DOCSLIB.ORG

Table 5-10. Bureau of Land Management Lands Designated As Wilderness by Congress As of September 30, 1996

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Table 5-10. Bureau of Land Management Lands Designated As Wilderness by Congress As of September 30, 1996 Table 5-10. Bureau of Land Management lands designated as wilderness by Congress as of September 30, 1996 Wilderness area name/a/ Administrative Size in acres unit name(s)/b/ (Federal only) Geographic State: Arizona Aravaipa Canyon Safford District 19,700 Arrastra Mountain Phoenix District 129,800 Aubrey Peak Phoenix District 15,400 Baboquivari Peak Safford District 2,040 Beaver Dam Mountains Arizona Strip District 15,000 Big Horn Mountains Phoenix District 21,000 Cottonwood Point Arizona Strip District 6,860 Coyote Mountains Safford District 5,100 Dos Cabezas Mountains Safford District 11,700 Eagletail Mountains Yuma District 100,600 East Cactus Plain Yuma District 14,630 Fishhooks Safford District 10,500 Gibraltar Mountain Yuma District 18,790 Grand Wash Cliffs Arizona Strip District 37,030 Harcuvar Mountains Yuma District 25,050 Harquahala Mountains Phoenix District 22,880 Hassayampa River Canyon Phoenix District 12,300 Hells Canyon Phoenix District 10,600 Hummingbird Springs Phoenix District 31,200 Kanab Creek Arizona Strip District 6,700 Mount Logan Arizona Strip District 14,650 Mount Nutt Phoenix District 27,660 Mount Tipton Phoenix District 32,760 Mount Trumbull Arizona Strip District 7,880 Mount Wilson Phoenix District 23,900 Muggins Mountains Yuma District 7,640 Needle's Eye Phoenix District 8,760 New Water Mountains Yuma District 24,600 North Maricopa Mountains Phoenix District 63,200 North Santa Teresa Safford District 5,800 Paiute Arizona Strip District 87,900 Paria Canyon-Vermilion Cliffs Arizona Strip District 89,400 Peloncillo Mountains Safford District 19,440 Rawhide Mountains Yuma District 38,470 Redfield Canyon Safford District 9,930 Sierra Estrella Phoenix District 14,400 Signal Mountain Phoenix District 13,350 South Maricopa Mountains Phoenix District 60,100 Swansea Yuma District 16,400 Table Top Phoenix District 34,400 Tres Alamos Phoenix District 8,300 Trigo Mountains Yuma District 30,300 Upper Burro Creek Phoenix District 27,440 Wabayuma Peak Phoenix District 40,000 Warm Springs Phoenix District 112,400 White Canyon Phoenix District 5,790 Woolsey Peak Phoenix District 64,000 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Arizona: 1,405,750 Table 5-10. Bureau of Land Management lands designated as wilderness by Congress as of September 30, 1996--continued Wilderness area name/a/ Administrative Size in acres Unit name(s)/b/ (Federal only) Geographic State: California Argus Range Calif. Desert District 74,890 Big Maria Mountains Calif. Desert District 47,575 Bigelow Cholla Garden Calif. Desert District 10,380 Bighorn Mountain Calif. Desert District 26,685 Black Mountain Calif. Desert District 13,940 Bright Star Calif. Desert District 9,520 Bristol Mountains Calif. Desert District 68,515 Cadiz Dones Calif. Desert District 39,740 Carrizo Gorge Calif. Desert District 15,700 Chemehuevi Mountains Calif. Desert District 64,320 Chimney Peak Calif. Desert District 13,700 Chuckwalla Mountains Calif. Desert District 80,770 Cleghorn Lakes Calif. Desert District 33,980 Clipper Mountain Calif. Desert District 26,000 Coso Range Calif. Desert District 50,520 Coyote Mountains Calif. Desert District 17,000 Darwin Falls Calif. Desert District 8,600 Dead Mountains Calif. Desert District 48,850 Domeland Calif. Desert District 36,300 El Paso Mountains Calif. Desert District 23,780 Fish Creek Mountains Calif. Desert District 25,940 Funeral Mountains Calif. Desert District 28,110 Golden Valley Calif. Desert District 37,700 Grass Valley Calif. Desert District 31,695 Hollow Hills Calif. Desert District 22,240 Ibex Calif. Desert District 26,460 Indian Pass Calif. Desert District 33,855 Inyo Mountains Calif. Desert District 172,020 Ishi Ukiah District 240 Jacumba Calif. Desert District 33,670 Kelso Dunes Calif. Desert District 129,580 Kiavah Calif. Desert District 40,290 Kingston Range Calif. Desert District 209,608 Little Chuckwalla Mountains Calif. Desert District 29,880 Little Picacho Calif. Desert District 33,600 Machesna Mountain Bakersfield District 120 Malpais Mesa Calif. Desert District 32,360 Manly Peak Calif. Desert District 16,105 Mecca Hills Calif. Desert District 24,200 Mesquite Calif. Desert District 47,330 Newberry Mountains Calif. Desert District 22,900 Nopah Range Calif. Desert District 110,860 North Algodones Dunes Calif. Desert District 32,240 North Mesquite Mountains Calif. Desert District 25,540 Old Woman Mountains Calif. Desert District 146,020 Orocopia Mountains Calif. Desert District 40,735 Owens Peak Calif. Desert District 74,060 Pahrump Valley Calif. Desert District 74,800 Palen/McCoy Calif. Desert District 270,629 Palo Verde Mountains Calif. Desert District 32,310 Picacho Peak Calif. Desert District 7,700 Piper Mountain Calif. Desert District 72,575 Piute Mountains Calif. Desert District 36,840 Table 5-10. Bureau of Land Management lands designated as wilderness by Congress as of September 30, 1996--continued Wilderness area name/a/ Administrative Size in acres Unit name(s)/b/ (Federal only) Geographic State: California--concluded Resting Spring Range Calif. Desert District 78,868 Rice Valley Calif. Desert District 40,820 Riverside Mountains Calif. Desert District 22,380 Rodman Mountains Calif. Desert District 27,690 Sacatar Trail Calif. Desert District 51,900 Saddle Peak Hills Calif. Desert District 1,440 San Gorgonio Calif. Desert District 37,980 Santa Lucia Bakersfield District 1,733 Santa Rosa Calif. Desert District 64,340 Sawtooth Mounains Calif. Desert District 35,080 Sheephole Valley Calif. Desert District 174,800 South Nopah Range Calif. Desert District 16,780 Stateline Calif. Desert District 7,050 Stepladder Mountains Calif. Desert District 81,600 Surprise Canyon Calif. Desert District 29,180 Sylvania Mountains Calif. Desert District 17,829 Trilobite Calif. Desert District 31,160 Trinity Alps Ukiah District 4,623 Turtle Mountains Calif. Desert District 144,500 Whipple Mountains Calif. Desert District 77,520 Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel Ukiah District 7,145 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in California: 3,587,395 Geographic State: Colorado Powderhorn Montrose District 48,115 Uncompahgre Montrose District 3,390 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Colorado: 51,505 Geographic State: Idaho Frank Church-River of No Return Coeur d'Alene District 802 Frank Church-River of No Return Coeur d'Alene District ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Idaho: 802 Geographic State: Montana Lee Metcalf Butte District 6,000 - Bear Trap Canyon Unit ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Montana: 6,000 Geographic State: New Mexico Bisti Albuquerque District 3,946 Cebolla Albuquerque District 62,800 De-na-zin Albuquerque District 22,454 West Malpais Albuquerque District 39,700 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in New Mexico: 128,900 Table 5-10. Bureau of Land Management lands designated as wilderness by Congress as of September 30, 1996--concluded Wilderness area name/a/ Administrative Size in acres unit name(s)/b/ (Federal only) Geographic State: Nevada Arc Dome Battle Mountain District 20 Currant Mountain Ely District 3 Mount Moriah Ely District 6,435 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Nevada: 6,458 Geographic State: Oregon Hells Canyon Vale District 968 Oregon Islands Coos Bay District 5 Table Rock Salem District 5,750 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Oregon: 6,723 Geographic State: Utah Beaver Dam Mountains Cedar City District 3,630 Paria Canyon-Vermilion Cliffs Cedar City District 23,000 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Utah: 26,630 Geographic State: Washington Juniper Dunes Spokane District 6,900 ___________ Total Bureau of Land Management acres in Washington: 6,900 Total Bureau of Land Management acres in United States: 5,227,063 /a/ Multiple listings are included for those areas designated or affected by more than one Public Law, managed by more than one agency, located in more than one administrative unit, or located in more than one State. /b/ The Bureau of Land Management office that has jurisdiction over the wilderness area..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wilderness Visitors and Recreation Impacts: Baseline Data Available for Twentieth Century Conditions
    United States Department of Agriculture Wilderness Visitors and Forest Service Recreation Impacts: Baseline Rocky Mountain Research Station Data Available for Twentieth General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-117 Century Conditions September 2003 David N. Cole Vita Wright Abstract __________________________________________ Cole, David N.; Wright, Vita. 2003. Wilderness visitors and recreation impacts: baseline data available for twentieth century conditions. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-117. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 52 p. This report provides an assessment and compilation of recreation-related monitoring data sources across the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). Telephone interviews with managers of all units of the NWPS and a literature search were conducted to locate studies that provide campsite impact data, trail impact data, and information about visitor characteristics. Of the 628 wildernesses that comprised the NWPS in January 2000, 51 percent had baseline campsite data, 9 percent had trail condition data and 24 percent had data on visitor characteristics. Wildernesses managed by the Forest Service and National Park Service were much more likely to have data than wildernesses managed by the Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service. Both unpublished data collected by the management agencies and data published in reports are included. Extensive appendices provide detailed information about available data for every study that we located. These have been organized by wilderness so that it is easy to locate all the information available for each wilderness in the NWPS. Keywords: campsite condition, monitoring, National Wilderness Preservation System, trail condition, visitor characteristics The Authors _______________________________________ David N.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona
    2.SOB nH in ntoiOGIGM. JAN 3 1 1989 Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1701-C Chapter C Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona By ED DE WITT, S.M. RICHARD, J.R. HASSEMER, and W.F. HANNA U.S. Geological Survey J.R. THOMPSON U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1701 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS- WEST-CENTRAL ARIZONA AND PART OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publlcatlon Data Mineral resources of the Harquahala Mountains wilderness study area, La Paz and Maricopa counties, Arizona. (Mineral resources of wilderness study areas west-central Arizona and part of San Bernardino County, California ; ch. C) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1701-C) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1701-C 1. Mines and mineral resources Arizona Harquahala Mountains Wilderness. 2. Harquahala Mountains (Ariz.) I. DeWitt, Ed. II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1701. QE75.B9 no. 1701-C 557.3 s [553'.09791'72] 88-600012 [TN24.A6] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
    [Show full text]
  • Pamphlet SIM 3411: Geologic Map of the Castle Rock 7.5' Quadrangle
    Geologic Map of the Castle Rock 7.5’ Quadrangle, Arizona and California By P. Kyle House, Barbara E. John, Daniel V. Malmon, Debra Block, L. Sue Beard, Tracey J. Felger, Ryan S. Crow, Jonathan E. Schwing, and Colleen E. Cassidy Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3411 Kayaker's view of Castle Rock (unit Tac) looking north-northeast from Castle Rock Bay, Arizona. The northern Mohave Mountains are visible in left background, and sediments of the Chemehuevi Formation (unit Qch) are seen along right edge of photo. Photograph taken August 27, 2014, by Kyle House, USGS. 2018 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey James F. Reilly II, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2018 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov/ or call 1–888–ASK–USGS (1–888–275–8747). For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. To order USGS information products, visit https://store.usgs.gov/. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: House, P.K., John, B.E., Malmon, D.V., Block, Debra, Beard, L.S., Felger, T.J., Crow, R.S., Schwing, J.E., and Cassidy, C.E., 2018, Geologic map of the Castle Rock 7.5’ quadrangle: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemehuevi Valley Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA)
    Chemehuevi Valley Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) The Chemehuevi Valley Viewshed with the Turtle Mountains National Natural Landmark is directly west of the communities of Havasu Landing, California and Lake Havasu City, Arizona. The Turtle Mountains Natural Landmark is an excellent illustration of volcanic phenomena with superimposed sculpturing of mountain landforms. In combination, the eastern and western sections present some of the finest geological formations in the Mohave Desert. The site is of scenic value and interest; it also contains excellent examples of Mohave Desert flora and fauna. From October to April each year hundreds of travelers “snowbirds” from the northeastern United States, Canada and Europe journey to the area to enjoy the mild winter climate seeking new experiences, enjoying vast landscape which have not existed in European Nations for hundreds of years. Visitors participate in backcountry touring adventure and the discovery of new hiking trails, rock hounding sites and camping opportunities. The Chemehuevi Reservation Havasu Landing Resort depends on the naturalness of the Chemehuevi Valley to support the recreation pursuits of their visitors. The Needles Field Office has developed a system of designated trails entitled the Mojave Adventure Routes in regards to the 2002 Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert Coordinated Management Plan item 3.8.7. These routes are an outstanding network of 4x4 vehicle backcountry touring routes for motorized recreation. These routes were developed for the purpose of traveling to areas not often seen by many people. This network is a shared-use trail system providing recreation opportunities for all persons, including those who use street-legal and non-street legal (Green Sticker) vehicles, hikers, bicyclists, and equestrians.
    [Show full text]
  • Competitive Renewable Energy Zones
    From: Megan Lawson To: Gungle, Ashley Cc: Hingtgen, Robert J; Patrick BROWN ([email protected]) ([email protected]) Subject: RE: Soitech follow up Date: Friday, October 04, 2013 2:34:46 PM Attachments: image001.png CA_CREZ_Conceptual_Transmission_Segments_Phase_2B_final.pdf Ashley, Here is our response to Mr. Silver's e-mail: Mr. Silver references “Competitive Renewable Energy Zones” (CREZs), which were part of the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) “Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative” (RETI) between 2008 and 2011. From what we can tell, the CEC’s RETI process appears to have stalled in early 2011, and now appears to have been set aside by the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) process. http://www.energy.ca.gov/reti/. As you know, we do not need to address the DRECP in the PEIR because the project areas are located entirely outside of the DRECP area. For the County’s reference, the RETI process identified necessary major updates to the California transmission system to access CREZs. The process identified CREZs that could be developed in the most cost effective and environmentally benign manner. Potential renewable energy projects were grouped into CREZs based on geographic proximity. The CREZ implicated in southern San Diego County is CREZ 27, San Diego South. Each CREZ was developed based on existing and proposed projects (e.g., those projects with a PPA, or PPA pending) and other projects or resources with a high potential of being developed. Because the Soitec projects were not yet proposed at the time of CREZ development (2008- 2010), Soitec’s projects were not accounted for in the CREZ, nor does CREZ 27 account for areas of high solar potential or the most cost-effective or environmentally-benign sites for future solar development.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Land Statistics 2003
    Public Land Statistics 2003 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management TABLE OF CONTENTS Table No. WELCOME PART 1 LAND RESOURCES AND INFORMATION 1-1 Acquisition of the Public Domain, 1781-1867 --- Acquisitions (Map) 1-2 Disposition of the Public Domain, 1781-2003 1-3 Mineral and Surface Acres Administered by the BLM --- Public Lands, On-Shore Federal and Indian Minerals in Lands of the U.S. Responsibilities of BLM - Lower 48 States (Map) --- Public Lands, On-Shore Federal and Indian Minerals in Lands of the U.S. Responsibilities of BLM - Alaska (Map) 1-4 Public Lands Under Exclusive Jurisdiction of the BLM 1-5 Area of Oregon and California (O&C) Revested Lands --- Revested Lands (Map) 1-6 Withdrawals, Revocations, Modifications, and Extensions --- Principal Meridians and Base Lines (Map) 1-7 Cadastral Survey Actions Completed --- Cadastral Survey Costs & Benefits to BLM (Bar Graph) --- Cadastral Survey Field Accomplishments: Percentage of Work Performed by Agency (Pie Chart) --- Cadastral Survey Office Accomplishments: Percentage of Work Performed by Agency (Pie Chart) 1-8 Obligations of Appropriations Received PART 2 HEALTHY PRODUCTIVE LANDS 2-1 Percent of Rangeland Acreage by Ecological Status by State 2-2 Condition of Riparian-Wetland Areas 2-3 Resource Conservation and Improvement Accomplishments 2-4 Forest Development Accomplishments in Acres 2-5 Types of Wildlife Habitat on Public Lands 2-6 Estimated Number of Big Game Animals on Public Lands 2-7 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Improvements Completed 2-8 Emergency Fire Stabilization
    [Show full text]
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Neogene Stratigraphy and Tectonics of Death Valley — a Review
    Earth-Science Reviews 73 (2005) 245–270 www.elsevier.com/locate/earscirev Upper Neogene stratigraphy and tectonics of Death Valley — a review J.R. Knott a,*, A.M. Sarna-Wojcicki b, M.N. Machette c, R.E. Klinger d aDepartment of Geological Sciences, California State University Fullerton, Fullerton, CA 92834, United States bU. S. Geological Survey, MS 975, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, United States cU. S. Geological Survey, MS 966, Box 25046, Denver, CO 80225-0046, United States dTechnical Service Center, U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, P. O. Box 25007, D-8530, Denver, CO 80225-0007, United States Abstract New tephrochronologic, soil-stratigraphic and radiometric-dating studies over the last 10 years have generated a robust numerical stratigraphy for Upper Neogene sedimentary deposits throughout Death Valley. Critical to this improved stratigraphy are correlated or radiometrically-dated tephra beds and tuffs that range in age from N3.58 Ma to b1.1 ka. These tephra beds and tuffs establish relations among the Upper Pliocene to Middle Pleistocene sedimentary deposits at Furnace Creek basin, Nova basin, Ubehebe–Lake Rogers basin, Copper Canyon, Artists Drive, Kit Fox Hills, and Confidence Hills. New geologic formations have been described in the Confidence Hills and at Mormon Point. This new geochronology also establishes maximum and minimum ages for Quaternary alluvial fans and Lake Manly deposits. Facies associated with the tephra beds show that ~3.3 Ma the Furnace Creek basin was a northwest–southeast-trending lake flanked by alluvial fans. This paleolake extended from the Furnace Creek to Ubehebe. Based on the new stratigraphy, the Death Valley fault system can be divided into four main fault zones: the dextral, Quaternary-age Northern Death Valley fault zone; the dextral, pre-Quaternary Furnace Creek fault zone; the oblique–normal Black Mountains fault zone; and the dextral Southern Death Valley fault zone.
    [Show full text]
  • The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012
    The Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment: Report on Stakeholder Input January 2012 (Photographs: Arizona Game and Fish Department) Arizona Game and Fish Department In partnership with the Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ i RECOMMENDED CITATION ........................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ iii DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ iv BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 1 THE MARICOPA COUNTY WILDLIFE CONNECTIVITY ASSESSMENT ................................... 8 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT AND ASSOCIATED GIS DATA ................................................... 10 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 12 MASTER LIST OF WILDLIFE LINKAGES AND HABITAT BLOCKSAND BARRIERS ................ 16 REFERENCE MAPS .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft DRECP and EIR/EIS CHAPTER II.4
    Draft DRECP and EIR/EIS CHAPTER II.4. ALTERNATIVE 1 II.4 ALTERNATIVE 1 Alternative 1 is one of five action alternatives considered and analyzed in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP or Plan) and Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS). The description of Alternative 1 is first provided at an interagency level (Section II.4.1), which describes all Plan elements of the alternative. After the interagency description, the individual elements of the alternative are described, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) elements of the DRECP (Section II.4.2), the Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) elements of the DRECP (Section II.4.3), and the General Conservation Plan (GCP) elements of the DRECP (Section II.4.4). II.4.1 Interagency Description of Alternative 1 The interagency description of Alternative 1 includes the following main sections: Overview of Alternative 1, Conservation Strategy, Monitoring and Adaptive Management Program, Description of the Covered Activities, and Plan Implementation. The description of Alternative 1 for the DRECP and EIR/EIS encompasses the overall conservation strategy and description of Covered Activities on federal and nonfederal lands (i.e., state, county, city, and privately owned lands) within the Plan Area. II.4.1.1 Overview of Alternative 1 The following provides a Plan-wide overview of Alternative 1. Alternative 1 integrates the renewable energy and resource conservation with other existing uses in the Plan Area and includes BLM LUPA elements, NCCP elements, and GCP elements. Under Alternative 1 for the DRECP, an interagency conservation strategy for the Plan Area would be established that includes a streamlined process for the permitting of renewable energy and transmission development on both federal and nonfederal lands and a BLM LUPA providing Conservation and Management Actions (CMAs) for resources throughout the Plan Area on BLM-administered lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Interest and the Panamint Shoshone (E.G., Voegelin 1938; Zigmond 1938; and Kelly 1934)
    109 VyI. NOTES ON BOUNDARIES AND CULTURE OF THE PANAMINT SHOSHONE AND OWENS VALLEY PAIUTE * Gordon L. Grosscup Boundary of the Panamint The Panamint Shoshone, also referred to as the Panamint, Koso (Coso) and Shoshone of eastern California, lived in that portion of the Basin and Range Province which extends from the Sierra Nevadas on the west to the Amargosa Desert of eastern Nevada on the east, and from Owens Valley and Fish Lake Valley in the north to an ill- defined boundary in the south shared with Southern Paiute groups. These boundaries will be discussed below. Previous attempts to define the Panamint Shoshone boundary have been made by Kroeber (1925), Steward (1933, 1937, 1938, 1939 and 1941) and Driver (1937). Others, who have worked with some of the groups which border the Panamint Shoshone, have something to say about the common boundary between the group of their special interest and the Panamint Shoshone (e.g., Voegelin 1938; Zigmond 1938; and Kelly 1934). Kroeber (1925: 589-560) wrote: "The territory of the westernmost member of this group [the Shoshone], our Koso, who form as it were the head of a serpent that curves across the map for 1, 500 miles, is one of the largest of any Californian people. It was also perhaps the most thinly populated, and one of the least defined. If there were boundaries, they are not known. To the west the crest of the Sierra has been assumed as the limit of the Koso toward the Tubatulabal. On the north were the eastern Mono of Owens River.
    [Show full text]