Public may soon own “Duke of Nevada’s” summer retreat
February 27, 2007
The Forest Service is negotiating to buy the last large private enclave on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.
If the 777-acre Incline Lake site sells to the government, the property will eventually be open to the public for the first time in 70 years. If the deal dies, the woodland acreage could become a private gated community.
For more than a year, the 19 shareholders of Incline Lake, a property previously owned by Nevada real estate magnate Norman Biltz, have been negotiating with the U.S. Forest Service over the sale of the historic property. An appraisal done for the shareholders puts the value of the land and sales expenses at about $75 million, but the Forest Service's sealed bid fell far short of that, participants said.
The families who own shares in the property, which includes a dam, an observatory and several buildings, have been trading responses with the Forest Service since the government's bid came through this fall. The Forest Service has said it can't maintain the observatory and other structures on the property, but other agencies have gotten involved.
The shareholders' company, Incline Lake Corp., has offered Washoe County a $10 million endowment to maintain existing structures. The county has offered to build parking and trailheads at the site and manage the buildings. Another 11 acres bordering State Route 431 would be managed by the Nevada Department Of Transportation as a parking easement.
The Forest Service also has discussed working with Washoe County Parks, Sierra Nevada College, Sage Ridge School, and others to keep the celestial observatory and family lodge in operation for educational purposes. If the sale goes through, the Incline Village General Improvement District has agreed to spend $1 million to purchase a 5-acre parcel at Incline Lake including 245 acre feet of water rights.
In July, Nevada state government approved $772,500 in grants to help Incline Village offset the purchase. Incline Village schools and other community groups could then use the parcel for outdoor activities. The parcel also could host a Visitors' Center, a Nordic Ski Center and a meeting/conference facility.
But it all depends on the federal government acquiring most of the land.
"It's been saved from development since my grandfather acquired it in the 1930s and I'd like to see it open for people to enjoy," said Norman Nash of Reno, grandson of Norman Biltz.
The Incline Lake property served as a summer retreat for Biltz, who was known as "The Duke of Nevada" for his efforts to attract business and development to Nevada from the 1930s to the 1950s. Biltz hosted "North-South" meetings at the lake - events that brought politicians, businessmen and powerbrokers from Northern Nevada and Clark County together to plan strategies and make deals for the state's future.
"The powers-that-be in the north and the powers-that-be in the south would come out here for barbeques," said Tim Griffin of Reno, whose family is among the shareholders. "A lot of deals were made over drinks and in fishing boats out on the lake," Griffin said.
Griffin said his family and the other shareholders would miss the property where several generations grew up and vacationed in the summers. "But it will be good if the public gets to enjoy it," he said.
The money for the purchase would come from the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act. Under that law, money from the sale of federal lands in Clark County is earmarked for use in projects and land acquisitions around Lake Tahoe.
Related posts: [ Incline Lake: Public may soon own “Duke of Nevada’s” summer retreat ] [ Tahoe Summit: 10 years later ] [ Keeping Tahoe Green ] [ Forest Service plan focuses on community protection ] [ Are slash mats worth the cost? ]
John Cobourn discusses nonpoint source pollution
February 27, 2007
Related posts: [ To dig or not to dig ] [ Second BMP Talks meeting adds to solutions ] [ Groups help resolve landscaping issues ] [ Hispanics attend landscaping class ] [ Impact of the Angora fire on water clarity ]
John Cobourn discusses BMPs
February 27, 2007
Related posts: [ Second BMP Talks meeting adds to solutions ] [ Hispanics attend landscaping class ] [ To dig or not to dig ] [ Groups help resolve landscaping issues ] [ Juan Luna talks about BMPs ]
Eager for your help
February 27, 2007
Hello friends on TahoeShare. We have no posts today, since the site has only been live for a few hours. But I wanted to tell all of you that this part of Share will highlight communities, individuals and contributions that I feel are vibrant, important, interesting, essential to our lives as we know them. We might run photo contests, I might ask you all a specific question in OurCommunity, you might suggest a brilliant topic and I will highlight all of those things here.
Related posts: [ Thank you ] [ Snow woes: Businesses cope with late snowfall ] [ St. John’s in the Wilderness ] [ Hello and Welcome ] [ Together in prayer, Junto en la oración ]
Hello and Welcome
February 27, 2007
Welcome to OurCommunity, the space on TahoeShare for original, experimental journalism. My name is Katie Palani. I’m a 24-year old graduate fellow at the University of Nevada, Reno, and I’m going to be a part of your community here on Share. I welcome you to your space on OurTahoe.org. Here, you can find your community online and become a part of the conversation. I want you to upload pictures, post memories, and join conversations that interest you.
I am sincerely interested in what you have to say, what the images you share say about your community, and how you remember your experiences here. You are welcome to use Share for your own conversations with friends, but I also encourage you to branch out and find some new perspective and meet some new people. Welcome, and pleased to meet you.
Related posts: [ BMP community conversation to begin soon ] [ Don’t label me ] [ Join the community ] [ It’s all about you ] [ Defensible space advocate helps her community ]
To dig or not to dig
February 26, 2007
==Start Related Links==
The Clean Water Act
BMPs at Lake Tahoe (TRPA)
BMP Inspections at Lake Tahoe:
Nevada-Tahoe Conservation District
Tahoe Resource Conservation District
==End Related Links==
Best Management Practices are getting mixed reviews.
Based on your experiences, how could the BMP process be improved? Please join the discussion to contribute your insights.
A Deeper Look:
The Clean Water Act, formed in 1972, defines pollution from stormwater runoff and erosion as nonpoint source pollution. It designates best management practices as the way to manage nonpoint source pollution. These practices are required throughout the country. The purpose of BMPs is to control disturbances to soil. When undisturbed, soil performs the important function of absorbing and cleansing water. John Cobourn, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension water resource specialist, explains more about nonpoint source pollution and BMPs.
Related posts: [ Juan Luna talks about BMPs ] [ Participants named for “BMP Talks” ] [ BMP community conversation to begin soon ] [ BMP compliance is low in Tahoe Basin ] [ Community meeting to discuss solutions for BMPs - Live streaming video available ]
Promise to make Tahoe better
February 23, 2007
Imagine a better Tahoe … Now make it real with your community! A tool called Promise Tahoe, right here on ourTahoe.org, is a way to recruit your neighbors to help you improve the environment at Lake Tahoe. Say you'll take action to improve the environment, but only if others will help.
Even the smallest individual contribution has the ability to make a big difference. For example, one person who uses public transportation rather than driving their own car to work won't make a noticeable difference in car emissions. But if that person makes a promise and asks 25 people to join him or her in taking public transportation, that's a big contribution to a better ecosystem.
The creator of Promise Tahoe is Melissa Voigtmann. She is a producer for KRNV News 4 in Reno.
"When I'm watching the news I often feel powerless," Voigtmann said. "I have no way of changing things that I'm unhappy with in my own community. It's my hope that Promise Tahoe will help residents of and visitors to Lake Tahoe join together to make real change in Tahoe."
Promises can be about just about anything. Some of the promises already on the site include:
- A promise to Ride TART at least five times a year if three other people will do the same
- A promise to obey the speed limit to reduce gas consumption if 15 other people will do the same
- A promise to recycle biodegradable waste if five people will do the same
We imagine all kinds of promises possible on this site, from the individual and mundane, to promises that could fix a major neighborhood run-off problem or clean up unsightly mess on a roadside.
To get started, click on "Act"; and make a promise. Small promises can make a big difference to you and the Tahoe community.
Related posts: [ It’s all about you ] [ I Get Why I Don’t Get It ] [ BMP community conversation to begin soon ] [ Global moves to reduce incandescents ] [ Public may soon own “Duke of Nevada’s” summer retreat ]
Weighing in on the Piers
February 23, 2007
Confronted with the possibility of 230 more piers around Lake Tahoe in the next 22 years, the Our Tahoe staff interviewed a handful of people to find out the community's opinions – Rochelle Nason, executive director of the League to Save Lake Tahoe; Roger Rosenberger, president of the Tahoe Area Sierra Club; April Ruggiero, North Shore homeowner; and Mindy Cooper-Smith, West Shore homeowner.
Q: Do you think shoreline homeowners have a right to a pier?
- Nason, Keep Tahoe Blue: The League to Save Lake Tahoe, which is also known by its motto "Keep Tahoe Blue", believes that shoreline homeowners (and other users of Lake Tahoe) should have convenient and safe access to boating facilities (including piers, buoys, slips, and ramps) to the maximum extent that such facilities can be reconciled with environmental protection. We do not believe anyone has a legal right to any particular type of facility except ones that they already own, have legal permission to use, or have acquired a permit to construct.
- Rosenberger, Tahoe Area Sierra Club: The shoreline owners do not own the lake; the public does. So, (shoreline owners) have no right to build a pier.
- Ruggiero, North Shore homeowner: Yeah.
- Cooper-Smith, West Shore homeowner: That's tricky. I guess since you pay so much more for being on the water, but I'd rather see shared piers. I think that would be a fairer way to go. I think shoreline people should have a right to have it, but I don't think it's right that others should be excluded. There has to be some compromise so that everybody can get access. But it would be fine with me if they never built another pier up here at all. So my answer is, no piers. … I don't think homeowners should have an exclusive right.
Q: Should there be a limit to how many piers will be allowed? If so, how
many do you think there should be?
- Nason, Keep Tahoe Blue: The League puts a higher priority on the appropriate location of structures, so as to protect scenic quality, drinking water intakes and water recreation (such as kayaking and fishing) than it does on the ultimate number of piers or other facilities. Nevertheless we believe that keeping the total numbers of piers within reason will be necessary for environmental protection and will ultimately benefit all users of Lake Tahoe, as well as the Lake itself. The total number of buoys presents an even more pressing problem as illegal buoys have proliferated to an alarming extent with little effective regulation, and because the total number of buoys is scheduled immediately to increase dramatically under TRPA's proposed shorezone ordinances.
- Rosenberger, Tahoe Area Sierra Club: The Sierra Club believes that Lake Tahoe is a unique place of natural beauty, and others agree. It has been designated an "Outstanding National Water Resource." No more piers should be allowed.
- Ruggiero, North Shore homeowner: That's hard because there are a lot of shoreline homes. If they're allowed to have them, then you have the condo associations. Yes, because we don't want the whole lake to be dotted with piers, but no because if people own lakefront property they have a right to it. The lake's so huge, I wouldn't be able to come up with a number. 750 is very unobtrusive; it's not like we're bothered by piers around the lake right now. … I like the idea of more public piers. In the Tahoe area, on North Shore, I can only think of one or two: the one on the other side of the Boatworks and the one off of Sugar Pine Park. That's it for public piers.
- Cooper-Smith, West Shore homeowner: Oh yeah - a lot less than what TRPA has proposed.
Q: What should the public's role be in determining the locations of public
piers?
- Nason, Keep Tahoe Blue: Selecting appropriate locations for public facilities at Lake Tahoe is a shared responsibility of land managers (which may include the U.S. Forest Service, state and local government, and private parties who wish to operate public facilities), and planning and regulatory bodies such as TRPA, California's Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection and the EPA. Both public land managers and regulatory agencies are subject to laws that provide opportunities for public participation, and one of the roles of Keep Tahoe Blue: The League to Save Lake Tahoe is to keep its members and the public informed of opportunities to have a voice in these decisions.
- Rosenberger, Tahoe Area Sierra Club: The Sierra Club has done a comprehensive poll (over 2,000 participants), which indicates overwhelming public opposition to piers. The politicians should listen.
- Ruggiero, North Shore homeowner: It is our view and our lake, and where we would want people to park and go. It's important that the public has a voice in it.
- Cooper-Smith, West Shore homeowner: Everybody should have a say. But that's not how it's been here.
Q: How do you think more piers will affect the environment and quality of life at Lake Tahoe?
- Nason, Keep Tahoe Blue: Piers can enhance the quality and safety of the boating experience, and they can also offer an enriching experience of the lake for residents and visitors who simply wish to enjoy views and the ambience of the lake from the pier. Private piers can also have substantial economic benefits to shoreline homeowners, enhancing the value of a property by as much as $2 million. Nevertheless, piers and other shorezone structures (such as buoys, slips, ramps, etc.) that are placed in the wrong locations, that are built in excessive numbers, or that are not properly built and maintained can degrade the natural and human environment, including scenery, water quality, aquatic life, natural water movement and low impact recreation opportunities.
- Rosenberger, Tahoe Area Sierra Club: There is little question that human activity increases stress on the natural environment. More piers, and the resulting boat activity, will adversely affect the lake. The various regulatory agencies around Lake Tahoe have been active for almost 40 years. During that time, the lake has lost 30 feet of clarity. Until the clarity numbers begin to improve, we should be doing nothing to further stress the environment.
- Ruggiero, North Shore homeowner: I don't think (the piers) really affect the environment as long as they're used for picnicking and diving off of and hanging out on. It's not going to affect the environment. Quality of life would improve because it would give people more places to go.
- Cooper-Smith, West Shore homeowner: That's hard for me to say, because I've seen lots of crawdads and fish around the piers, so I'm not convinced that they're really hurting (the environment). … If you had (piers) coming out all over the place, it would certainly be ugly. I would rather get rid of all the jet skis and make the water skiers go further out because they try to drown me in my kayak. So the piers, if there were just a few, wouldn't bother me. My feeling is that they really do have to control development, but it just has to be more democratic…
Related posts: [ TRPA postpones pier review ] [ Are slash mats worth the cost? ] [ Impact of the Angora fire on water clarity ] [ Incline Lake: Public may soon own “Duke of Nevada’s” summer retreat ] [ Best Management Practices in Tahoe Gardening ]
TRPA postpones pier review
February 23, 2007
==Start Related Links==
==End Related Links==
A proposal to allow construction of new piers at Lake Tahoe remains beached after two years of deliberations.
The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency favors a plan to add 230 new piers over 22 years as the best middle ground. Environmental groups want the moratorium that has banned piers on two-thirds of the shore continued until lake clarity improves. But property owners along the shoreline say they have a right to build wharfs to secure "reasonable boating access" to the lake.
The agency was expected to vote on the pier plan - called Alternative 6A - last month but delayed action until the end of March at the earliest.
Environmental groups and California state agencies argue that no piers should be built until all the environmental consequences are known. Scientists say more piers probably wouldn't be detrimental to deep water clarity, the main environmental indicator at the lake, but critics now question the effect new piers, and presumably more boats, would have on near-shore water clarity.
The plan would generate more than $51 million in fees if all the structures were approved over the next 20 years.
Is there public involvement in the debate over piers?
The public is generally absent from the latest debate over piers. A proposal to prohibit boating at Emerald Bay for one day a week, part of an earlier pier and buoy plan, was withdrawn after citizens complained. Instead, the plan now calls for a lower speed limit on Emerald Bay and blue-boating requirements.
But the debate over Alternative 6A hasn't drawn much public comment and is mainly between the environmental groups and shoreline property owners. TRPA says extending the moratorium can't be justified legally and scientific studies show that piers don't damage fish habitat, which was a theory used to justify the ban. The agency says the favored plan would satisfy some of the pent-up demand for piers while at the same time help protect the lake through its "blue boating" provision.
Will "blue boating" balance pier concerns?
The program would require all boats entering the lake to be free of invasive weeds, have lake-friendly engines and contain other water quality protection measures. Inspections would be voluntary at first and then mandatory by 2009. Alternative 6A also would allow up to 1,800 new buoys on the lake, which floats 1,400 buoys.
But environmental groups favor no new piers and no new buoys until current pollution concerns - including the piers' effects on near-shore water quality - are resolved. That frustrates property owners, who say they've been playing a game whose rules keep changing.
Do shoreline owners have a right to build piers?
Jan Brisco, spokeswoman for the Tahoe Lakefront Property Owners, said Alternative 6A is an incentive approach to building new piers and TRPA can't hold property owners hostage to the demands of environmental groups. She said shoreline owners have an established right to access the water and to "wharf out."
"The moratorium was caused by concerns over fish habitat, but that was resolved 12 years ago," she said. "Then it was scenic concerns, then boating… It's a moving target. Whatever can be used to fight piers is being used."
How many new piers are enough?
TRPA says the 230 number - which includes 10 new public piers in 22 years - is a worst case scenario and the plan provides incentives for property owners to share common piers. In addition, sandy shores would be restricted to piers 200 feet apart while rocky shores would be under a 100-foot density limit.
But Roger Rosenberger, president of the Tahoe Area Sierra Club, said the decrease in lake clarity directly relates to the increase in human activity at the lake. He said the burden of proof that water clarity will not further degrade should be on the people who want to construct new piers.
"The shoreline property owners don't own the lake, the public does," he said. "So there is no right to build a pier." He said a Sierra Club sponsored poll of more than 2,000 people showed "overwhelming public opposition to piers."
Who owns the Tahoe shoreline?
The Tahoe shoreline is 47 percent public as compared to 17 percent in 1971, and 53 percent of the shoreline is private property. Private property owners currently hold about 1,400 parcels on Lake Tahoe, which has 768 piers (public and private).
TRPA spokeswoman Julie Regan said the agency is responsible for coming up with a shore zone plan that can pass legal muster and is based on science. She said the agency aims to find a middle ground and "balance" among the stakeholders on either side of the controversy and is currently meeting with California agencies to discuss their concerns.
Alternative 6A at a glance
- Density standards: Alternative 6A calls for a density-based approach to piers around Lake Tahoe. Under Alternative 6A, a maximum of 220 new private piers and 10 new public piers would be added over the next 22 years. TRPA would accept up to 10 private pier permit applications each year. Total pier densities would not exceed an average of one per 200 feet of sandy shoreline or an average of one per 100 feet of rocky shoreline. All piers would be required to meet minimum scenic and environmental standards.
- Buoys: Currently, about 4,500 buoys exist on the lake. Alternative 6A would allow lakefront property owners to add two buoys per parcel for a total of up to 1,862 new buoys around the lake. A streamlined application process would reduce the permitting paperwork for buoys, along with an aggressive buoy enforcement program. The program will recognize nearly all pre-existing buoys. The plan calls for buoy owners to "demonstrate maintenance" on their buoys every other year.
- Boat sticker program: TRPA proposes a boat pollution reduction program to make sure all boats entering the lake are free of invasive weeds, have lake-friendly engines and contain other water quality protection measures. TRPA plans to use additional public input to fine-tune the program.
- Emerald Bay protections: Alternative 6A calls for a lower speed limit of 5 miles per hour in Emerald Bay for all watercraft. Boat emissions significantly decrease at lower speeds and TRPA says this approach can help reduce pollution while providing added benefits to safety.
Related posts: [ Weighing in on the Piers ] [ What happened? ] [ Is there missing information? ] [ Second BMP Talks meeting adds to solutions ] [ What would you do if you were TRPA? ]
A wild ride at South Lake
February 17, 2007
High in the Sierra, the summer sun was torturous. Hundreds of feet below and miles behind us, it had felt like enjoyable weather to go mountain biking. The crisp, mountain air of Lake Tahoe had been a player in the ruse to sucker me into this game of chance. Groaning and wheezing my way up a seven-mile, 3,200-foot vertical climb, chances were I wasn’t going to make it.
Photo Gallery: Tahoe mountain biking |
I was up at the lake for work and had brought my bike just in case. I thought I had gotten lucky when I caught a friend of mine already on her way up the mountain from Reno and still in cell phone range. Alex was on her way to meet some buddies to do a loop on a trail called Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride. Sounded perfect. Now, with holes burning through my quads and my heart about to overheat, I realized Lady Luck wasn’t on my side after all.It seemed as though we had been climbing for days and we weren’t even to the single-track dirt trail yet. Flashes of what Alex had said as we peddled down Highway 50, the car already a mile behind us, kept popping into my head, “20-mile loop…really burly…collegiate bikers.” With no water, no food and no idea what I had gotten myself into, all I could manage was an exhausted, half-hearted grin. I’ve sandbagged plenty of friends before, kayaking or skiing, and just knew that I was getting what I had coming to me. Life always manages to bring me a twist of fate and return me to a sense of humility. This was, after all, only the second time I had been mountain biking.The first time I went biking was with my roommate on the Tahoe Rim Trail from Brockway Summit to Tahoe City. We shuttled the uphill section and rode a great 8 to 10-mile downhill single-track through a forest of dense fir trees. The deep blue waters of Tahoe shimmered below us in the California sun. Passing in and out of the shade, we stayed cool. The day was perfect for a newbie to the area and to mountain biking.Since moving to Reno in July, I’ve realized that there’s nothing you can’t find for great mountain biking in Northern Nevada. Whether it’s a 13-mile traverse 2,000 feet above Lake Tahoe on the Flume Trail, or an up and down, twisting and turning ride through the trees along Galena Creek, the Reno/Tahoe area is a premier place to be introduced to mountain biking. Just be
careful to ask what the trail is like before you get there.With my first ride in mind, I was all smiles and excitement as the five of us gathered at the trail head near Meyers for the ride up Toads. Geared up and ready to go, we started down the narrow forest road back towards Highway 50.”Why are we heading back out to the road?” I asked.”Because we loop around and end up back at the car,” Alex told me. “We go down the highway for a little bit then cut off down a neighborhood road and end up climbing on a forest road.”"Oh, alright. I just figured we’d be on the trail the whole time,” I said.”Well, it’s still mostly single-track trail,” Alex said nonchalantly. “These guys are just looking to get in a longer ride. They’re all collegiate bikers that I know from racing.”"Collegiate bikers?” I stammered. I imagine my face looked something like that of a confused dog. “You race?”"Yeah, I’m on UNR’s cycling team,” Alex said.I had only known her as a University of Nevada, Reno graduate student and fellow Alaskan. It dawned on me that I may have gotten in over my head.”It’s a long, tough climb and pretty technical on the downhill but it’s supposed to be one of the best rides in this whole area,” she said. “I’ve never done it because all the friends I ride with have always told me I couldn’t handle it. You’ve been on a long ride before though I’m sure,” she said confidently.Laughing, I killed her confidence.”Oh yeah, you know…that Brockway ride we did last week.”"Well, that wasn’t really a cross-country ride, that was just downhill,” she said. “What’s the longest ride you’ve done besides that?”"Oh. Well, let’s see. There was that Brockway ride we did last week and, um, well that’s pretty much it,” I said in good-humored embarrassment.”That’s the only time you’ve been riding?” she asked, jaw dropping.”Don’t worry, I’ll be fine,” I said, echoing the advice I pass on to all my friends before I take them kayaking.An hour later, with stinging sweat blurring my vision, I wasn’t too sure. My only saving grace was that Alex would stop periodically to wait for me, give me a sip of water and a worried look.”Well, we made it to the single track,” Alex said pointing across Highway 89 to the start of the Tahoe Rim Trail. “Now the real climbing begins. I’m not sure how long it is to the top but it’s supposed to be pretty brutal.” She laughed.If brutal is climbing straight up hill on a skinny, loose-dirt track over granite boulders and the roots of trees in order to hike your bike up an even steeper section of rock laced terrain, then I’d say the next hour and a half of my life fit the description.By the time we got to the top my inner being was dancing a jig and wailing in jubilation. Externally, all I could manage was a mumbled, “Thank God,” and collapse on a massive fallen pine tree.Alex’s friends weren’t too sympathetic to my suffering and quickly gathered up and took off blazing down the trail.”Well, it’s all down hill from here. Not that it gets any easier,” said Alex, as if trying to soothe me with her taunting laughter. “But, you’ll probably be out in front of me. I go pretty slow on the downhill.”
The next 12 miles brought redemption and punishment both. The trail is fast and smooth for sections–just long enough to make a fatigued rider enjoy the speed and get cocky. Then a sharp corner dropped into a 100-foot long stair case section. My cockiness demonstrated to Alex, behind me, how to do a perfect aerial dismount into a head-first landing. Rock gardens and more tree stumps kept me on my toes but my ability to focus was fading fast. With each crash though, I started to feel that perhaps Lady Luck was on my side after all. I was bruised and battered, but not actually hurt.Rock gardens became less and less frequent and sharp corners gave way to perfectly banked turns I settled into something like cruise control. The trees went by in a blur and the path in front of me was all there was. I no longer saw the rocks that scattered the trail–instead I saw the gaps between them and weaved through like a skier in the trees. The roots no longer served as obstacles but became ramps for mini jumps. The wind on my sweat and dirt stained face was like a splash from a mountain stream. We crested a hill and a combination of joy, sadness and disbelief took hold of me as I spotted the car. Not only had I survived, I was hooked.
Related posts: [ Snow woes: Businesses cope with late snowfall ] [ Preparing for the extreme ] [ South Lake neighborhood lives on, even without houses ] [ In quest for gold, Olympic skier seeks to help Reno youth ] [ Keeping Tahoe Green ]
Latest Headlines
- Hearing planned in Incline tree-felling case - The federal trial for an Incline Village woman charged with hiring a tree-cutting company to chop three Ponderosa Pines from her Lake Tahoe property has been canceled and a change-of-plea hearing scheduled May 1.
- Truckee man takes torch to North Pole - A Truckee man who reached the North Pole this week carrying an unlit torch for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games plans to discuss his experience and environmental issues Saturday by audio and video transmissions with participants at a Lake Tahoe festival.
- Quake pattern watched closely - As earthquakes continue to shake Reno, two reports released this month give new insight into the likely characteristics of a temblor at Lake Tahoe.
Winds are North at 6 MPH. The pressure is 30.17" and the humidity is 23%. The heat index is 75. Last Updated on Jul 5, 10:55 am PDT.
What does living or playing at Tahoe mean to you? Share your photos, videos, and stories by joining the ‘We Love Tahoe’ community and show the world what being... Read more »
