DOCSLIB.ORG

Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan Amendment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan Amendment Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan Amendment East Bay Regional Park District Planning & GIS Services Department 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, California 94605 www.ebparks.org Approved by the East Bay Regional Park District Board of Directors by Resolution # 2013-12-302 on December 17, 2013 Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan Amendment Entry at Neptune Drive Planning and GIS Services Department East Bay Regional Park District 2050 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, California 94605 EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO.: 2013 - 12 - 302 December 17, 2013 APPROVAL OF THE OYSTER BAY REGIONAL SHORELINE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan Amendment, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, a Land Use Plan Amendment has been prepared to provide guide the future development of facilities, expand public access, trails and interpretive opportunities and provide for resource protection at the Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline; and WHEREAS, the Board Executive Committee has reviewed the Land Use Plan Amendment and recommended its favorable consideration by the full Board; and WHEREAS, the Park Advisory Committee has reviewed and recommended approval of d'le-Land Use Plan Amendment; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional Park District hereby approves the Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan Amendment; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the General Manager is hereby authorized and directed, on behalf of the District and in its name, to execute and deliver such documents and to do such acts as may be deemed necessary or appropriate to accomplish the intentions of this resolution. Moved by Director Siden, seconded by Director Wieskamp, and approved this Ir h day of December, 2013, by the following vote: FOR: Whitney Dotson, Beverly Lane, Ted Radke, Carol Severin, Doug Siden, John Sutter, Ayn Wieskamp. AGAINST: None. ABSTAIN: None. CERTlFlCATION ABSENT: None. I, Allen Pulido, Clerk of the Board of Directon 01 .... East Bay Regional Park District, do ~ ~ thIt the above and foregoing is a full, true and cOfTeCt copy of Resolution No. :JRt.7 - a. ~ Jc) 2..- adopted ..... by of [);rectors at a /r- on thzjl.:u--dI Z 2£0 . 'l!/tv.-W John Sutter ~Soard President I , TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Planning Background ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Purpose of this Land Use Plan Amendment ...................................................................................... 2 1.4 Planning Process ............................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – LUPA RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 5 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Site Description ............................................................................................................................... 13 3.1.1 Climate Conditions ............................................................................................................ 13 3.2 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.1 Topography, Geology, and Soils ....................................................................................... 13 3.2.2 Hydrology / Watershed .................................................................................................... 14 3.2.3 Plant Communities and Associated Wildlife ..................................................................... 14 3.3 Gas Monitoring and Leachate Collection Systems .......................................................................... 17 3.4 Access and Parking .......................................................................................................................... 14 3.5 Internal Circulation ......................................................................................................................... 14 3.6 Utilities .......................................................................................................................................... 18 3.7 Maintenance and Operations ......................................................................................................... 18 3.8 Public Safety .................................................................................................................................... 18 4.0 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT ............................................................................................................... 21 4.1 Park Concept ................................................................................................................................... 21 4.2 Designation of Staging /Recreation and Natural Units ................................................................... 21 4.3 Land Use and Facilities .................................................................................................................... 21 4.3.1 Access ............................................................................................................................... 22 4.3.2 Parking and Staging Areas ................................................................................................ 22 4.3.3 Trails.................................................................................................................................. 25 4.3.4 Picnic Areas ....................................................................................................................... 25 4.3.5 Irrigated Turf and Landscaped Areas ................................................................................ 26 4.3.6 View Points and Vistas ...................................................................................................... 26 4.3.7 Public Art .......................................................................................................................... 27 4.3.8 Special Event Area ............................................................................................................ 27 4.3.9 Bicycle Skills Area .............................................................................................................. 28 4.3.10 Disc (Frisbee) Golf Course ................................................................................................. 29 4.3.11 Unleashed Dog Area ......................................................................................................... 30 4.3.12 Service Yard ...................................................................................................................... 30 4.3.13 Grading and Topography .................................................................................................. 31 1.3.14 Utilities .............................................................................................................................. 31 i 4.4 Resource Management ................................................................................................................... 31 4.4.1 Vegetation Management .................................................................................................. 32 4.4.2 Integrated Pest Management and Revegetation .............................................................. 34 4.4.3 Wildlife Pest Species ......................................................................................................... 36 4.5 Operations and Maintenance ......................................................................................................... 36 4.6 Public Safety .................................................................................................................................... 37 4.7 Interpretive Programming .............................................................................................................. 37 4.8 Coordination with Other Agencies .................................................................................................. 38 4.9 Project Implementation / Phasing .................................................................................................. 39 APPENDICES......................................................................................................................................................... 41 Appendix A: Plant Species Observed at Oyster Bay .............................................................................. 43 Appendix B: Recommended Plant List .................................................................................................. 47 Appendix C: Wildlife Species Observed at Oyster Bay .......................................................................... 49 Appendix D: Special Status Wildlife Species at Oyster Bay ................................................................... 55 Appendix E: Fish Species at
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sediment Transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: an Overview
    Marine Geology 345 (2013) 3–17 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/margeo Sediment transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: An overview Patrick L. Barnard a,⁎, David H. Schoellhamer b,c, Bruce E. Jaffe a, Lester J. McKee d a U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, Santa Cruz, CA, USA b U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center, Sacramento, CA, USA c University of California, Davis, USA d San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA, USA article info abstract Article history: The papers in this special issue feature state-of-the-art approaches to understanding the physical processes Received 29 March 2012 related to sediment transport and geomorphology of complex coastal–estuarine systems. Here we focus on Received in revised form 9 April 2013 the San Francisco Bay Coastal System, extending from the lower San Joaquin–Sacramento Delta, through the Accepted 13 April 2013 Bay, and along the adjacent outer Pacific Coast. San Francisco Bay is an urbanized estuary that is impacted by Available online 20 April 2013 numerous anthropogenic activities common to many large estuaries, including a mining legacy, channel dredging, aggregate mining, reservoirs, freshwater diversion, watershed modifications, urban run-off, ship traffic, exotic Keywords: sediment transport species introductions, land reclamation, and wetland restoration. The Golden Gate strait is the sole inlet 9 3 estuaries connecting the Bay to the Pacific Ocean, and serves as the conduit for a tidal flow of ~8 × 10 m /day, in addition circulation to the transport of mud, sand, biogenic material, nutrients, and pollutants.
    [Show full text]
  • Oyster Growers and Oyster Pirates in San Francisco Bay
    04-C3737 1/20/06 9:46 AM Page 63 Oyster Growers and Oyster Pirates in San Francisco Bay MATTHEW MORSE BOOKER The author is a member of the history department at North Carolina State University, Raleigh. In the late nineteenth century San Francisco Bay hosted one of the American West’s most valuable fisheries: Not the bay’s native oysters, but Atlantic oysters, shipped across the country by rail and seeded on privately owned tidelands, created private profits and sparked public resistance. Both oyster growers and oyster pirates depended upon a rapidly changing bay ecosystem. Their struggle to possess the bay’s productivity revealed the inqualities of ownership in the American West. An unstable nature and shifting perceptions of San Francisco Bay combined to remake the bay into a place to dump waste rather than to find food. Both growers and pirates disappeared following the collapse of the oyster fishery in the early twentieth century. In 1902 twenty-two-year-old Oakland writer Jack London published his first book, an adventure story for boys. In the novel, London’s boy hero runs away from a comfortable middle-class home to test his mettle in the rough world of the San Francisco waterfront. Plucky but naïve, Joe Bronson soon finds himself sailing down San Francisco Bay in a rickety sloop called the Dazzler, piloted by hard-drinking French Pete and his tough orphan sidekick, the ’Frisco Kid. The Dazzler joins a small fleet of boats congregating in the tidal flats along the eastern shoreline of San Francisco Bay where French Pete orders Joe and the Kid to drag a triangular piece of steel, an oyster dredge, over the muddy bottom.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Native Oyster Restoration in San Francisco Bay. Final Report to California Coastal Conservancy Agreement
    Planning for Native Oyster Restoration in San Francisco Bay Final Report to California Coastal Conservancy Agreement # 05-134 Edwin Grosholza, Jim Mooreb, Chela Zabina, Sarikka Attoea and Rena Obernoltea aDepartment of Environmental Science and Policy University of California, Davis bCalifornia Department of Fish and Game Funding provided by the California Ocean Protection Council Introduction Historically, native Olympia oysters Ostreola conchaphila (=Ostrea lurida) (Turgeon et al. 1998) were an abundant and ecologically important part of the fauna in West Coast estuaries and an important fishery (Barnett 1963, Baker 1995). Unfortunately, the popularity of the fishery that began in the 1850s resulted in the complete collapse of native oyster populations along the west coast of the U.S. during the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Barnett 1963, Baker 1995). Not only was the fishery lost, but so were the key ecosystem services provided by native oysters. Studies of oysters in estuaries in the eastern U.S. have shown that native oyster reefs (Crassostrea virginica) act as a “foundation species” by creating a refuge from predators and physical stress as well as a food source resulting in increased local diversity of fishes and invertebrates (Zimmerman 1989, Lenihan 1999, Micheli and Peterson 1999, Lenihan et al. 2001). In the largely unstructured, soft-sediment habitats of West Coast estuaries, aggregations of native oysters were likely to have provided similar functions and have been shown to increase invertebrate species richness (Kimbro and Grosholz 2006). The introduction of exotic Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) from Asia in the early 20th century provided a successful replacement for the native oyster fishery.
    [Show full text]
  • A Geographic History of San Lorenzo Creek Watershed
    A GEOGRAPHIC HISTORY OF SAN LORENZO CREEK WATERSHED LANDSCAPE PATTERNS UNDERLYING HUMAN ACTIVITIES IN THE LANDS OF THE YRGIN MISSION SAN JOSE RANCHO, 1796-1834 SAN LEANDRO, SAN LORENZO, AND SAN RAMON RANCHOS, 1830s-1849 TOWNS OF HAYWARD’S, SQUATTERSVILLE, AND MT EDEN, 1850s CITIES OF HAYWARD, SAN LORENZO, AND CASTRO VALLEY Robin Grossinger and Elise Brewster San Francisco Estuary Institute Regional Watershed Program Prepared for the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Clean Water Program SFEI Contribution 85 December 2003 Some agents of change in the San Lorenzo Creek watershed, 1769-2003. Rainfall data (July-June year) compiled by Lester McKee from Hayward data, using correlation to early San Francisco rainfall records that were developed by Jan Null (ggweather.com). Local flooding data from FEMA 1986 and Modrell (pers. comm.). Mission livestock data from Jackson 1994. Population data from Eden Writers 1975. San Francisco Estuary Institute 2 San Lorenzo Creek Landscape Patterns in the San Lorenzo Creek Watershed and Surrounding Areas Table of Contents San Lorenzo Creek Watershed ……………………………………………………………………………. 2 San Lorenzo Creek …………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 Alluvial Plain …………………………………………………………………………………….……………. 5 The Bay - Tidal Marshland ………………………………………………………….……………………. 6 Salt Ponds ………………………………………………………….………………………………………….. 7 Landings ……………………………………………………………………………………………….………. 7 Mission San Jose Rangeland ………………………………………………………………….……….. 9 Diramaderos - Sausals - Indian Grant - San Lorenzo Grove …………………….……………
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Mercury TMDL Report Mercury TMDL and Evaluate New Card Is in Preparation by the Water and Relevant Information from Board
    Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Summary Waterbody – The San Francisco Bay is located on the Central Coast of California. It is a broad and shallow natural embayment. The northern part of the Bay has more flushing than the southern portion because the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers discharge into the northern segment, while smaller, local watersheds provide freshwater to the southern part. Water Quality The northern and southern portions of the Bay are linked by the Central Bay, which provides the connection to the Pacific Ocean. Progress All segments of San Francisco Bay are included in this TMDL, including marine and estuarine waters adjacent to the Bay (Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta within San Francisco Bay region, Suisun Bay, Report Carquinez Strait, San Pablo Bay, Richardson Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, Lower San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay including the Lower South Bay) (see map below). Three additional mercury- impaired waterbodies that are specific areas within these larger segments are also included in this TMDL (Castro Cove, Oakland Inner Harbor, and San Leandro Bay). San Francisco Bay – Mercury (Approved 2008) WATER QUALITY STATUS ○ TMDL targets achieved ○ Conditions improving ● Improvement needed ○ Data inconclusive Contacts EPA: Luisa Valiela at (415) 972-3400 or [email protected] San Francisco Bay Water Board: Carrie Austin at (510) 622-1015 or [email protected] Segments of San Francisco Bay Last Updated 6/15/2015 Progress Report: Mercury in the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Goals Mercury water quality objectives were identified to protect both people who consume Bay fish and aquatic organisms and wildlife: To protect human health: Not to exceed 0.2 mg mercury per kg (mg/kg) (average wet weight of the edible portion) in trophic level1 (TL) 3 and 4 fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring the Estuary
    1 AA FrameworkFramework forfor CollaborativeCollaborative ActionAction onon WetlandsWetlands US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE etlands in the San Francisco Bay Area are range of interests—including resource and regulato- Wamong the most important coastal wintering ry agencies, environmental organizations, business, and migratory stopover areas for millions of water- and agriculture—convened the San Francisco Bay fowl and shorebirds traveling along the Pacific Fly- Joint Venture (SFBJV) in June of 1995. In September way, which stretches from Alaska to South America. 1996, 20 parties representing this diverse wetlands These wetlands also provide economic benefits, constituency signed a working agreement that iden- offer a range of recreational opportunities, and con- tified the goals and objectives of the SFBJV, and the tribute to a higher quality of life for residents in the responsibilities of its board and working commit- densely populated San Francisco Bay Area. They are tees. The agreement also stated that the Implemen- essential aspects of the Bay region’s unique charac- tation Strategy would be developed to guide its par- ter and, along with the creeks that flow into the Bay, ties toward the long-term vision of the restored Bay help to define the vibrant and distinctive identities Estuary. The signatory partners recognized and of communities around the Bay. However, despite endorsed the goals of the North American Waterfowl their value, destruction of these precious natural Management Plan. However, they enlarged the goals assets continues. Today’s wetlands are only a rem- and objectives of the Plan to include benefits not nant, perhaps 20 percent of the vast wetlands seen only for waterfowl, but also for the other wildlife by the first European settlers.
    [Show full text]
  • Documents Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in California, Circa 1852-1904
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/hb109nb422 Online items available Finding Aid to the Documents Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in California, circa 1852-1904 Finding Aid written by Michelle Morton and Marie Salta, with assistance from Dean C. Rowan and Randal Brandt The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ © 2008, 2013 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Finding Aid to the Documents BANC MSS Land Case Files 1852-1892BANC MSS C-A 300 FILM 1 Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in Cali... Finding Aid to the Documents Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in California, circa 1852-1904 Collection Number: BANC MSS Land Case Files The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California Finding Aid Written By: Michelle Morton and Marie Salta, with assistance from Dean C. Rowan and Randal Brandt. Date Completed: March 2008 © 2008, 2013 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Collection Summary Collection Title: Documents pertaining to the adjudication of private land claims in California Date (inclusive): circa 1852-1904 Collection Number: BANC MSS Land Case Files 1852-1892 Microfilm: BANC MSS C-A 300 FILM Creators : United States. District Court (California) Extent: Number of containers: 857 Cases. 876 Portfolios. 6 volumes (linear feet: Approximately 75)Microfilm: 200 reels10 digital objects (1494 images) Repository: The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ Abstract: In 1851 the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • California Fish and Game “Conservation of Wildlife Through Education”
    Spring 2015 81 CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME “Conservation of Wildlife Through Education” Volume 101 Spring 2015 Number 2 CDFW Photo by Terry Maas Published Quarterly by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 82 CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME Vol. 101, No. 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Jerry Brown, Governor CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY John Laird, Secretary for Natural Resources FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Jack Baylis, President Jim Kellogg, Vice President Richard B. Rogers, Member Jacque Hostler-Carmesin, Member Michael Sutton, Member Sonke Mastrup, Executive Director DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Charlton “Chuck” Bonham, Director CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME EDITORIAL STAFF Vern Bleich ........................................................................................Editor-in-Chief Debra Hamilton ............ Office of Communication, Education and Outreach - AVU Jeff Villepique, Steve Parmenter ........................................... Inland Deserts Region Scott Osborn, Laura Patterson, Joel Trumbo ................................... Wildlife Branch Dave Lentz, Kevin Shaffer ............................................................. Fisheries Branch Peter Kalvass, Nina Kogut .................................................................Marine Region James Harrington .......................................Office of Spill Prevention and Response Cherilyn Burton ...................................................................... Native Plant Program Spring 2015 83 VOLUME 101 SPRING 2015 NUMBER 2 Published Quarterly by STATE OF
    [Show full text]
  • How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, and the Colonial Roots of California, 1846 – 1879
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2019 How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, And The Colonial Roots Of California, 1846 – 1879 Camille Alexandrite Suárez University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Suárez, Camille Alexandrite, "How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, And The Colonial Roots Of California, 1846 – 1879" (2019). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 3491. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3491 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3491 For more information, please contact [email protected]. How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, And The Colonial Roots Of California, 1846 – 1879 Abstract The construction of California as an American state was a colonial project premised upon Indigenous removal, state-supported land dispossession, the perpetuation of unfree labor systems and legal, race- based discrimination alongside successful Anglo-American settlement. This dissertation, entitled “How the West was Won: Race, Citizenship, and the Colonial Roots of California, 1849 - 1879” argues that the incorporation of California and its diverse peoples into the U.S. depended on processes of colonization that produced and justified an adaptable acialr hierarchy that protected white privilege and supported a racially-exclusive conception of citizenship. In the first section, I trace how the California Constitution and federal and state legislation violated the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This legal system empowered Anglo-American migrants seeking territorial, political, and economic control of the region by allowing for the dispossession of Californio and Indigenous communities and legal discrimination against Californio, Indigenous, Black, and Chinese persons.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Resilience Assessment of the San Francisco Bay and Outer Coast Watersheds
    Coastal Resilience Assessment of the San Francisco Bay and Outer Coast Watersheds Suggested Citation: Crist, P.J., S. Veloz, J. Wood, R. White, M. Chesnutt, C. Scott, P. Cutter, and G. Dobson. Coastal Resilience Assessment of the San Francisco Bay and Outer Coast Watersheds. 2019. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. IMPORTANT INFORMATION/DISCLAIMER: This report represents a Regional Coastal Resilience Assessment that can be used to identify places on the landscape for resilience-building efforts and conservation actions through understanding coastal flood threats, the exposure of populations and infrastructure have to those threats, and the presence of suitable fish and wildlife habitat. As with all remotely sensed or publicly available data, all features should be verified with a site visit, as the locations of suitable landscapes or areas containing flood hazards and community assets are approximate. The data, maps, and analysis provided should be used only as a screening-level resource to support management decisions. This report should be used strictly as a planning reference tool and not for permitting or other legal purposes. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government, or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s partners. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation or its funding sources. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION DISCLAIMER: The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of NOAA or the Department of Commerce.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting to Know the County of Alameda
    Presented by Carol S Orth, CPA Division Chief, Tax Analysis Unit Tax Manager’s Subcommittee Meeting February, 2016 Seventh most populous county in California Fourth most racially diverse county in the United States Land area of 739 square miles and population of 2,043 per square mile Water area is 84 square miles Total area is 823 square miles 2015-16 Total assessed value net other exemptions - $237,563 million Total parcel count - 498,559 Total initial tax charge for 2015-16 - $3.4 billion (includes AV and fixed charges) Budget of over $2.7 billion 2015-16 Top Ten Taxpayers by Assessed Value 1. Pacific Gas and Electric 2. Tesla Motors, Inc 3. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals 4. Digital 720, 2nd LLC 5. Russell City Energy Company 6. AT&T 7. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, INC 8. 5616 Bay Street Investors LLC 9. PSB Northern California Industrial Portfolio LLC 10. Bayer Healthcare LLC Borders the San Francisco Bay on the west with San Francisco and San Mateo Counties, crest of the Berkeley Hills forms northeastern border with Contra Costa County, southern border with Santa Clara County, eastern border with San Joaquin County and southeastern border with Stanislaus County Hayward Fault, a major branch of the San Andreas Fault to the west, runs through the most populated areas of Alameda County and the Calaveras Fault runs through the southeastern part of the county. On March 25, 1853, an Act of Incorporation was created and Alameda County was "born". Created from parts of Contra Costa and Santa Clara Counties, the act was signed into law by Governor Bigler on April 6, 1853.
    [Show full text]
  • Where's the Hayward Fault? a Green Guide to the Fault
    Where's the Hayward Fault? A Green Guide to the Fault By Philip W. Stoffer This report describes self-guided field trips to one of North America's most dangerous earthquake faults—the Hayward Fault. Locations were chosen because of their easy access using mass transit and/or their significance relating to the natural and cultural history of the East Bay landscape. Open-File Report 2008-1135 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2008 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/ Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation: Stoffer, Philip W., 2008, Where’s the Hayward Fault? A green guide to the fault: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1135, 88 p. [http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1135/]. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. ii Table of Contents Introduction to This Guide .............................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]