Draft EIS_072312.pdf - Middle Fork American River Project ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 in granaries. Key resources such as acorns, salmon, and deer were “ritually managed” to ensure success and equal distribution. Typical Nisenan structures were conical bark houses with thatched roofs. Washoe community structure consisted of a village or “bunch” of varying size. Winter camps were the basis for a bunch, but nearby villages could be included as well. Two lodging structures were common: a conical winter house like that used by the Nisenan, and a summer brush house, often similar to a windbreak. Unlike the Nisenan, the household was the main economic and political unit, and bunches did not control natural resources. Instead, individual families had certain inherited rights to plant gathering locations, fishing traps, and hunting of certain animals. The Washoe calendar was divided into 3 seasons or “years”: the fishing year, the gathering year, and the hunting year. The fishing year began in early spring when small groups would travel to Lake Tahoe to fish. Some in the party would later bring fish back to the winter village. As the weather warmed, other villagers would move to the lake, and by late June, most Washoe would be found there. This was a time of great social interaction. The gathering season started in the summer with individual family units moving toward the western slope of Sierra Nevada lowlands to gather plant resources. Plant gathering required almost constant movement of family groups. By the end of summer, some family groups had moved back to the lake while others continued to exploit plant resources and hunt deer while waiting for the onset of the acorn harvest. The gathering year ended with the pinõn harvest, which was a main winter staple. The pinõn harvest brought many families back together again and was a time of ceremonial activity. The hunting year began in late summer and lasted until first snow. Communal drives for large game including deer and antelope were organized; smaller game such as rabbits, birds, and other animals were also taken. Although the Nisenan and the Washoe were different in their organizational structure, there were several similarities. Both groups exploited seasonal resources and had similar flaked and ground stone tool technologies including knives, arrow and spear points, clubs, arrow straighteners, scrapers, pestles, bedrock mortars, metates, pipes, and charms. Both also constructed semi-subterranean earth lodge roundhouses for ceremonial use and communal gatherings. The Nisenan and the Washoe frequently interacted for trade and ceremonial purposes, but also conflicted over territories and resources. However, while sometimes hostile, their relationship was generally described as friendly. The first expeditions by Euro Americans into the area were either trappers or other men exploring the area, and Spanish explorers. Spanish exploration of the Central Valley did not begin until the late 1700s and did not reach the Sierra Nevada until the early 1800s. In the 1840s, Sutter’s Fort on the Sacramento River was the main historic settlement in the area, although individual ranches were located on the Bear River. The discovery of gold at Sutter’s Mill on the American River in 1848 led to the “gold rush” in 250
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 northern California and a major increase in population. Shortly thereafter water diversion structures were common, followed by drift mining and hydraulic mining. Hydraulic mining activities were halted in 1884 due to environmental impacts. During the 19th century, the French Meadows and Hell Hole areas were primarily used for seasonal grazing by ranchers residing in the Central Valley. Logging also occurred at French Meadows and in the Forest Hill Divide area, but was limited in the vicinity of Hell Hole because of its remoteness and inaccessibility. Until the construction of the Forest Hill and Mosquito Ridge roads in the early 20 th century, there was no logging in areas of higher elevation in the project vicinity. Hydroelectric development in the region began in the late 1800s with the construction of the Folsom powerhouse on the American River in 1895. The increased need for water and power in California resulted in the California State Water Resources Act in 1945, and the creation of the Nevada Irrigation District and ultimately the PCWA in 1957. Construction of the project began in 1963 but in 1964 the uncompleted Hell Hole dam breached. The project was completed in 1967. Previous Cultural Resources Investigations In preparation for the pre-application document, PCWA researched archival, unpublished literature and published sources that provided information about previous cultural resource surveys undertaken within the project area. Existing information was also obtained from the Forest Service, Eldorado National Forest, Tahoe National Forest, California Historical Resources Information System, United Auburn Indian Community, Shingle Springs Rancheria, Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California (Washoe Tribe), Todd Valley Miwok-Maidu Cultural Foundation, Colfax-Todd Valley Consolidated Tribe, and the Placer County Historical Society (PCWA, 2007b). According to research undertaken for the project pre-application document (PCWA, 2007b), previous cultural resource studies of the project area have been limited. The earliest were a study conducted for the project in 1965 (Rackerby, 1965, as cited by PCWA, 2007b) and studies for the Auburn Dam Project. A total of 87 previously recorded archaeological sites were identified in the project vicinity including 47 prehistoric sites, 35 historic-era sites, 3 sites with both prehistoric and historic components, 1 cemetery, and 1 site identified as “uncertain (historic?).” A total of 41 of these sites were located on lands administered by the Tahoe National Forest, 37 were situated on lands administered by the Eldorado National Forest, and the remaining sites were located on other privately owned lands. The prehistoric sites consisted of lithic scatters and bedrock mortars, although midden sites and one petroglyph site was also identified. The historic-era sites generally consist of foundations, ditches, and mining sites. 251
Page 1 and 2:
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
41 Table 3.3.1-1. Average number of
Page 73 and 74:
43 Site/Release Location Gravel Ini
Page 75 and 76:
45 a Q 1 - TSR, Table G-1 (PCWA, 20
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
69 Table 3.3.2-3. Hydrology for sel
Page 101 and 102:
71 Exceedances and Summary Statisti
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
91 Figure 3.3.2-6. Fish passage bar
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
105 Location American River below M
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
135 Species Name Status a Butte Cou
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
145 Table 3.3.3-5. Special-status w
Page 177 and 178:
147 Species Name Status Habitat Occ
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
195 Figure 3.3.5-1. French Meadows
Page 227 and 228:
197 Figure 3.3.5-3. Long Canyon, re
Page 229 and 230: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 279: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 283 and 284: 253 Table 3.3.6-1. Archaeological a
Page 285 and 286: 255 Resource Number Type a Descript
Page 305 and 306: 275 Table 4-2. Summary of annual co
Page 309 and 310: 279 Enhancement/Mitigation Measures
Page 331 and 332:
301 Enhancement/Mitigation Measures
Page 333 and 334:
303 c Base 2010 costs were provided
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
307 Resource No-Action Alternative
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
319 Table 5-2. Staff-recommended mi
Page 351 and 352:
321 Location Middle Fork American R
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
A-1
Page 405 and 406:
A-3
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419:
show all

Draft EIS_072312.pdf - Middle Fork American River Project ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?