ................................................................................... 9 Defining groundwater recharge centers in the Sierra Valley watershed .................... 10 3. Aquifer delineation ................................................................................................. 13 Background ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Italian Swiss Settlement of Plumas County 1860-1920
    :«<: Italian Swiss Settlement Of Plumas County S^PX^^-.\A/ ^ 1860-1920 2£*£fe«*- ITALIAN-SWISS SETTLEMENT IN PLUMAS COUNTY 1860 to 1920 by Jacqueline and JoEllen Hall Winning Essay in the First Annual A.N.C.R.R.-Fabrics West Contest in Local History, 1973 With an Introduction by W. H. Hutchinson Association for Northern California Records and Research Chico, California Research Paper No. 1 Copyright 1973 by Jacqueline and JoEllen Hall Published 1973 by the Association for Northern California Records and Research; Printed by California State University, Chico, and Brock's Printers, Chico, California 95926 Second Printing, May, 1975 ANCRR Publications are available from: Association for Northern California Records and Research P. 0. Box 3074 Chico, California 95926 CONTENTS Introduction v I. Scope and Location of Italian-Swiss Immigration to California 1 II. Description of Typical Immigrant and Influences on Immigration 2 III. History of Swiss Immigration Stressing Economic Reasons For Immigration 6 IV. Italian-Swiss Immigration to Plumas County Focusing on the Dual Attractions of Gold and Land 13 V. Italian-Swiss Settlement in Plumas County 20 VI. Pattern of Land Acquisition and Land Occupancy 26 VII. Development of a Sense of Community Through Group Migration, Partnerships and Marriage Within the National Group ..... 32 VIII. Significance ot the Italian-Swiss Immigrant in Plumas County as Revealed by the Dottas, the Ramellis and the Guidicis ... 38 IX. Contributing Factors to Successful Settlement 46 Appendix A Italian-Swiss Family Names
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating Calving Areas for Rocky Mountain Elk on the Plumas National Forest
    Investigating Calving Areas for Rocky Mountain Elk on the Plumas National Forest: Implications for Land Management By Abigail Marshall A case study submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Natural Resources Presented: March 27, 2020 Commencement: June 13, 2020 Marshall Case Study Abstract Sustainable elk (Cervus canadensis) habitat management on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) lands involves a complex relationship between management practices and ecological processes. A relatively novel Rocky Mountain elk population (Cervus canadensis nelsoni) on the Plumas National Forest (PNF) in northeastern California became established in the early 2000s, but there is little information on the current number of individuals or the extent of land used by elk on the PNF. Elk populations are highly influenced by cow and calf survival and disturbances during the calving period are associated with reduced calf:cow ratios. Taking advantage of the fact that cows and calves have limited mobility during the first few weeks after birth, I developed a survey method that can be utilized by the PNF to identify and conserve key areas where calving activity occurs. Vegetative conditions and management histories will be documented for positively identified calving areas on two scales to begin gathering data related to site selection. The monitoring program will enhance the USFS’s ability to manage elk habitat, as well as food resources for the threatened gray wolf (Canis lupus), and domestic grazing on
    [Show full text]
  • Bighorn Sheep Ritual in Northeast California
    BIGHORN SHEEP RITUAL IN NORTHEAST CALIFORNIA: AN EXAMINATION OF THE LOYALTON ROCKSHELTER CACHES ____________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Chico ____________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Anthropology ____________ by © Christine C. O'Neill 2015 Fall 2015 BIGHORN SHEEP RITUAL IN NORTHEAST CALIFORNIA: AN EXAMINATION OF THE LOYALTON ROCKSHELTER CACHES A Thesis by Christine C. O'Neill Fall 2015 APPROVED BY THE INTERIM DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES: _________________________________ Sharon Barrios, Ph.D. APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: ______________________________ _________________________________ Guy Q. King, Ph.D. Frank Bayham, Ph.D., Chair Graduate Coordinator _________________________________ Antoinette Martinez, Ph.D. PUBLICATION RIGHTS No portion of this thesis may be reprinted or reproduced in any manner unacceptable to the usual copyright restrictions without the written permission of the author. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my professors and mentors, Dr. Frank Bayham and Dr. Antoinette Martinez. You both have challenged me to become a better and more thoughtful anthropologist. Dr. Bayham, thank you for providing me with this research opportunity. You handed me the Loyalton Rockshelter faunal assemblage on a silver platter my first year, and I have been obsessed with fetal bighorn sheep ever since. You have certainly added to my weirdness. Dr. Martinez, you have been provided an incredible amount of support and kindness through this process. I would also like to thank Kevin Dalton for all the time that he took answering all my crazy, ridiculous questions. Thank you to the students and professors assisting in faunal identifications.
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Valley Ranch
    Sierra Valley Ranch Producer Stories 2009 Calpine, California From Upper Feather River Watershed Farmers and Ranchers Sierra Valley Ranch is situated in Sierra and Plumas Counties at 5,000 ft elevation. This mountain valley receives snowmelt and runoff on the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada. Several major streams and tributaries run through the ranch including the Middle Fork Feather River, Craycroft Creek, Cold Stream, and the Westside Canal. The ranch is a seasonal summer grazing operation for 2,000 commercial cow‐calf pairs. The water flowing through the property is one of the most valuable assets of this largest ranch in Sierra Valley. However, years of seasonal flood damage and mismanagement had left the irrigation system non‐functional. Marsh grasses had taken over much of the low‐lying areas while the elevated areas of the meadows had lost production of higher quality grasses. The Eric Roen family purchased the ranch in 1995 with a clear vision of the tremendous potential of this historic ranch with its vast native meadows and rangelands and the idle water rights. Ranch manager Paul Roen knew that the repair and improvement of the irrigation structures would be a Management Highlights big job. But, the potential to improve the productivity and economic viability ♦ Repair 15 major irrigation of the ranch by re‐establishing water control was obvious. Three truckloads structures damaged by seasonal of culverts, a D6 Cat and 320 Excavator were used to repair and upgrade 15 floods and negligence major irrigation system structures. Recycled 25,000 lb. gondola cars obtained from a railroad salvage contractor were installed as main channel weirs and ♦ Improve water distribution from have proven to better withstand the winter floods than wooden structures.
    [Show full text]