DOCSLIB.ORG

Contribute to a New Vision for the Conservation Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Contribute to a New Vision for the Conservation Program CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY • VOL 35 / NO 2 APRIL–JUNE 2 005 • WWW.CNPS.ORG Bulletin Contribute to a New Vision for the Conservation Program BY ILEENE ANDERSON he Conservation Program is halfway through the conservation visioning Tmeetings being convened throughout California. Program volunteers and staff meet to listen to the views of CNPS members and other interested folks regarding the most press- ing conservation needs and strategic directions for the conservation program and how CNPS should proceed to address these needs. Part of the impetus for these meetings is a potential restructuring of the program at the State level, in light of the former Senior Land Management Analyst, Emily Roberson’s having moved on to the Center for Biological Diversity and the CONSERVATION VISIONING Lilac sunbonnets bloomed in profusion this year. Photo: I. Anderson. MEETINGS Open to the membership and impending retirement of the current Conser- notes from previous meetings, at http://www. other interested folks vation Director, David Chipping, at the end of cnps.org/programs/conservation/meetings. the year. The program has held two meetings htm. � July 7 so far, one in Southern California in January, —Ileene Anderson is Senior Analyst and 10:30 am–4:00 pm and a second in the Sacramento area in March. Southern California Botanist for CNPS Santa Clara Valley CNPS Two more are slated in July (see box at left). To Office, Raptor Room date these meetings have been inspiring, with a 3921 E. Bayshore Boulevard breadth of viewpoints, ideas, and great sugges- Palo Alto, CA 94303 tions. The meetings provide an exciting oppor- July 23 tunity to meet with other plant conservation 10:30 am –4:00 pm activists. Following the state-wide meetings, Hopland Research and Extension Center a final version of the conservation vision will 4070 University Road be composed to guide the CNPS Conservation Hopland, CA 95443 Program. This plan will be presented at the September 2005 Conservation Conference and For more information, see Chapter Council meeting, which is also open http://www.cnps.org/programs/ to the membership (see page 8). conservation/meetings.htm The conservation visioning meetings are —Jennifer Kalt, open to all interested folks. If you plan to State Forest Issues Coordinator attend, RSVP so that we can provide adequate [email protected] space and refreshments. Check out the general agenda for the meetings, as well as meeting P A G E 1 CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY • VOL 35 / NO 2 APRIL–JUNE 2 005 • WWW.CNPS.ORG A Note from the Executive Director You Volunteered 80,000 Hours A DEMOCRATIC (SMALL-D) ORGANIZATION And…We’re in Color! tinct personality, with unique projects and By design, CNPS is a democratic, from the programs, as can be seen from a reading of bottom up, organization. The power lies in the ou are holding in your hands the very the 2004 Chapter Annual Activity Report and chapters and is exercised through the Chapter first CNPS Bulletin ever printed in recent issues of Fremontia. Many chapters Council, which provides direction and connects Y full color. It’s brought to you cour- maintain websites that are linked with the the chapters to the state organization. tesy of a generous member, who prefers to CNPS web site (http://www.cnps.org/chapters/ The Chapter Council has several core func- remain anonymous. Upon hearing my plan chapter_map.htm). Chapters organize annual tions: to maintain strong relations between to showcase the fantastic photos submitted garden tours, maintain native plant nurser- the chapters and the state Board of Direc- from chapter-sponsored desert field trips this ies, sponsor overnight botanical expeditions, tors; to fulfill basic governance responsibili- spring, he offered to donate the amount over publish books, monitor rare plants, and fund ties related to electing and evaluating the usual printing costs, and turned the dream of scholarship programs. A few chapters employ Board and changing the bylaws; and to set many members into a reality. At this point, it staff to coordinate volunteers on land stew- the strategic vision, mission, and goals of the is a one-time-only experiment. Let me know ardship projects, native plant nurseries, and organization and to set policy to put those what you think. conservation programs. Read chapter profiles into effect. The Board hires the Executive in each issue of this year’s Fremontia. Director to manage day-to-day operation, LIFEBLOOD OF CNPS The chapters remain a solid base of CNPS staff and programs. Almost all of our 9,800 members are affili- volunteers. During 2004, 29 chapters reported Please make a point of sharing your ideas ated with one of our chapters, which are the 80,000 volunteer hours! That’s the equivalent of with your Council Delegate, especially if you lifeblood of CNPS. Each of the 32 chapters has 40 full-time workers. Even the smallest chapters are not able to attend Chapter Council meetings the same foundation: a core group of commit- with fewer than 40 members reported hundreds this year. CNPS leadership begins with members ted volunteers, a series of monthly meetings of volunteer hours. And, it appears that volunteer and chapters. I speak for all staff in welcoming with a speaker, weekend field trips, an annual hours are probably under- rather than over- your ideas and recommendations. � plant sale, and a newsletter. estimated. This number has been consistent for —Pamela C. Muick, Ph.D, Execu- But each chapter has also developed a dis- at least the past couple of years. tive Director, [email protected] CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Chapter Council Reviews Strategic Plan Sacramento, CA 95816-5113 Priorities for action Phone 916-447-2677 Fax 916-447-2727 � BY SUE BRITTING E-mail [email protected] � Visit www.CNPS.org s happens about every four years, review of the CNPS Strategic Plan is now under way. At Send articles to [email protected] the March Chapter Council meeting, we focused our discussions on the mission and vision Pamela C. Muick, Executive Director A statements of the strategic plan, including views of members, whose suggestions and com- BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR 2005 ments can be viewed at the CNPS website. Carol Witham, President Overall, people were mostly satisfied with the thrust of the existing mission and vision statements. Sandy McCoy, Vice President Desired changes reflected a desire to tune-up and refine the wording rather than change any funda- Steve Hartman, Treasurer mental direction. The council established two committees to consider the suggestions and to propose David Diaz, Vern Goehring, Diana language changes for consideration by the Chapter Council at the June meeting, as follows: Hickson, Lynn Houser, Lynne Kada, Mission Committee, to consist of David Magney (Channel Islands Chapter) and Julie Evens (CNPS David Magney, J. Spence McIntyre vegetation staff).Vision Committee, composed of David Chipping (San Luis Obispo Chapter), Betsey CHAPTER COUNCIL Landis (LA/Santa Monica Chapter), Dave Sundstrom (Orange County Chapter),and Brad Jenkins Lynne Kada, Chair, Lynn Houser, Vice Chair (Orange County Chapter). Sarah Jayne, Secretary At the meeting, the council members also discussed the goals of the strategic plan. Certainly, we BULLETIN could agree that we had accomplished many good things in the past four years, but it was less clear (NOW RECRUITING), Editor how those accomplishments were linked to the goals we had formulated for this strategic plan in Mary Johnson, Editorial Consultant continued on page 6 Lisa Roth, Design and Production P A G E 2 CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY • VOL 35 / NO 2 APRIL–JUNE 2 005 • WWW.CNPS.ORG Desert Field Trip Takes CNPSers to Granite Mountains Wildflowers and a ‘reptile trifecta’ BY STEVE HARTMAN ver the past decade, the annual CNPS desert field trip has taken us to many Oplaces, but this was the first time we could plan on having a roof over our heads. So despite the forecasts of a week of rain, we weren’t alarmed at the cold and windy condi- tions that greeted us when we arrived at Norris Camp (named after Kenneth S. Norris, distin- guished zoologist and founding father of the UC Natural Reserve System). This rustic facility is funky but very practical, with lights and a refrigerator powered by solar panels, various bunk rooms, propane stoves, and food storage lockers in a kitchen fully stocked with pots and pans and utensils. CNPS desert enthusiasts enjoy a spectacular spring. Photo: Rolf Muertter Bright and early the first morning, Jim André, director of the nearly 9,000-acre Jack fecta: We saw a Mojave green rattlesnake, a hills just north of a mine. This area featured and Marilyn Sweeney Granite Mountains Des- horned lizard, and a desert tortoise. multiple species in certain genera, including ert Research Center, arrived and led us on an After lunch in the shade of athel trees (Tama- Pectocarya heterocarpa, P. platycarpa, and all-day driving trip with four stops. We parked rix aphylla) in Cadiz, we drove east to desert on the east side of Kelbaker Road just south of pavement just south of the Chambless rock continued on page 4 Interstate 40 and walked to a wash with smoke collecting area at the base of the Trilobite Wil- tree (Psorothamnus spinosus), catclaw acacia derness of the Marble Mountains. Among the Contribute to Conservation (Acacia greggii), blad- the species we saw were 2005 has been a glorious year for plant derpod (Isomeris arbo- Phacelia neglecta (prior enthusiasts throughout the state. The spec- rea), and with many to this year only four tacular blooms in the deserts, vernal pools, annuals. As we walked locations were known foothills, and mountain meadows helped to up rocky washlets lead- in the East Mojave, now remind us all why CNPS is passionately dedi- ing to a sheer cliff, we more than 100 locations cated to the preservation and appreciation of encountered different there have been recog- California’s native flora.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newberry/Dead Mountains Scenic Backcountry Drive the 10-Mile One-Way Drive Is on Bureau of Land Management Public Lands
    Newberry/Dead Mountains Scenic Backcountry Drive The 10-mile one-way drive is on Bureau of Land Management public lands. However, it is better to take this as a loop trail (see directions) so you don’t have to backtrack and can see other attractions. Although the road is gravel, it is in good condition and can be navigated by 2-wheel drive sedan vehicles, although high clearance is preferable. This particular scenic drive offers a wide range of vistas. Looking north are the Newberry Mountains with the prominent and sacred Spirit Mountain looming above the horizon. Looking south are the Dead Moun- tains which are also sacred to the native Indian tribes in the area. To the west are the granitic crystal hills with interesting rock formations. To the east is the Colorado River Valley and the high peaks of the Hualapai Range in Arizona as backdrop. The green fields along the Colorado River in this area are part of the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation. The Fort Mojave Indian Reservation covers nearly 42,000 acres in the tri-state area of Arizona, California, and Nevada. The Mojave Indians are Pipa Aha Macav — “The People By The River.” Mojave culture traces the earthly origins of its people to Spirit Mountain. Newberry Mountains Newberry Mountains Prior to the arrival of white settler to the region, the Mojave Indians were prosperous farmers with well- established villages and trade networks that stretched as far away as the Pacific Ocean. In the 16th Century, the time the Spanish arrived in the territory, the Mojave’s were the largest concentration of people in the Southwest.
    [Show full text]
  • Miocene Low-Angle Normal Faulting and Dike Emplacement, Homer Mountain and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern California and Southernmost Nevada
    Miocene low-angle normal faulting and dike emplacement, Homer Mountain and surrounding areas, southeastern California and southernmost Nevada JON E. SPENCER* U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefleld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025 ABSTRACT tions, differed radically from the state of that collectively accommodated as much as 50% stress in the upper plate, as inferred from to 100% extension of upper-plate rocks (Ander- Homer Mountain and surrounding regions fault geometry. Low-angle faulting and east- son, 1971). In many areas, normal faults within are within, or adjacent to, the western part of northeast-west-southwest distension of up- upper-plate rocks merge with, or are truncated a broad region of low-angle normal faults ex- per-plate rocks reflect regional reduction of by, a basal, subhorizontal fault often referred to posed within the lower Colorado River compression in the east-northeast-west- as a "detachment fault" (for example, see Davis trough. During middle Miocene time, upper- southwest direction and associated large- and others, 1980). The term "detachment fault" plate rocks in the Homer, Sacramento, Dead, scale east-northeast-west-southwest crustal is used here to indicate a low-angle normal fault and Newberry Mountains moved eastward or extension. In contrast, concave-upward flex- that formed at a low angle (for example, Wer- northeastward, relative to the lower plate, ure of the lower plate, in response to tectonic nicke and others, 1984; Reynolds and Spsncer, above single or multiple low-angle normal denudation and resultant isostatic uplift, is in- 1985). The interpretation that detachment faults faults. Deposition of coarse clastic sedimen- ferred to have produced local subhorizontal are rooted faults that accommodate crustal ex- tary rocks occurred during extensional fault- compression at shallow crustal levels in the tension (Wernicke, 1981; Howard and John, ing and was accompanied by, and closely lower plate that overwhelmed the regional 1983; Davis and others, 1983; Allmendinger followed by, eruption of basaltic volcanics.
    [Show full text]
  • The California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 As Amended
    the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as amended U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Desert District Riverside, California the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as Amended IN REPLY REFER TO United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT STATE OFFICE Federal Office Building 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 Dear Reader: Thank you.You and many other interested citizens like you have made this California Desert Conservation Area Plan. It was conceived of your interests and concerns, born into law through your elected representatives, molded by your direct personal involvement, matured and refined through public conflict, interaction, and compromise, and completed as a result of your review, comment and advice. It is a good plan. You have reason to be proud. Perhaps, as individuals, we may say, “This is not exactly the plan I would like,” but together we can say, “This is a plan we can agree on, it is fair, and it is possible.” This is the most important part of all, because this Plan is only a beginning. A plan is a piece of paper-what counts is what happens on the ground. The California Desert Plan encompasses a tremendous area and many different resources and uses. The decisions in the Plan are major and important, but they are only general guides to site—specific actions. The job ahead of us now involves three tasks: —Site-specific plans, such as grazing allotment management plans or vehicle route designation; —On-the-ground actions, such as granting mineral leases, developing water sources for wildlife, building fences for livestock pastures or for protecting petroglyphs; and —Keeping people informed of and involved in putting the Plan to work on the ground, and in changing the Plan to meet future needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Names
    GEOGRAPHIC NAMES CORRECT ORTHOGRAPHY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES ? REVISED TO JANUARY, 1911 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1911 PREPARED FOR USE IN THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE BY THE UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHIC BOARD WASHINGTON, D. C, JANUARY, 1911 ) CORRECT ORTHOGRAPHY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES. The following list of geographic names includes all decisions on spelling rendered by the United States Geographic Board to and including December 7, 1910. Adopted forms are shown by bold-face type, rejected forms by italic, and revisions of previous decisions by an asterisk (*). Aalplaus ; see Alplaus. Acoma; township, McLeod County, Minn. Abagadasset; point, Kennebec River, Saga- (Not Aconia.) dahoc County, Me. (Not Abagadusset. AQores ; see Azores. Abatan; river, southwest part of Bohol, Acquasco; see Aquaseo. discharging into Maribojoc Bay. (Not Acquia; see Aquia. Abalan nor Abalon.) Acworth; railroad station and town, Cobb Aberjona; river, IVIiddlesex County, Mass. County, Ga. (Not Ackworth.) (Not Abbajona.) Adam; island, Chesapeake Bay, Dorchester Abino; point, in Canada, near east end of County, Md. (Not Adam's nor Adams.) Lake Erie. (Not Abineau nor Albino.) Adams; creek, Chatham County, Ga. (Not Aboite; railroad station, Allen County, Adams's.) Ind. (Not Aboit.) Adams; township. Warren County, Ind. AJjoo-shehr ; see Bushire. (Not J. Q. Adams.) Abookeer; AhouJcir; see Abukir. Adam's Creek; see Cunningham. Ahou Hamad; see Abu Hamed. Adams Fall; ledge in New Haven Harbor, Fall.) Abram ; creek in Grant and Mineral Coun- Conn. (Not Adam's ties, W. Va. (Not Abraham.) Adel; see Somali. Abram; see Shimmo. Adelina; town, Calvert County, Md. (Not Abruad ; see Riad. Adalina.) Absaroka; range of mountains in and near Aderhold; ferry over Chattahoochee River, Yellowstone National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land
    DRECP Proposed LUPA and Final EIS CHAPTER III.8. CULTURAL RESOURCES III.8 CULTURAL RESOURCES This chapter presents the Affected Environment for the Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) Decision Area and the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) area for cultural resources. These areas overlap, and in the following programmatic discussion are referred to broadly as the “California Desert Region.” More than 32,000 cultural resources are known in the DRECP area in every existing environmental context ⎼ from mountain crests to dry lake beds ⎼ and include both surface and subsurface deposits. Cultural resources are categorized as buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts (including cultural landscapes and Traditional Cultural Properties) under the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Historic properties are cultural resources included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), maintained by the Secretary of the Interior (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 60.4). See Section III.8.1.1 for more information on federal regulations and historic properties. This chapter discusses three types of cultural resources classified by their origins: prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic. Prehistoric cultural resources are associated with the human occupation of California prior to prolonged European contact. These resources may include sites and deposits, structures, artifacts, rock art, trails, and other traces of Native American human behavior. In California, the prehistoric period began over 12,000 years ago and extended through the eighteenth century until 1769, when the first Europeans settled in California. Ethnographic resources represent the heritage of a particular ethnic or cultural group, such as Native Americans or African, European, Latino, or Asian immigrants.
    [Show full text]
  • Ca-Lower-Colorado-River-Valley-Pkwy
    I • I I I ) I I A REPORT TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES ---1 I 'I I I I THE LOWER I COLORADO I RIVER I VALLEY • PARKWAY I I D- '°'le> F; 1-e. ·• NFS- ' f\CAc:.+... \ V"C. , ~ P,of>oseol I ~~~~=-'~c f~l~~c~~w I THE LOWER COLORADO I filVERVALLEYPARKWAY I I I A proposal for a National Parkway and Scenic Recreation Road System along the Lower Colorado River Valley in 'I California, Arizona, and Nevada. I NATIONAL PARK .i DENVER SEfiViC I ·-.-:. a.t ..1flkllb""ll.--';,.i. n II"~ r.· " •· \..' ;: · I ;:~::::.;.;:;.:J I I I U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service I in cooperation with Lower Colorado River Office Bureau of Land Management • PLE~\SE RtTUR?j TO: I February 1969 I , lJnited States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY I WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 I I Dear Mr. President: We are pleased to transmit herewith. a report on the feasibility anc;l desirability of developing a nation~l p;;i.rkwa,y and sc;enic recreation I road system within. the Lower C9l9rado River· Vaiiey in Arizona, Califo~nia, and Nevada, from the Lake Mead National Recreation I Area and Davis Dam on the north to the International Boup.d:;i.ry ~ith Mexico on the south in: the vicinity of San Luis, Arizqna arid Mexic.o.· . ·. ' .. ·.' . ·. I This :i;eport is based on ci. study 11,'lade by the Lower Col<;>rado River Office ap.d the NatiQnal :Par~ Service pf this Depa.rtmep.t with engineerin.g assistance by the Buqlau of Public Roads of the Departmep.t of .
    [Show full text]
  • Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation
    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Books, Reports, and Studies Resources, Energy, and the Environment 2004 Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation University of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/books_reports_studies Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, and the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons Citation Information Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2004). SPECIAL USE PROVISIONS IN WILDERNESS LEGISLATION (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2004). Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School. SPECIAL USE PROVISIONS IN WILDERNESS LEGISLATION Natural Resources Law Center University of Colorado School of Law 401 UCB Boulder, Colorado 80309-0401 2004 Table of Contents SPECIAL USE PROVISIONS IN WILDERNESS LEGISLATION ........................................................... 1 I. Overview ................................................................................................................................. 1 II. Specific Special Use Provisions............................................................................................. 1 A. Water Rights ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment
    Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment Quarry Operations –Yuma Area Office Lower Colorado River Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Yuma Area Office Yuma, Arizona August 2007 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment Quarry Operations – Yuma Area Office Lower Colorado River Region prepared by Yuma Area Office Resource Management Office Environmental Planning and Compliance Group Jason Associates Corporation Yuma Office Contract No. 03-PE-34-0230 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Yuma Area Office Yuma, Arizona August 2007 Acronyms and Abbreviations ADEQ Arizona Department of Environmental Quality APCD Air Pollution Control District AQMD Air Quality Management District BCO Biological and Conference Opinion BMPs Best Management Practices BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CARB California Air Resources Board CESA California Endangered Species Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CO Carbon monoxide CRFWLS Colorado River Front Work and Levee System CRIT Colorado River Indian Tribes DM Departmental Manual DTSC Department
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 48/Friday, March 11, 2016/Notices
    12938 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2016 / Notices Controlled substance means any substance State, or local government officer or (including chemical) device on public lands. so designated by law whose availability is employee in the scope of their duties; This prohibition includes, but is not limited restricted, including, but not limited to, members of any organized law enforcement, to, any homemade or manufactured bomb, narcotics, stimulants, depressants, rescue, or fire-fighting force in performance cannon, mortar, or similar device. hallucinogens, and marijuana. of an official duty; and any person whose Destructive device means any type of activities are authorized in writing by the Enforcement weapon, by whatever name known, which Bureau of Land Management. Any person who violates any of these will, or which may be readily converted to 4. All persons must abide by all Federal supplementary rules may be tried before a expel a projectile by the action of an and State laws, rules, and regulations United States Magistrate and fined in explosive or other propellant, the barrel or pertaining to firearms and weapons for all accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3571, imprisoned barrels of which have a bore of more than shooting activities on public lands. no more than 12 months under 43 U.S.C. 0.60 caliber, except a shotgun or shotgun 5. No person shall, unless it is posted as 1733(a) and 43 CFR 8360.0–7, or both. In shell, which is generally recognized as allowed, target shoot with a weapon within accordance with 43 CFR 8365.1–7, State or particularly suitable for sporting purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Preserving Wild California an External Assessment
    PRESERVING WILD CALIFORNIA AN EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT Report to the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation Steven L. Yaffee, Sheila K. Schueller and Julia M. Wondolleck School of Natural Resources and Environment University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan April 15, 2009 The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable inputs of numerous Preserving Wild California staff and grantees along with others in the California conservation community who shared their experiences and insights with us. Research Team Steven L. Yaffee, PhD Sheila K. Schueller, PhD Julia M. Wondolleck, PhD Michelle S. Aldridge Yvette C. Dimcheff Nicole A. Fernandes Aviva Y. Glaser José G. Gonzalez Kristen E. Johnson Lauren V. Pidot For comments and questions, please contact: Dr. Steven Yaffee School of Natural Resources and Environment University of Michigan 440 Church Street Ann Arbor MI 48109‐1041 [email protected] 734‐763‐5451 Title page photos by Tupper Ansel Blake Table of Contents Executive Summary ……..............................................................…………………………………… ix Section 1 – Introduction and Method of Assessment ………………………………………… 1 The Bottom Line ………………………………………………………………………...... 1 Methods Used to Carry Out the External Assessment …………………………................. 3 Some Caveats …………………………………………………………………………...…. 7 A Roadmap to the Report ………………………………………………………………...... 9 Section 2 – What was Intended? The Logic of the PWC Program ……………………..… 11 An Ambitious but Clear Set of Goals and Objectives ………………………………...…… 12 Six Major Types of Grantmaking Strategies …………………………………………….… 14 A Set of Quantitative and Qualitative Measures of Success ………………………….…… 16 Section 3 – What was Funded? A Snapshot of Program Activities ………………….….. 23 How were funds distributed by region? ………………………………………………….… 25 How were funds distributed by type of project? ………………………………………….... 25 How were funds distributed by region and type of project? ………………………….……. 26 How many acres were acquired? ………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • National Landscape Conservation System: Wilderness Areas
    National Landscape Conservation System: Wilderness Areas State Field Office Wilderness Public Law Date Designated Units Acres AZ Gila District Aravaipa Canyon PL 101-628 8/28/1984 1 19,410 AZ Colorado River District Arrastra Mountain PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 129,800 AZ Colorado River District Aubrey Peak PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 15,400 AZ Gila District Baboquivari Peak PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 2,040 AZ Arizona Strip District Beaver Dam Mountains (3,667 in UT) PL 98-406 8/28/1984 1 15,000 AZ Phoenix District Big Horn Mountains PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 21,000 AZ Arizona Strip District Cottonwood Point PL 98-406 8/28/1984 1 6,860 AZ Gila District Coyote Mountains PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 5,100 AZ Gila District Dos Cabezas Mountains PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 11,700 AZ Colorado River District Eagletail Mountains PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 97,880 AZ Colorado River District East Cactus Plain PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 14,630 AZ Gila District Fishhooks PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 10,500 AZ Colorado River District Gibralter Mountain PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 18,790 AZ Arizona Strip District Grand Wash Cliffs PL 98-406 8/28/1984 1 37,030 AZ Colorado River District Harcuvar Mountains PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 25,050 AZ Phoenix District Harquahala Mountains PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 22,880 AZ Phoenix District Hassayampa River Canyon PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 12,300 AZ Phoenix District Hells Canyon PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 9,951 AZ Phoenix District Hummingbird Springs PL 101-628 11/28/1990 1 31,200 AZ Arizona Strip District Kanab Creek PL 98-406 8/28/1984 1 6,700 AZ Arizona
    [Show full text]
  • 2021-00579.Pdf (Federalregister.Gov)
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 01/14/2021 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2021-00579, and on govinfo.gov 4310-40 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [(LLCA930000.L13400000.DS0000.21X) MO#450014117] Notice of Availability of the Draft Desert Plan Amendment and Draft Environmental Impact Statement, California AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a Draft Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), for an amendment to the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan and the Bakersfield and Bishop Resource Management Plans (RMPs). The Desert Plan Amendment Draft LUPA/EIS includes consideration of changes to the management or modification to the boundaries of 129 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). By this notice, the BLM is announcing the availability of the Draft LUPA/EIS. In order to comply with Federal regulations, the BLM is also announcing a comment period on proposed changes to the ACECs within the planning area. DATES: To ensure that comments will be considered, the BLM must receive written comments on the Draft LUPA/ EIS within 90 days following the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes its notice of the Draft LUPA/EIS in the Federal Register. The BLM will announce future meetings and any other public participation activities at least 15 days in advance through public notices, news releases, and/or mailings. ADDRESSES: The Desert Plan Amendment Draft LUPA/EIS are available on the BLM ePlanning project website at https://go.usa.gov/x7hdj.
    [Show full text]