1
50
15
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/05b4509697d71b211192d00e5e8d3f2d.pdf
ad56f6a6ea7d4aa7e33551593c0d90c4
PDF Text
Text
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
(P.L. 90-542, as amended)
(16 U.S.C. 1271-1287)
1An Act
To provide for a National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and for other purposes.
Be It enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America In
Congress assembled, that,
(a) this Act may be cited as the 'Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.'
Congressional declaration of polley.
(b) It Is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation
which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational ,
geologic, fish and wlldllle, historic, cultural, or other similar values, shall be preserved in freeflowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit
and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Congress declares that the established
national policy of dam and other construction at appropriate sections of the rivers 01 the United
States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections
thereof in their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to full ill other vital
national conservation purposes.
Congressional declaration of purpose,
(c) The purpose of this Act is to implement this policy by instituting a national wild and scenic rivers
system, by designating the initial components of that system, and by prescribing the methods by
which and standards according to which additional components may be added to the system from
time to time.
Composition of system; requirements for State-administered components_
SECTION 2. (a) The national wild and scenic rivers system shall comprise rivers (i) that are
authorized for inclusion therein by Act of Congress, or (ii) that are designated as wild, scenic or
recreational rivers by or pursuant to an act of the legislature of the State or States through which
they flow, that are to be permanently administered as wild, scenic or recreational rivers by an
agency or political subdivision of the State or States concerned, that are found by the Secretary of
the Interior, upon application of the Governor of the State or the Governors of the States concerned,
or a person or persons thereunto duly appOinted by him or them, to meet the criteria established in
this Act and such criteria supplementary thereto as he may prescribe, and that are approved by him
for inclusion in the system, including, upon application of the Governor of the State concerned, the
Allagash Wilderness Waterway, Maine; that segment of the Wolf River, Wisconsin, which flows
through Langlade County; and that segment of the New River in North Carolina extending from its
confluence with Dog Creek downstream approximately 26.5 miles to the Virginia State line. Upon
receipt of an application under clause (ii) of this subsection, the Secretary shall notify the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission and publish such application In the Federal Register. Each river
deSignated under clause (ii) shall be administered by the State or political subdivision thereof
without expense to the United States other than for administration and management of federally
owned lands. For purposes of the preceding sentence, amounts made available to any State or
�political subdivision under the Land and Water Conservation [Fund] Act of 1965 or any other
provision of law shall not be treated as an expense to the United States. Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to provide for the transfer to, or administration by, a State or local authority of any
federally owned lands which are within the boundaries of any river included within the system under
clause (ii).
Cfassification.
(b) A wild, scenic or recreational river area eligible to be included in the system is a free-flowing
stream and the related adjacent land area that possesses one or more of the values referred to in
Section 1, subsection (b) of this Act. Every wild, scenic or recreational river in its free-flowing
condition, or upon restoration to this condition, shall be considered eligible for inclusion in the
national wild and scenic rivers system and, if included, shall be classified. deSignated, and
administered as one of the following:
(1) Wild river areas -- Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments and generally
inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters
unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America.
(2) Scenic river areas -- Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments. with
shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible
in places by roads.
(3) Recreational river areas -- Those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible by road
or railroad. that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone
some impoundment or diversion In the past.
Congressionally deSignated components.
SECTION 3. (a) The following rivers and the land adjacent thereto are
hereby deSignated as components of the national wild and scenic rivers
system:
(1) CLEARWATER, MIDDLE FORK, IDAHO. -- The Middle Fork from the town of
Kooskia upstream to the town of Lowell; the Lochsa River from its
junction with the Selway at Lowell forming the Middle Fork, upstream to
the Powell Ranger Station; and the Selway River from Lowell upstream to
Its origin; to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture.
(2) ELEVEN POINT, MISSOURI. -- The segment of the river extending
downstream from Thomasville. to State Highway 142; to be administered by
the Secretary of Agriculture.l a
(3) FEATHER, CALIFORNIA. -- The entire Middle Fork downstream from the
confluence of its tributary streams one kilometer south of Beckwourth,
California; to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture.
(4) RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO. -- The segment extending from the Colorado
State line downstream to the State Highway 96 crossing, and the lower
four miles of the Red River; to be administered by the Secretary of the
Interior.
(5) ROGUE, OREGON. -- The segment of the river extending from the mouth
of the Applegate River downstream to the Lobster Creek Bridge; to be
administered by agencies of the Departments of the Interior or
Agriculture as agreed upon by the Secretaries of said Departments or as
directed by the President.
(6) SAINT CROIX, MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN. -- The segment between the dam
near Taylors Falls. Minnesota, and the dam near Gordon, Wisconsin, and
its tributary, the Namekagon, from Lake Namekagon downstream to its
�Wild and Scenic River Issues
STATEMENT OF REASONS
Introduction
The Original Forest Service Inventory of Potential Wild and Scenic Rjyers Was a Gross Depreciation of the
Logan Riyer and Its Significant Tributaries
As identified by the Utah Division of Wildlife, The Utah Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, the
Bureau of Reclamation's Western Water Plan, and the American Whitewater Association, portions of the Logan
River are 'NCll known and highly valued. Throughout the Inventory, the Logan River and its significant tributaries 'NCre undervalued. An indication of the extent of undervaluing is Ihe Forest Services' revised evaluation
that identified five outstandingly remarkable values that might be recognized for the Logan river and its significan tributaries. Wasatch-Cache Revision Planning Record Wild and Scenic Rivers Eligibility Evaluation,
Supplement I, June 1994 (hereinafter "Supplement").
The current UDOT ROD (page 38) is based entirely on the superficial treatment of the original inventory. It is inconceivable that the Forest Plan could approve the uoor ROD until a full and complete reevaluation of wild and scenic eligibility for the Logan river and its significant tributaries is completed.
The Forest Service ROD ignores inconsistency in there own repons. Even though the original
Inventory found no segments of the Logan river and its significant tributaries to be outstandingly remarkable,
the identificaiton of five likely to be outstandignly remarkable va1ues in th Supplement resulted in the conclusion that, "No changes were made based upon this reconsideration." (Supplement p. 1-9). How can such a
substantial difference in potential eligibility be ignored? In order to protect management standards in the
Forest Plan, a detailed stud y of the Logan river and its significant tributaries must be conducted and the criteria
used in evaluation must be capable to withstand the scrutiny of all concerned publics.
A further example of the lack of appreciation of the regional importance of the Logan river is the fact
that the Oneida Narrows of the Bear river has been nominated for eligibility by the Bureau of Land
Management. By any reasonable comparison, the Logan river and its significant tributaries far exceeds the
Oneida Narrows section of the Bear river in wild and scenic values.
Consideration of Potential WUd and Scenic Riyers in the Forest Planning Process
Section 5(d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Pub. L. No. 90-542, 16 U.S.C. §1271 III WI., requires all federal agenCies to consider potential national wild, scenic, ad recreational river areas in all planning for the use
and development of water and related land resources. 16 U.S.c. §1276 (d). The planning respnnsibility
imposed by §5(d) plainly requires the Forest Service to assess the values of potential Wild and Scenic Rivers
on national forest lands during the preparation of land and resource management plans pursuant to the
National Forest Management Ae~ 16 U.S.C. §1600 III WI· Section 1924 of the Forest Management Act recognizes the Forest Service's responsibility in tbis regard: "Consideration of potential wild and scenic rivers is an
inherent part of the ongoing land and resource management planning process."
Chapter 8 of the agency's Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, set forth agency policy
and planning requirements for integrating the evaluation of potential wild and scenic rivers into the National
Forest Management Act (NFMA) planning process. Pursuant to these directions, consideration of potential
�wild and scenic rivers in national forest plans follow a relatively straightforward procedure. Each forest plan
should:
(I) Determine whether eam river within the forest boundaries is eli&ible
for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section
I(b) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Le.• whether the river is free flowing and possesses one or more "outstandingly remarkable" values);
(2) Determine the appropriate classification ("wild", "scenic", or "recreational") for rivers found to be
eligible; and
(3) Either study eam eligible river in the plan itself to determine its suitability for inclusion in the
Wild and Scenic River System or conduct such an evaluaion as a subsequent, separate river study. Forest
Service Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, Chapter 8, § 8.14 (hereinafter "Handbook
Chapter 8").
While eligibility is a threshold determination which properly focuses only upon the statutory criteria,
i&., whether a river is free-flowing and possesses ODe or more outstandingly remarkable values, evaluation of a
river's suitability for inclusion in the national rivers system involves a balancing of the relative values of the
river and its adjoining lands as a part of the national rivers system against other uses for the river area, and
practical considerations of the feasibility of administration of the river corridor as a component of the system.
Handbook Chapter 8, § 8.23. As a substantive decision regarding the appropriate management of a sensitive
area, the planners' decision regarding suitability must be accompanied by environmental analysis pursuant to
the National Environmental Policy Act. Ill.. § 8.31.
During the study process, the values and potential classifications of eligible rivers must be protected by
detailed management standards in the forest plan. Rivers determined to be suitable for designation are to be
protected until Congress acts upon the Forest Service's recommendations. ld...
The Forest Service ROD violates the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and Forest Service administrative
direction for compliance with that Act. The Wasatch-Cache Planners erred in certain findings of NonEli&ibility of the Logan River from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek and from Beaver Creek to its source
for potential Wild and Scenic Status
Section 5 (d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act establishes a broad mandate to federal agencies to consider potential wild and scenic rivers in their land and resource management planning. Forest Service administrative direction implementing that proviSion makes clear that forest planners should consider all streams on a
forest. Chapter 8 of the R)[est Service Land and Resource Handbook directs that forest planners consider
rivers identified through Congressional or Secretarial action, through listing on the National Park Service's
Nationwide Rivers Inventory ('''NRr'). or through the land management planning process itself. Handbook
Chapter 8, §§ 8.11. 8.14. The Handbook stresses that consideration of rivers other than those listed on the
NRI is "particularly important" where the NRI is incomplete, and that consideration should be given to rivers
identified in other studies, such as the Pacific Northwest Rivers Study, in State river assessments, or by other
federal or State agencies or private interests. !d.., § 8.11.
The Wasatch-Cache planners complied with the broad mandate of section 5 (d) and Forest Service
administrative policy and took an independent look at streams nowing on the Forest, including the Logan
River and Beaver Creek. The resulting document, "Inventory of Rivers on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest
Eligible for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System" was published in November 1993 (bere-
�inafter "Inventory 1993").
Appellants are concerned that initially, only .one. stream on the entire Wasatch-Cache National Forest,
(the Stillwater Fork of the Bear River), was found to be eligible for interim protection until a suitability study
was performed. Appellants were involved with studying the Logan River and Beaver Creek, using the eligibility requirements from the Land and Resouoce Management Planning Handbook. Even though over 50 pages
of information was provided to the Inventory Team, no reference was made to this material in the Inventory
except a footnote. (Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon. 1993).
The appellants found that certain segments of the Logan River might possess the free-flowing characteristics and outstandingly remarkable qualities for eligibility if the evaluation was corrected to use current
evaluation techniques. These techniques were detailed in two letters to the Forest Supervisor. (J. Logan, in a
3 page, single-spaced letter to Ms. Susan Giannettino, Forest Supervisor; 18 January 1994: Also D Parkin, in a
23 page. single-spaced letter to Ms. Susan Giannettino; 18 February 1994).
The letters concurred thm the inventory used an honest and systematic approach in preparing the report,
However. the main thrusts of these letters was that there were "significant flaws in both the methodology and
interpretation of policy guidelines" (Parkin, 1994).
At a later dae (June, 1994) the Logan River was re-segmented in two segments, Lower Twin Bridge to
Beaver Creek and Beaver Creek to its source. The segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver creek was
given five out of nine "might possess outstandingly remarkable values". Neither of the above-mentioned
commentors were aware of this document, however, both are mentioned in the document. The responsiveness
of the planners to the commentors is reflected in this updated inventory. Eighty-two rivers andlor river segments were identified in the re-evaluation and the only river segment that scores anywhere near what this segment of the Logan river is the East Fork of the Smith's Fork, which scored only three "might possess outstandingly remarkable values". (Supplement to Inventory, 1994).
The supplement represents an improvement over the Inventory of 1993 . Appellants are concerned,
however, that the planning team did not assess all resource values that would qualify the Logan River for
inclusion as an eligible wild and scenic river. Most notably. there is ample evidence to indicate that the Logan
River possesses outstandingly remarkable water oriented recreation, botanical, and wildlife values. (CPLC,
1993).
The appellants are also concerned that the supplement does not evaluate significant tributaries of the
Logan River, most notably Beaver Creek. Study and protection of tributary streams is an important component
of the wild and scenic planning process because such streams and creeks are integral components of river systems. The goals of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act can be best achieved through preservation and recognition
of river systems as integral wholes, with full recognition for the contribution of tributary steams. Also, management of suc h tributaries as wild and scenic rivers will enhance the r"Orest Service's ability to maintain and
enhance downstream riverine values.
Tbe Forest Service ROD Fails AdeQuately to Protect The Loean River's Potential Wjld and Scenic Status
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act provides tha each component of the system shall be "administered in
such a manner as to protect and enhance the values which caused it 10 be included in said system ... " Section
100a); 16 U.S.C. § 128I (a). This section of the Act bas been interpreted as stating a " nondegradation and
enhancement policy for all designated river areas." S-". Interagency Guidelines,47 Fed. Reg . 39454, 39458.
Appellants are concerned that the Logan River segmenl which "may possess outstandingly remarkable
values" as indicated in the Supplement to the Inventory will be exposed to inappropriate levels of disturbance
by UDal's Preferred Alternative Highway Project due to improper classification. The UDOT ROD states that
..... the road reconstruction project will not affect the potential eligibility or classification on the Logan River"
�(p. 38). As stated above, the Logan River segment from Lower Twin Bridge to Beaver Creek is most likely
eligible and therefore, until an adequate classification is complete, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act mandates
no degradation of values that could inhibit the river from eligibility.
The UDOT ROD states on Page 37. "The FEIS also evaluated the effects of the alternatives on the
resources and characteristics affecting the scenic. historic. recreation, wildlife and fish. cultural and other values associated with the river and river corridor... there will be either no or only minor effects from the Preferred
Alternative on these values."
The uoor ROD states on Page 38, "The FEIS recognizes that some screening vegetation along the
river may be disturbed, but again this is estimated in the EIS to be minor and mostly temporary in nature."
Appellants believe that there are numerous construction segments in the Preferred Alternative that will
result in significant depreciation of wild and scenic values and will in fact jeopardize the potential classification of the Logan River and Beaver Creek. These will cause enough degradation to the eligibility requirements
that the river will be dropped from consideration before it has been honestly evaluated for eligibility.
Appellants are concerned that these "minor effects" will be enough to degrade the eligibility requirements and
disqualify the river. These include:
Scenic yalues
1. The appellants are concerned that the Preferred Alternative will not comply with the Visual Quality
Objectives established in the Forest Plan. If this is the case, then the classification of the Logan River will also
not meet the outstandingly remarkable scenic values needed to qualify the Logan River.
2. Tbe "Dugway" will be excavated eight feet into the uphill side, creating the potential for a large
road cut or retaining wall. Up canyon from the dugway, the curve will be flattened and realignment will start
here for the replacement of the upper twin bridge, producing another large road cut.
3. The curve flattening and widening of the road at Temple Fork will produce a large road cut.
4. The eight miles of the Upper Canyon (from mp 391.6 to Beaver Mountain road intersection) will be
widened to 34 feet and areas with passing lanes (could be up to two miles in length) will be widened to 44
feet. These construction segments will produce large amounts of cut and fill and a large road base. further
degrading the scenic value.
Other Impacts
I. Bridge rip-rap. Extensive rip-rap (FS ROD p. 7 and p. 9) "could total as mucb as 1,000 feet of the
river's length ..... This will depreciate the free-flowing nature of the river and will adversely impact the potential for eligibility in tbe Wild and Scenic program.
2. Wet-lands mitigation. Wet-lands otitigation, in general, is a farce (Scieoce, 1993, 206: 1890-1892.)
It hasn' t 'WOrked in the past and there is no reason to expect it will work now . Any activities that call for wetlands mitigation activities will JesuIt in the depreciation of wild and scenic values of the Logan river, and
should, therefore. be found in violation of the Forest Plan. The Forest Plan does not specifically deal with this
issue and should be amended to do so.
3. General cut-and-fill that will be required to widen the road. In the original Inventory, restriction of
�the potential free-flowing nature of the Logan river was used as justification of finding the lower section of the
river to be ineligible (Inventory, p. 12-13). How is it possible that the Forest Plan could allow the same
activites on the upper section of the Logan river tha led to disqualification of the lower section? Such action
inconsistent with both the intent and the Jetter of Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the Forest Service's own
Planning Handbook.
The Forest Service Failed to AdeQuately Involve Concerned Publics in the Inventory Process.
Although Logan Canyon is of high local and national interest, the original Inventory received a very
limited distribution. (Audubon, NovemberlDecember 1994). Even so, of those interested parties who
responded, the overwhelming majority were critical of the Inventory. Of those that responded, none were notified of the subsequent reevaluation or the changes incorporated in the Table of Appendix D, June 1994
Supplement.
The Forest Service has not porvided sufficient documentation required for concerned publics to evaluate the criteria used to draw conclusions in the Inventory. The Inventory refers to "detailed field surveys"
(Inventory, pp. A-19 1993), and the Supplement references, "documenlation used to facilitate judging the merits of further study have been incorporated in this supplement.. ... (Supplement. pp 1-10). Yet when appellants
requested access to this "documentation", all that was forthcoming were copies of maps with largely unintelligible notations. Apparently. there exists no documentation that can be reviewed by concerned publics. It is
irresponisble for the Forst Service to agree to AllY depreciation of wild and scenic values without full involvement of concerned publics.
�Literature Cited
Bass, R. 1994. Keeping Logan Canyon. Audubon . NovlDec.
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon. 1993. An October 7, 1993, letter
containing information about Logan River. Logan Canyon and Beaver Creek.
with numerous .. tachments
USDA Forest Service. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1985. Final
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Wasatch-Cache National Forest.
Salt Lalce City, UT.
USDA Forest Service. Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1993 . Inventory of
Rivers on the Wasatch-Cache
National Forest Eligible for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Salt Lake City, UT.
USDA Forest Service, Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 1994. Supplement to
Inventory of Rivers on the
Wasatch-Cache National Forest Eligihle for Indusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Salt
Lake City,
UT.
Logan, J. 1994. A January 18 letter to Susan Giannettino. Forest Supervisor,
Forest.
Wasatch-Cache National
Parkin, D. 1994. A February 18 letter to Susan Giannellino, Forest Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National
Forest.
�c o
A. L
Working
for
the
T
I
protection
of
I
Logan
o
Canyon
This is reprinted
from our AURUSt 1996
issue of Can.';an Wind
b.y Drew Parkin.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires federal land management agencies to include
wild and scenic river evaluations as part of their normal decision-making processes. In the case
of the Forest Service this means that forest plans must specifically consider wild and scenic
river eligibility. It also means that any Environmental Impact Statement that involves river
resources must address this issue. Further - and this is the important part - once the Forest
Service identifies a river as being eligible, it must, in adherence with its own administrative
directives, manage the river "in a marmer consistent with the purposes of the Act, and such
that the outstandingly remarkable values which make it eligible for inclusion are not diminished to the point where eligibility is negated. In no event should the free-flowing characteristics of the river be modified."In response to a threatened law suit, the Forest Service some ten
years ago set out in earnest to identify potentially eligible wild and scenic rivers. Individual
forests were entrusted with this and many responded admirably. Unfortunately, wild and
scenic evaluations have never been high on the list for forest managers in Utah. Pressured by
concerened citizens, the Wasatch-Cache National Forest undertook a year-long river study and,
in November of 1993, released its inventory.
The Inventory started by identifying 37 streams that forest planners deemed worthy of
being studied. Next, the larger streams on that list, including the Logan River, were subdivided into "segments." In all, the Forest Service study considered 59 stream segments. Of these,
18 segments were rejected out-of-hand as being insignificant. Beaver Creek was one of these.
An additional 11 segments were rejected for not being free-flowing. These included streams
that had been subjected to water withdrawals, channelization, or other degradation. All of the
Logan downstream of Temple Fork was rejected for this reason. This left 30 stream segments
that were actually included in the study.
The inventory considered nine separate resource features: cultural, wildlife, botanical,
geological / hydrological, scenery, water recreation, general recreation, fisheries, and ecological.
The idea was to determine the significance of each of the 30 segments with regard to each
resource feature. A stream could be rated as either (1) typical, (2) significant at a statewide
USU
Box
.1674
•
L
0
8 a n
•
U t • h
•
843 2 2 - 0 1 9 9
�level, or (3) significant at what the Forest Service termed a "provincial" level (an area compris-ing all of the Rocky Mountains). A rating of 3 for any given resource feature would qualify a
stream segment for wild and scenic river designation. The result? Of the original 59 stream segments, only one - the Stillwater Fork of the Bear- was found eligible based on a "3" rating for
its scenic features. No other stream received a 3 and all were therefore rejected, including the
Logan River.
I was stunned when I heard of the findings. Based on several years of professional experience with wild and scenic rivers, and having a detailed knowledge of the Logan River, it was
my judgement that the Logan River not only met but exceeded eligibility requirements. After
pouring over the report, I concluded that the study team's basic asswnptions were wrong and
applying these asswnptions greatly skewed the findings. The decision to use "provincial" significance as the cut-off for eligibility was the most pervasive error. The Forest Service Manuel
itself directs that "statewide" significance is an appropriate measure for judging wild and scenic
status. Several national forests have used it as the basis for their decisions, and it is accepted
practice for National Park Service and BLM planners as well.
Had the Wasatch-Cache report used statewide significance as the threshold, the Logan
River would have been included easily.
If anything, I believe that the above Forest Service ratings for the Logan River are low. I
question the ratings for wildlife, water recreation, and, especially, scenery. Even if the Forest
Service ratings are correct, it is obvious the Logan River is an extremely important resource with
statewide significance. In five of the nine resource categories, the river received a statewide significance rating. No other stream had more than two. The Logan River was rated as the most
significant stream in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest for five of the nine resource categories.
Again, no other stream could claim more than two. The conclusion is inescapable. The Forest
Service report absolutely confirms that, when compared to other streams on the forest, the
Logan River is the crown jewel and is most certainly eligible for wild and scenic designation.
(Drew Parkin is a river policy consultant in cambridge, Mass., and serves
on the board of directors of the Pacific Rivers Council. He previously managed Wild
and Scenic River programs for the National Park Service. He is a native of utah
and spent several seasons working for the Forest Service in Logan canyon.)
USFS data on the Logan River
between Temple Fork and White Pine Creek
Rating compared to other
Wasatch-Cache streams
Logan River rating
Cultural resources
Statewide significance
Wildlife
Typical
Typical
Botanical resourses
Geology/Hydrology
Scenery
Water recreation
General recreation
Fisheries
Ecology
Highest rating in the forest
Rated in top 5
Rated in top 5
Highest rating in the forest
Rated in top 10
Highest rating in the forest
Rated in top 10
Tied for highest rating
Tied for highest rating
Statewide Significance
Typical
Typical
Statewide s ignificance
Statewide significance
Statewide significance
This infomtlltion
W4S fQkm
directly from
t~
report
For more information visit our web page at: http://www.logancanyon.org
�CACHE ANGLERS
Support Wild and Scenic designation
for the Logan River
Cache Anglers would like to express its support of the effort to have the Logan
Ri~r
designated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. While the designation will not affect
the regulations nor the current use of the river by sportsmen of all types. we believe
that it would be an important step in protecting the river against further private and
commercial development which would harm the river and its riparian habitat.
We firmly believe that this river. one of the finest cold water fisheries in the state of
Utah, needs to be protected and preserved for future generations to enjoy.
Regardless of the different purposes for which this beautiful river is used, the Wild
and Scenic designation would be a great step in preserving what is left of Logan
River's natural water ways and make them available for all sportsmen now and in the
future .
Jason Swan, President
Cache Anglers
�A RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE LOGAN CITY COUNCIL OFFERING ITS OFFICIAL
SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE LOGAN RIVER INTO THE NATIONAL
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, the Logan City Council recognizes the natural beauty and splendor of
the Logan River, the phYSical, economic, and spiritual benefits provided to local
citizens by the river, that it is a unique river in its own right, and that it is a
river worthy of protecting for our families and our future;
WHEREAS, the Council has been requested by local citizens and organizations to
offer its official support of the designation of the Logan River into the National Wild
and Scenic Rivers System;
WHEREAS, the Council received this official request on December 9, 1998 and
again reviewed the request in a public workshop on March 10, 1999, to consider the
proposed resolution;
WHEREAS, the Council recognizes that the Logan River has been found eligible by
the u.s. Forest Service for designation into the System and must now go through a
suitability study, that such a designation must then be introduced by legislation for
consideration into the U.S. Congress; or, be recommended fo r designation by the
Governor to the U.S. Secretary of Interior;
WHEREAS, the Council recognizes that said resolution does not in any way carry
forth official legislation or regulation regarding the Wild and Scenic deSignation, but
that it provides for local support needed as the proposed designation proceeds through
the appropriate process;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council has voted in a public meeting on _ _ _ _ _~
in favor of the proposed resolution, offering the official support of this governing body
for the designation of the Logan River as a Wild and Scenic River.
Passed and Adopted this __ day of _ _ _ _ _~, 1999.
Chair
�·.
•
Date: Wednesday, September 30, 19986:54:46 PM
Date: Wed, 30 Sap 1998 09:50:46 -0600
From: River Network <rivernet-info@lgc.apc.org>
To: rivernet@igc.apc.org. rlvernet-info@igc.apc.org
Subject: Dam decommissioning Strategy Workshop Proceedings
The proceedings from the July 1998 International Rivers Network (IRN)-sponsored International Dam
Decommissioning Strategy Workshop are now available. They contain discussion outcomes. participant
information, and a list of articles. press releases and publications of interest, and can be ordered for $10
through IAN's library Coordinator, Yvonne Cuellar (von@irn.org). You can also find much of this information
on IAN's decommissioning web page at: www.irn .org
At the July workshop, activists formed "Living Rivers: the International Coalition for the Restoration of Rivers
and Communities Affected by Dams,· as the seed for growing a global movement on dam decommissioning
and river restoration issues. To help service and build this coalition, IRN is not only circulating information,
but also encouraging organizations around the world to join Living Rivers, by endorsing the Walker Creek
Declaration, which appears below. To sign your organization on to the declaration and join the coalition
please contact IAN's Decommissioning Coordinator (rani@irn.org). Please feel free to circulate the
declaration to other organizations who may be interested in supporting it as well.
WALKER CREEK DECLARATION
Founding Statement of
LIVING RIVERS
The International Coalition for the Restoration of
Aivers and Communities Affected by Dams
25 July, 1998
WHEREAS:
Free-flowing, living rivers are an essential, life-giving feature of our natural and human environment. They
fulfil a multitude of ecological, economic, spiritual, cultural, and aesthetic needs and wants.
Worldwide, these invaluable rivers are now degraded by hundreds of thousands of dams, which have
flooded huge areas of the world's most beautiful and ecologically rich habitats and the homes and lands of
tens of millions of people. Dams have impoverished countless communities which were dependent on the
bounty of free-flowing rivers and riverside lands, and endangered public health.
Dams have blocked flows of nutrients and sediments and the passage of fish and other aquatic lifeforms.
Dams have contaminated river water. Dams have eliminated essential natural flooding regimes thereby
degrading the ecosystems, farmlands and fisheries which depend on floods . And dams have caused the
decline and extinction of riverine species and the ecological degradation of estuaries and coastlines.
Many dams provide services for society, including the generation of electricity, the storage and diversion of
water, flood protection, navigation and flat-water recreation. But we now know that these services come at a
high economic, ecological and social cost and often can be met in other less damaging ways. We also have
learned that costs and benefits of dams are unequally shared - those who reap the rewards are rarely those
who must bear the costs.
After decades of experience, we now know that the promised benefits of many dam projects have never been
realized, and their adverse effects are more serious than predicted. Trying to recreate artificially the complex
natural cycles and functions of undammed rivers has proven to be far more difficult than was once thought.
Efforts to mitigate the adverse effects of dams have often proven expensive and ineffective.
�The knowledge learned over the past decades has led to the continuing improvement of standards for
planning. designing. and operating dams. This has included social and environmental impact assessments,
access to Information. public participation in decision-making. and periodic re-evaluation of a dam's impacts
and operations. Many existing dams would never have been built if they had had to comply with current bestpractice planning principles. procedures and standards. Some are illega l because they were constructed in
violation of existing laws. or because required environmental mitigation and social compensation measures
were never implemented.
Many dams are now obsolete. Many have reached the end of their functional life span and no longer serve a
purpose that justifies their negative impacts. Many are unsafe. threatening the lives of millions of peopl e. as
well as property, fish and wildlife.
For many dams the cost of maintenance and of environmental and social mitigation exceeds the benefits to
be gained from dam operation. The cost of removing dams Is In many cases proving less than the cost of
continuing to operate them. even without taking full account of the social and ecological benefits of dam
removal.
A movement Is now growing around the world which recognizes the vital importance of living rivers. People
are calling for major changes in the operating patterns of dams to lessen their negative impacts, the
decommissioning and removal of obsolete and dangerous dams. the restoration of rivers and the provision of
reparations for past damages suffered by riverine communities affected by dams.
THEREFORE:
We now establish Living Rivers. an international coalition for the restoration of rivers and communities
affected by dams, by means of dam reoperation, decommiss ioning or removal.
Independent and transparent evaluations must be carried out periodically to identify which dams should
continue in operation. which should have their operations altered to mitigate adverse impacts. and which
should be decommissioned or removed. The continued existence and operation of individual dams must be
justified on the grounds of ecological and social impacts. economics and safety.
Decommissioning plans must be prepared for all dams. whether existing. planned or under construction.
These plans should Include dam removal and river, reservoir zone and floodplain restoration. The plans
should also include mechanisms for raising the funds needed to pay for decommissioning.
Dam owners and the beneficiaries of dams must be held responsible for the costs of mitigating the impacts of
their continuing operation. of reparations for past damages, and where relevant of decommissioning or
removing the dams. Funding mechanisms must be established to pay for decommissioning abandoned
dams or for dams where the owner has insufficient financial resources. International agencies which have
financed dams should share the responsibility for thei r decommissioning or removal.
Rigorous dam safety standards must be developed and enforced. including the preparation and pub lication
of flood inundation maps and emergency evacuation plans. and the purchase of liability insurance. The
safety records of dams must be made public. The costs of implementing improved dam safety standards
should be borne by dam owners and beneficiaries and, where relevant, international funding agencies.
Scientific. engineering and sociological research and education on dam decommissioning must be promoted
by governments and dam agencies.
Watershed management and energy plans must be developed In a participatory and transparent manner.
Watershed management plans should integrate sustainable agriculture and fisheries, urban planning, flood
management, water supply and environmental restoration. Regional energy services plans should
incorporate demand-side management and the most environmentally benign and cost-effective forms of
generation.
�Dams have had huge negative Impacts on rivers and river communities ~ removing dams Is an economically,
technically, socially and environmentally viable and sensible option for reversing these impacts and restoring
living rivers. Investment In living river systems will produce substantial benefits for our human and natural
communities, today and tomorrow.
Let our rivers live!
ENDORSED BY:
American Rivers, USA; Assembly of the Poor, Thailand; European Rivers Network, France/ Europe; Florida
Defenders of the Environment, USA; Friends of the Earth, USA; Friends of the Eel River, USA; Glen Canyon
Institute, USA; International Rivers Network, USA; John Muir Project, Earth Island Institute. USA; Let's Help
the River Movement, Russia; Narmada Bachao Andolan, India; Pedder 2000, Australia; River Alliance of
Wisconsin, USA; Save Our Wild Salmon Coalition, USA; SOS Loire Vivante, France; WaterWatch of Oregon,
USA; Wildlife Fund ThaI/and; Zeleny Svit - Green World, Ukraine Since July 25, this declaration has also
been endorsed by the following
organizations:
Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment. Hungary; Friends of the River, USA; Global Response,
USA; Idaho Rivers United, USA
Rani Derasary
International Rivers Network (IRN)
1847 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94703 USA
Phone: (510) 848-1155
(510)848-1008
Fax:
Email: rani@irn.org
WWW: www.lrn.org
For more information, please contact River Network at
<rivernet@igc.apc.org> or visit our website: http://www.rivernetwork.org.
�In the 1960s, the country awoke to the fact that our rivers were being
dammed, dredged, diked, diverted and degraded at an alarming rate. To
lend balance to our history of use and abuse of our waterways, Congress
created the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In October of 1968,
the freshly penned Wild and Scenic Rivers Act pronounced,
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain
selected rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments,
possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish
and wildlife, historic, cultural or other similar values, shall be
preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate
environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present
and future generations. The Congress declares that the established
national policy of dams and other construction at appropriate sections
of the rivers of the United States needs to be complemented by a policy
that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their
free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and
to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes.
- ----
While ! sometimes criticized as not reaching its full potential, there is
little d ~bt that when applied, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has
usually peen a JOlI,sing su<;~, helping to prot
some of this nation's
ath, Manistee and
premiere riveri. Aliagash and Alieghen~Kern an
McKenf ie. The Wild\ and Scenic Rivers Stem n
prote s many of the
ur
Muir's
rivers lo~ our historYt literature, our n tion' t;YOuth. Jo
Tuolum e River and is famous, losing battle t stop the flooding of
HetchUJ tchy Valley; t e Delaware ~iver of our American Revolu~n; Zane
Grey's famous flyfishing river, the l')Iorth Umpqua; the Missouri of Lewis
and Clark''sJpurneys. Great rivers IT
om our past, guaranteed to be great
rivers in our future.
But designation as a wild and scenic river is not designation as a
national park. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act does not generally lock up
a river like a wilderness designation. The idea is not to halt
development and use of a river; instead, the goal is to preserve the
character of a river. Uses compatible with the management goals of a
particular river are allowed, change is expected to happen. Development
not damaging to the outstanding resources of a designated river, or
curtailing its free flow, are usually allowed. The term "living
landscape" has been frequently applied to wild and scenic rivers. Of
course, each river designation is different, and each management plan is
unique. But the bottom line is that the Wild and Scenic Rivers System is
not something to be feared by landowners or sportsmen _
.;..
As you <!'!!l1.h t guess, a large per~enta~ nd-sceni rivers flow
through the PacifiC-Northwest. Oregon's spectacular Klamath I ~ nd
- 1-
�its incredible abundance of wildlife -- was recently added to the Wild
and Scenic Rivers System following a 15-year battle over the proposed
Salt Caves Hydroelectric Project. The last section of the Columbia River
in Washington not lying behind federal and private dams is being
considered for designation. (Curiously enough, this reach is eligible
because it has lain protected within the Hanford Nuclear Reservation,
the site of Cold War atomic bomb production.) The Wallowa River in
northeastern Oregon was recently designated as a wild and scenic river
by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, becoming part of one of the most c
ompletely protected river systems in the country. And the closing of the
104 th Congress saw the addition of Elkhorn Creek in Oregon to the list
of protected Northwest rivers. (The Lamprey River in New Hampshire and
the Clarion River in Pennsylvania were also designated in the closing
days of the 104th Congress.) And, hopefully, others will follow.
Whether the Wild and Scenic Rivers System grows or not, there are many
rivers already protected for you to enjoy. Grab a flyrod, load the kayak
on the car, slip on your most comfortable walking shoes. Get out there
and savor your natural heritage. But go slow, and enjoy every minute of
your trip to the river. Because of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers
System, you've got the time.
- 2-
�This disc was prepared for the National Park Service by the U.S. Geological Survey with additional
contributions from:
U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Biological Service, Bureau of
Reclamation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, National Resources Conservation Service,
Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management
U.S. Department of Interior
National Park Service
Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program
(202)343-3780
THE NATIONWIDE RIVERS INVENTORY
I.
Background and Authorizations
Section 5.(d) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1271-1287) requires that "In all
planning for the use and development of water and related land resources, consideration shall be
given by all Federal agencies Involved to potential national wild, scenic, and recreational river
areas.· It further requires that -, .. the Secretary of the Interior shall make specific studies and
Investigations to determine which additional wild, scenic, and recreational river areas .. . shall be
evaluated in planning reports by all Federal agencies as potential alternative uses of water and
related land resources Involved."
The Nationwide Rivers Inventory - In partial fulfillment of the Section 5(d) requirements, the National
Park Service has compiled and maintains a Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI), a register of river
segments that potentially qualify as national wild, scenic, or recreational river areas. The NAI
qualifies as a comprehensive plan under Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Power Act.
Presidential Directive - A presidential directive requires each Federal agency, as part of its normal
planning and environmental review processes, take care to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on
rivers Identified in the Nationwide Rivers Inventory compiled by NPS. Further, all agencies are
required to consult with the National Park Service prior to taking actions which could effectively
foreclose wild, scenic, or recreational status for rivers on the inventory.
Stalewide River Assessments and Inventories - Pursuant to Section 11 of the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act, NPS has been providing technical assistance to states in the conduct of statewide river
assessments and inventories. These efforts provide a source for potential future additions to Ihe
Nationwide Rivers Inventory and the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System especially as State
administered components.
Public Law 88-29 - Outdoor Recreation Act of 1963 authorizes the Secretary of Interior to prepare
and maintain a continuing Inventory and evaluation of outdoor recreation needs and resources
including rivers ; provide technical assistance; encourage interstate and regional cooperation in the
planning, acquisition, and development of outdoor recreation resources; sponsor and engage In
research and education; cooperate with and provide technical assistance to Federal departments
and agencies; and promote coordination of Federal plans and activities generally relating to
outdoor recreation resources including rivers and associated trail corridors. These responsibilities
are also assigned to the National Center for Recreation and Conservation of the National Park
Service.
�II. Initial Listing and Updates of the NRI
The original inventory was conducted to by the Department of Interior with the cooperation of State
and local agencies, and completed in 1982. To be listed, river segments had to meet three basic
criteria:
be free flowing (and generally be 25 miles or longer)
be relatively undeveloped (both river and corridor)
possess outstanding natural and/or cultural values
A major update of the NRI was initiated in 1993. The first phase completed in December, consisted
of adding the river segments found to have outstanding wild, scenic. or recreation potential by the
U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service in accordance
with 5(d) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. There is no minimum length specified by this
section of the Act. River segments are classified according to extent of development as follows:
Wild: Those rivers or sections of rivers that Bre free of
impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with
watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters
unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America.
Scenic: Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of
impoundments, with shorelines or watersheds still largely
primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in
places by roads .
Recreational: Those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily
accessible by road or railroad. that may have some development
along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some
impoundment or diversion in the past.
The second phase of the NRI update, initiated in 1994, added river segments found eligible through
statewide river assessments and inventories. GIS and watershed referencing for all NRI segments
will complete the update.
�III. How To Contact National Park Service Offices
For Information or questions on policy and update status:
National Park Service
National Center for Recreation and Conservation
Post Office Box 37127
Washington, D.C. 20013
202-343-3780
For information or questions on specific river segments:
ROCKY MOUNTAIN STATES
Conservation Assistance Branch
National Park Service
12795 West Alameda Parkway
Post OHlce Box 25287
Denver, Colorado 80225-0287
303-969-2850
COLORADO, MONTANA, UTAH, and WYOMING
�~ -4l'''' """ . -
-..-r-
3 ,." ~ (~ '" ," 0 1'rr-r-o!J j)
(all,k," ,(A- quO')
.
r
~
f\
... ,....
,
•
c
...
",
1)e.b (f( a /.\ F sL,,/1>1 a '"
,
;Y3 t- W loa 5
Lo9lMA , llT
1' "1,, I" I" II ,II J,I", /I ,',,' ,I, ,',',' I, ,I ,11,1"',, ,',,' ,II
�1JM fr5hl'/&
___
I/",. l
(a c he /11tf)Z.,j p");t.'l'1;
19.(' ~
,
,
�31 74 Camino Arroyo
Carlsbad, CA 92009
December 3, 1998
Logan City Council
Logan, UT 84321
Dear City Council ,
My wife and I lived in Logan from 1955, when we came as college
students, until just last year. We raised three sons in Logan, and Logan will
always be our hearts' country. We absorbed Cache Valley. The silhouette of the
mountains, east up the canyon and west across the valley, is still the horizon
line of our life.
I wouldn't mention this background if I didn't think a great many
people share such feelings. Few things go as deep as the sense of home.
Unfortunately, sometimes the deepest values get taken for granted.
We're all very busy. We can even forget to think about the absolute beauty and
purity of Logan River, coming down the canyon and through the town. Surely
there can't be many towns anywhere in the world that can say: a wild, clean
river comes down out of the mountains to us; there is no one, no town, upstream.
I think about Logan River a lot these days. Our iririgation and
drinking water here in coastal California is sparse, it comes a long way, and it
has been used several times. There is no way, with all the engineering
capability in the world, we could create the kind of situation Logan has.
So, speaking from deep care for Logan and from the knowledge of how
easy it is to lose natural resources, and how hard if not impossible it is to get
them back, I respectfully urge the Council to endorse Logan River as a Wild and
Scenic River. Logan River is lifeblood. Please protect it.
Sincerely,
fl.t ifWt "-'
1-' "
Thomas J. Lyon
IJ'V,
�p.o. 60x 3501
~tm,
Utcdi 84323-3501
25 October, 1998
Mr. Dan Miller, President
logan Canyon Coalltion
USU Box 1674
Logan, UT 84322-0199
Dear Mr. Miller,
Bridgerland Audubon Society wishes to unequivocally endorse your efforts to urge the
U.S. Forest Service to designate the Logan River through Logan Canyon as " Scenic" within the
Wild and Scenic River System lnventory.
The Logan River is a Iynchpin in the history, culture and ecosystem of Cache Valley and
the Bear River Range. It is an historical artery of commerce, source of culinary water for Logan
City, recreational refuge for land and water users, habitat for many species of migrant and yearround animals, and a source of beauty and wonder in every season. Designating it as " Scenic"
should not compromise any of these attributes, but rather help to preserve its value to this and
future gene'rations.
It would be an honor to have the Logan River designated as the first " Wild and Scenic
River" in Utah . There is nothing to lose, and everything to gain in such a designation .
Please keep us apprised of the status of the project, and include our support in your efforts
to achieve this designation.
\1" '::'IY,
~jf=f?'~
t:O).
1:1 _
PrinhKI 01'1
......
�What is the
Wild & Scenic Rivers Act?
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 is unique among environmental laws in the world
because of its potential to protect free-flowing rivers and river-sections in their condition at
the time of designation. Unfortunately, the potential of this Act still has not been tapped. Less
than I percent of the nation's total river miles have been included in the Nation's Wild and
Scenic Rivers System. NOT ONE of Utah's beautiful rivers has this outstanding distinction.
What Does Designation 001
• offers three levels of protection- Wild. Scenic, and Recreational, which correspond to existing development and the extraordinary values of the river.
• provides blanket protection against federally licensed dams, diversion, and other on-river
development which cannot be overridden by a FERC hydropower license.
• provides flexibility in working with local landowners to protect the designated river's riparian corridor through the creation of a management plan.
• will actually increase the market value of surrounding private property.
• maintains the conditions existing at the time of designation, including local lifestyles and land
uses within the river corridor.
• will not stop highway improvements. Although, the Utah Department of Transportation will
have to respect Logan River's outstandingly remarkable values and can't change the rivers
character.
• Designation as a Wild and Scenic River is not deSignation like a national park. The Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act does not lock up a river like a wilderness designation. The idea is not to
halt development and use of a river; instead, the goal is to preserve the character of a river.
Uses compatible with the management goals of a particular river are allowed, change is
expected to happen. Development not damaging to the outstanding resources of a designated river, or curtailing its free flow, are allowed. The term "living landscape' has been frequently applied to wild and scenic rivers. Of course, each river designation is different, and each
management plan is unique. But the bottom line is that the Wild and Scenic Rivers System is
not something to be feared by landowners, water users or sportsmen.
For more information visit our web page at: http://www.logancanyon.org
�Leave A True Legacy
The Logan as Utah's First Wild and Scenic River
We the undersigned hereby declare our support for segments of the Logan River to be designated as Utah's first Wild
and Scenic River under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as long as that designation doesn't
interfere with traditional uses now enjoyed by the public.
Signature
Print name
Street
ctty
RETURN COMP LETEO PETITIONS TO THE LOGAN CANYON COALITION, USU BOX '1874 , LOGAN , UTAH 84322·0"111
Stale
Zip
�c o
4. L
Working
for
the
T
I
protection
of
I
Logan
o
C;lnyon
Leave A True Legacy
The Logan as Utah's First Wild and Scenic River
Thirty years after the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed by
Congress, there have been over 154 Wild and Scenic designations in the
United States. Not one of Utah's beautiful rivers has this outstanding
distinction.
The Logan River and its watershed is a critical resource of recreation,
economic stability, and most importantly, a source of culinary water for
Logan and Cache Valley residents. A Wild and Scenic designation would
not encroach upon existing uses of the river, but would provide longterm protection for this precious resource.
Utah citizens deserve a Wild and Scenic River. Let's all join together and
leave this true legacy for our families and our future.
Support the Logan River as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River.
For more information visit our web page at:
USU
Box
#1674
•
Log a n
•
http://www.logancanyon.org
Uta h
•
84322·0199
�c
04. L
WorklDS
for
the
I
T
protection
of
I
LOBan
o
Canyon
Logan Canyon Coalition's
Executive Summary
Logan Canyon Coalition is a grassroots citizens organization in northern Utah dedicated to
promoting reasonable improvements in the narrow, winding canyon while protecting the
canyon's scenic and environmental resources. Lee is devoted to protecting logan Canyon.
logan River and its eco·systems.
Currently.
lee's
efforts are directed towards protecting the logan RiYer from excessive
development from its proximity to a nearby highway and a proposed land swap that will
create state and private lands above the river. Lee Is running a campaign to have a portion
of the Logan River deSignated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. In May, 1998 the Forest
Service and other environmental experts gathered to expound on the overwhelming data
that argues in favor of deSignation. LCC will direct Its resources through community outreach and initializing several campaigns toward Wild and Scenic designation.
For more information visit our web page at http://www.logancanyon .org
usu
Box
'1674
•
Log a n
•
U I • h
•
843 2 2 - 0 1 9 9
�c o
A. L
Working
for
the
T
I
protection
of
I
Logan
o
l\T
Canyon
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
30th Anniversary of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
The 30th anniversary of the most important piece of federal legislation ever written to
protect rivers-The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act-will be celebrated across the country
during the month of October.
Thanks to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, many of our nation's most outstanding free-flow-
ing rivers are protected from dams and inappropriate development. The Act. signed in 1968,
protects rivers with remarkable scenic. recreational. geological. fish and wildlife. historic,
cultural. or other similar values. To date, segments of 154 rivers have been designated . cov-
ering nearly 10,764 miles. Not one of Utah's beautiful rivers has this outstanding distinction.
The logan River was passed by during the first two rounds of Wild and Scenic
recommendation by the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. But as a result of public pressure,
the Forest Service is currently conducting a third inventory of Wasatch-Cache National
Forest rivers Including the Logan.
The Logan River and its watershed is a critical resource of recreation, economic stability,
and most importantly, a source of culinary water for Logan and Cache Valley residents. A
Wild and Scenic designation would not encroach upon existing uses of the river. but would
provide long-term protection for this precious resource.
"We (LCC) want to leave a true legacy," said Dan Miller. LCC President. "We are seeking
to have the Logan River designated as Utah's first Wild and Scenic River. Utah citizens
deserve a Wild and Scenic River within their borders, and I ask that we all join together to
leave this true legacy for our families and our future ."
USU
Box
'1674
•
L
0
8
it
n
•
U I • h
•
843 22- 0 1 9 9
�Wild and Scenic rivers are an important part of the country's heritage, offering the public
recreation opportunities, enhanced tourism economies, the preservation of plant and animal species, and dependable supplies of clean water. Many communities along Wild and
Scenic rivers benefit from an Increase in land values that accompany a Wild and Scenic
river designation.
While the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has had great success, much work still remains.
According to the National Park Service's Nationwide Rivers Inventory, more than 60.000
miles of rivers qualify for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. American Rivers,
the nation's leading river conservation organization, is working to stem the extinction of
our most outstanding rivers and bring more rivers into the Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
"We hope the Logan River will someday be apart of that system:' Miller said.
For more information please visit our web site at http://www.logancanyon.org
Dan Miller. President
Logan Canyon Coalition
e-mail: Dmil123S@aolocom
ph#: 435/258-'1432
�Please Write To
LEAVE A TRUE LEGACY
and Support the Logan as Utah's first
Wild and Scenic River
NOT ONE of Utah's beautiful rivers is recognized for its outstanding qualities through
induction into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
To be eligible for this status. a river just has to be free-flowing and posses at least one
outstandingly remarkable value which may include: fish, wildlife, scenery, geology,
archaeology, cultural, historical, and recreational.
After studying the river, citizens groups have identified the following outstandingly
remarkable values on the Logan River: Fish and Wildlife. Scenic. Geologic, and
Recreation.
Surprisingly. the Logan was passed by during the first two rounds of Wild and Scenic
recommendation by the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. But as a result of public pressure, the Forest Service is conducting a third inventory of Utah's rivers.
The opportunity still exists for the logan to be recognized for its outstanding qualities.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT in this process is extremely important. PLEASE WRITE the
Wasatch-Cache National Forest and urge them to recommend that the logan River be
inducted into the Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
Attn. Bernie Weingardt
Wasatch-Cache National Forest
8230 Federal Building
125 South State Street
Salt Lake City. Utah 84138
�ACTION ALERT!
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was signed into law in 1968. Thirty years later, Utah and Nevada
are the only two states in the West without a designated river. The U.s. Forest Service recently
determined the Logan to be eligible for designation. Next it must be determined to be suitable,
largely dependent upon local sentiment, and then designated by Congress. You can help make
the Logan River Utah's first Wild and Scenic river. The Logan City Council has been asked to
issue a proclamation supporting such a designation, which will then be forwarded with our
petition onto our Congressional delegation. Please call or write OUf City Council members and
the Mayor asking them to support such a proclamation. They will be voting on such a measure
March 4th.
Mayor Doug Thompson
255 North Main
Logan, UT 84321
750-9800
Alan Allred, Logan City Council
1535 E. 1500 N.
Logan, UT 84341
752-6441
John Harder, Logan City Council
289 E. 200 N.
Logan, UT 84321
753-6300
Janice Pearce, Logan City Council
Steve Thompson, Logan City Council
37 South 200 West
Logan, UT 84321
753-8254
Karen Borg, Logan City Council
1670 N. 1600 E.
Logan, UT 84341
753-6963
727 N. 150 W.
Logan, UT 84321
753-3599
Sponsored by the Logan Canyon Coalition
�LOGAN RIVER DRA INAGE
SEGMENT
39.0 Logan River: Ida bo statelin e to confluence with Beaver Creek - 6.6 miles
POTENT IAL OUTSTANDINGLY REMARKABLE VA LUES
Fish
DESC RI PTION
Gener al - This segment of Logan River, from the Idaho stateline to its confluence with Beaver
Creek, is located on the Logan District in Cache Counry, Utah. A recent land exchange with the
State of Utah in the upper reaches of the river have made most of the lands through with it flows
pan of the National Forest system, although about 1 mile still flows through private lands.
Bio/physica l setting - The segment of the Logan River is a relatively small up river portion of
the stream where the river is natural in character and has few highway and road encroadunents
and crossings., The stream flow is perennial; however during low flow periods a portion of the
stream can go underground for about 100 to 200 yards.
Elevations ranges along the stream from about 7,500 feet at the state line to about 6400 feet at
Beaver Creek. In the upper reaches of the segment the somewhat confined channel is character·
ized by poo!·riffie·run and it runs through a broad open valley. Adjacent uplands are primarily
dominated by aspen and sagebrush communities and some conifer communities. Subalpine fir is
succeeding aspen communities in some areas. Riparian communities are characterized by thinleaf
alder and various willows. Dispersed recreation impacts are common along the upper poslion of
the ri\·er segment, resulting in soil compaction, loss of some woody vegetation, and the presence
of some introduced herbaceous species. No threatened. endangered, or sensitive plants occur
along this segment of the Logan River.
Fish species present include rainbow trout, pure strain Bonnevill e cutthroat trout (a sensitive species), brook trout, and brown trout. The Bonneville cutthroat population here is pan of a larger
metapopulation of the species that occupies the Logan River basin and tributaries, and is considered to be critical to the overall preservation of the species. The State of Utah rates the fishery
here as a Class II, unique. No endangered or threatened mammals exist on this segment.
H um an dimension · Acc ess to the base of segment is provided
Scenic Byway, and by Forest Road 006 (a din road) whi ch runs
veloped Forest Service campgrounds are present in the upper part
sian of Parks and Recreation operates a winter sports trailhead
Highway 89 and the Franklin Basin Road.
V-54
by US Highway 89, a National
parallel to the segment. No de·
of the segment. The Utah Divi·
parking area at the junction of
�DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELI GIBILITY
Evaluation of Free-flowing Condition - This segment of the Logan River has n Ol been substantially modified by the dirt road that runs along it or by other construction or diversion. The segment is free-flow ing.
Evaluation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values - The Bonneville cutthroat population of this
stream is pan of a larger self-sustaining continuous meta-population of this species. The fi sh is a
sensitive species which is currently incl uded in a conservation agreem ent. Spawning of the species occurs in this stream and other Logan River tributaries. In comparison to other known and
documented populations of Bonnevill e cunhroat trout this is a very special population that is and
wi ll be important to the overall survival of the species.
Eligibility and Classification - Since this segment of the Logan Ri ver is free-flowing and has an
outstandingly remarkable fishery popUlation, the segment is eligible for the National Wild and
Sceni c Rvers System. The stream can be classifi ed as a scenic river.
V-55
�SEGMENT
t
39.1 Logan River : Con fluence wit h Beaver C r eek to Third Dam - 20 miles
POTENTIAL O UTSTANDING LY REMARKABLE VALUES
Scenic, Recreation, Geo logical, Fish, Ecological
DESC RIPT ION
General - This segment of Logan Ri ver, from the confluence with Beaver Creek to Third Dam is
about 19 mil es long. It is located on the Logan Ranger Distri ct in Cache County, Utah. This segment is managed entirely by the Forest Service.
Bio/pbysical setting - Elevations range from 5,200 feet near Third Dam to 6400 feet at Beaver
Creek. Along this segment the terrain changes from a relatively narrow gorge j ust below Third
Dam. and runs through a classic canyon landscape to a much more open and rolling setting in the
uppennost 8 miles above the Temple Fork confluence.
The geological features mosl apparent along the course of the ri ver are some of the karst fea tures,
notably Ricks Springs cave, Logan Cave. and Wi nd Cave. Other caves al so ex ist. and undoubtedly many more remain to be di scovered. Ordovician quartzite strata near Right Fork contain unusually well fonned and preserved fuco idal structures (foss ili zed casts of ancient wonn borrows
which appear like seaweed mats frozen in the stone). At the west end of the corridor. lake terrace
gravel deposits of prehi stori c Lake Bonneville perch above the ri ver bed and mark the upper level
of a lake with enormous significance in the Great Basin. Well-defined faults and shear zones cut
and displace the sedi mentary strata in se\'eral road cuts along the corri dor. some of which also
show geologically interesting small-scale folding of the strata.
Uplands are dominated by Douglas fir on cooler north- facing slopes with mapl e, sagebrush. mountain mahogany, and juniper communities on south-facting and other drier sites. Riparian vegetation is characteri zed bi rch/dogwood, box elder, and yellow willow communi ties. Crack willow, an
introduced species. is a common component of some of the camping and ipicnicking areas in the
lower sections of the segment. One federall y listed Threatened plant, Primula maguirei (Maguire
primrose), occurs along this segmentin more mesic limestone cliffs. In addi tion, several Intermountain Region sensitive species. including Viola frank smithii ffranksmi th violet), Eri geron
cronquistii , and Draba maguirei, occur on the dolomitic limestone outcrops.
No endangered or threatened wildlife species exist on this segment. However, the western bigeared bat, an Intennountain Region (Forest Service) sensitive species, has been verified here.
Fish spec ies present include rainbow. brook. and brown trout, and the sensitive species - Bonneville cutthroat trout with has relati onships to both pure and potentially pure sub populations in
adjacent tributaries. This popUlation of Bonneville cutthroat in Logan River can be considered
pan of a meta-population that occupies the upper portion of thi s river drainage, (in biological
tenn s - a population that has imponance beyond the local scale).
I
•
,
[
J
t
J
I
r
t
\
.
�Human dimension· Parallel access is provided by State Highway 89, a designated National Scenic Byv..'ay. This highway is used by through travellers driving between the Wasatch Front and
Idaho or Wyoming. or by recreati on users who are interested in destinations al ong the river and
highway.
I
I
I
t
1
•
f
t
I
]
1
I
I
f
t
Recreation pressure in the corridor, both dispersed and developed. can be considered moderate to
heavy depending on season and day of the week. The Forest Service provides many developed
campgrounds and picnic sites in the lower ponicn of the segment, and upstream the most notable
is the Tony Grove recreation complex, snowmobile parking and other facilities. Other interesting
viewing sites include Rick Springs. Access to the river for fishing and tubing is very easy. Two
geological markers are present: one explaining about ancient Lake Bonneville and the other about
deposits of fucoidal quartzite. Logan Wind Cave is also a destination for hikers. Rock climbing is
very popular aiong the segment. Below Ricks Springs some kayaking occurs depending on the water level.
Between Third Dam and Right Hand Fork slopes are quite steep, and vegetation diversity shows a
high degree of patterning owing to considerable variability in altitude, slope, aspect, soils, etc.
Views are not especially long or vastin the lower section, but are some of the more attractive available in northern Utah. The narrow canyon from Right Hand Fork up [0 Chicken Creek provides
pleasant scenery to passing motori sts who are nearly enclosed by the canyon and its heavy riparian
forest. For those \\·ho stop, a more leisurely viewing experience may be appreciated at a local
campsite or picnic area. Scenery above this point changes considerably and ranges from the
deeply encised gorge near the twin bridges to wide-open expansive uplands draped with sagebrush and aspen around Tony Grove and Red Banks.
Tony Grove Memorial Ranger Station, a National Regi ster site, is within the seb'lllent. TIlls complex has a unique log cabi n and later CCC period buildings that relate to earlier periods in the hislOry of Nationa l Forest land management.
Fishing along the Logan River is common, and the experience is considered to be high quality.
The State of Utah ranks the upper portion of the segment at Class II , a unique fishing segment.
Hunting is also a common endeavor in areas adjacent to the river.
The Utah State University Field Station is located in the upper portion of the segment. Portions of
the area are in the Logan Canyon Cattle allotment. There are no commercial fishing, hwlting, or
recreation activities on the segment.
Although some of the several stream-crossing structures may impede peak stream fl ows, there are
no fu ll-scale impoundments in this reach above the inundated area above the Third Dam. No sig-nificant diversions have been made that could have any noticeable effects on stream flows or instream water uses ; however, there are probably several minor diversions for adjacent domestic and
irrigation uses .
DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY
Evaluation of Free-flowing Condition· Although Highway 89 runs the length of thi s segment
and has some effects on its free-flow, these are not so substanti al that most observers would notice changes from a purely natural character. In general the ecological functions of the river are
V-57
�natural along the segment. Over the last several decades construrction efforts and active management have intended that natural appearance and functions might be preserved. The segment is
free-flowing.
Evalu ation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values - The Bonneville cutthroat population of this
stream is part of a larger self-sustaining continuous meta-population of this species. The fish is a
sensitive species which is currently included in a conservation agreement. Spawning of the species occurs in this stream and other Logan River tributaries. In comparison to other known and
documented populations of Bonneville cutthroat trout this is a very special population that is and
wi ll be important to the overall survival of the species.
Scenery along the segment has been recognized as outstanding by the creation of the National Scenic Byway fo r Highway 89. This scenery is diverse and variable, a scenic smorgasbord of this
part of the Wasatch Range.
The recreation opportunities in this segment are about as broad spectrum as are provided in any
simil ar setting northern Utah. If one were to look for a typical northern Utah outdoor recreation,
the Logan River area might be a good model for the type. For its variety, length of season, quality, and appropriate scale of facilities, the recreation experience along the Logan Ri ver is outstandIng.
nti s segment meetS the criteria for outstandingly remarkable geo logical \'alue due to the diversity
and abundance of fear. .lfes \vhich together form an area with high educational and scientific interest. In broad scale, the entire river corridor presents an unparalleled cross section of the geo logic
structure and middle and lower Paleozoic carbonate stratigraphy of the west flank of the Bear
River Range. A myriad of smaller geologic features fall within the confines of the corridor which
contains the geologically-interesting meanders of the Logan River.
Ecologically, thIS segment contains a wide variety of plant, animal , and aquatic communities that
are functioning in a relatively heal thy manner, especially when compared to the proximity to local
urban populations. The use of the corridor as a setting for education for local schools and the uini versity community has been appreciated for many decades. Due to the location of the river in close
proximity to Utah State, more is known and written about the local natural setting than for most
areas of the western U.S. The ecological setting and its value to local and broader communities
can be considered outstanding.
Eligibility and Classification - Since this segment of the Logan River is free-flowing and has
outstandingly remarkable values. the segment is eligible for the National Wlld and Scenic Rvers
System. The stream can be classified as a recreational river.
V-58
•
I
r
I
I
�SEGM ENT
39.2 Logan RiYe r : 1 bird Da m to Fo rest Bound a ry - 3 mil es
POT E:\TlAL O UTSTA!\" DI:"IGL Y
RE~ I A RKA BL E
VALUES
Ecological. Scenic
1
DESCRl PTl O!\"
I
Gener a l - This segment of Logan River, from TIlird Dam to the western boundary afthe WasatchCache Nati onal Forest is about 3 miles long. It is located on the Logan Ranger District in Cache
County, Utah.
I
J
,
I
J
Bio/ phys ic a l settin g - The narrowest part of Logan Canyon is the sening for this segment. Here
the river cuts a gorge through the \Vasatch Range to emerge in Cache \"alley at Logan. Elevations
on the segment range from about 5200 feet to 4800 feet. Upland vegetation along this ponion of
the stream is characterized by sagebrush and mountain mahogany on dryer sites and bigtooth
maple in the foothills: Douglas fir occurs on more mesic nonh-facing slo pes. Riparian communities are dominated by cO llonwood. box elder. and crack willow trees with ycllow willow and coyote willow , river bi rch. and red-osier dOf,'wood along the narrow riparian conidor. One federally
listed TItreatened plant. Primula maguieri Maguire primrose), occurs along this segment. In addition , several Intermountain Region (Forest Service) sensitive species. including Afusineon lineare (Rydbcrgs musineon), Erigeron cronquistii. and Draba maguirei. occur on the dolomitic
limestone outcrops along this segment. Plant communities along this segment appear somewhat
altered in many areas because of road placement which channelizes the river, planting of nonnative trees and shrubs. and building locations.
There are no threatened, endangered or sensitive fish species in this segment, nor any endangered
or threatened wildlife species. Sensitive wildlife species have not been verified.
I
•
•
•
I
iI
Human dimension - US Highway 89, a National Scenic Byway, runs along the segment for its
complete length. There are three developed Forest Service recration sites in this segment and a
geological marker explaining about ancient Lake Bonneville. No significant archeological or historic sites are present. Because of the relatively narrow stream conidor and traffic density recreation opportunities are limited compared to further upstream on the river. Fishing is common, but
not generally so satisfying an experience as that upstream . Tubing and some kayaking are popular
activities. While the scenery is that of a narrow rocky canyon and quite pleasant, vistas are not so
expansive as further upstream where the canyon opens up.
There are no commercial recreation ventures in this segment, and linle opportunity to develop any .
There is a restaurant which takes advantage of the riverine sening for dining. No commercial
hunting or fishing is permined.
Due to highway and dam construction over the past century, thi s segment of the Logan ri ver has
been heavily modi fi ed. Adjacent floodplains and meadows have been significantl y modifi ed anddeveloped. Oxbows exist, but usually have been cut off by the highway, or they have been fi lled .
V-59
�Highway 89 pinches the stream for much of its length channelizing it and decreaing its naturalness. The Highway corsses the river once in this segment, while five small er bridges span the
river for access to summer homes and the National Forest. The stream flow is perenniaL Logan
City is required to maintain 20 cfs between Second and Third dam. Below Second Darn no minimwn is required and during dry periods the flow is minimal. .
DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY
Evaluation of Free.flowing Condition - This segment of the Logan River has been substantially
modified by construction of Highway 89 which runs along it or by other construction or diversion.
The segment is not free-flowing.
•
•
•
Evaluation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values· Because the stream has been found to be
not free-flowing there is no further consideration of the values for which it might potentially have
been eligible.
Eligibility and C lassifi cation - This segment of the Logan River is not free-flowing and therefore not eligible as a Wild and Sceni c River.
,
J
F
t
!
f
V-60
�SEGMENTS
The discussion and eval uation of th e following rivers have been combined. as all are being considered potentially outstandingly remarkable fo r the same related va lue. the Bonneville cutthroat trout
fish population.
j
39.3
39.4
39.S
39.6
39.8
39.9
Beaver Creek: Idaho State Line to Mouth - 6.5 miles
\Vhite Pine C reek: Source to Mouth - 5.9 miles
Temple Fork: Source to Mouth - 5.6 miles
Spawn Creek: Source to :'\Iouth - 3.8 miles
Bunchgrass C reek: Source to Mouth - 5.0 miles
Little Bear Creek: Source to Mouth - 4.0 miles
POTENTIAL OUTSTANDINGLY REMARKABLE \' ALUE
Fish
j
i
1
I
•
I
DESCRIPTIONS
General - These segments are located on the Logan Ranger District, and are all tributary streams
to the upper Logan River. Most of the streams flow exclusively through Nati onal Forest, although
recent land exchanges in the area of the upper Logan River, White Pine Creek, and Beaver Creek
have change ownership status there.
Bio/physical setting - All six of the streams in this section are tributaries of the upper Logan
River. As such they have some anributes in common and some that are unique. Each has vegetation in uplands which includes sagebrush. lodgepole pine, SUbalpine fi r. aspen, Douglas fir and
some limber pine. Riparian communities are typicall y narrow and include willows. dogwood, aspen and conifers. ~o threatened. endangered or sensiti\'e plants are known to occur within these
corridors. The flammulated owl, a sensitive species, has been located within the area. The corridors include habitat suitable for boreal owl, goshawk, wolverine and three-toed woodpeckers;
none of these sensiti ve species are known to occur within the corridor. Several beaver ponds lie
within these corridors, and the lower reaches of some provide big game winter range (moose, elk
and deer).
Fish species include rainbow, brown and brook trout, sculpin and Bonnevi lle cutthroat trout (a
sensiti ve species). While all the fish species in these tributaries can add to visitor enjoyment or the
overall wildlife diversity in the upper Logan River drainage, the Bonnevill e cunhroat trout population is of special interest and value. The range of Bonneville cutthroat includes most of the eastern
Great Basin (See Appendix F, Regions of Comparison, Fish Values). These several streams in addition to the upper portions of the main Logan River are occupied with a meta-population (that is a
genetically interactive larger population of the species) that, if protected, can insure the preservation of the species, which is currently under some considerable pressure to survive due to pressures of exotic species introduction, fi shing pressure, and habitat fragmentation, destruction,
andlor degradation. The upper Logan River population of these fish is probably the largest and
most di verse subpopulation with habitat connectivity that remains. Fish abundance for the Bonneville cutthroat is high, and the population is self-sustaining through natural spawning in both the
main Logan River and these tributaries. This river system is of critical importance to Bonneville
\'-6 1
�r
cutthroat because of its lack of migratory obstructions, the large number of connected populations,
and the overall strength and diversity afthe population.
Human dimension - Access up the main Logan River to the lower portions of most of these
streams is by u.s. Highway 89, the Logan Canyon National Scenic Byway. From this main highway smaller Forest Roads are present up Temple Fork and Beaver Creek, while even more ephemeral roads and trails are present along the other streams (e.g. White Pine Creek). At times the
presence of these roads has impacted these streams and plans for some roads (e.g. Temple Fork)
include reducing these impacts by reconstruction. Developed recreation sites are few within the
upper Logan drainages compared to further downstream along the main Logan River. Dispersed
camping and hiking use can be light to heavy depending on which stream is in question and season
or day of the week. Fishing use is along these streams variable dependent on access and seasons.
A catch and release policy has been in place.
Several sites providing access and other recreation opportunities are found within these corridors
or close by. Included are: a snowmobile parking area and groomed snowmobile and crosscountry ski trails are located near the junction of Highways 89 and 243 ; a snowmobile route connecting Utah to the Yellowstone area passes through the corridor; Beaver Mountain Ski Area; a
commercial outfitter/guide offers horseback rides near the ski area; and portions of the Great
\Vestem Trail in Beaver Creek and upper Temple Fork.
There are few known prehistoric sites within these corridors, although occasional scatters of
chipped stone materials attest to Nati ve American use of the streamsides for seasonal hunting and
fishing camps, as well as access ways to upland areas. The Temple Fork Sawmill historic site and
historic Tony Grove Ranger Station are within the corridors of consideration.
Sheep and catt le graze most of the areas within which these rivers flow.
There are no dams or di versions on these segments. In some places U.S. Highway 89, and Forest
Roads, and other old roads affect the stream channe ls, flood plains, and water quality by crossing
the segments or running along side them.
DETAILED EVALUATION OF ELiGmILITY
Eva lu ation of Free-flowing Condition - These six tributaries of the Logan River have not been
modified to any significant extent by human uses. All six may be considered free-flowi ng .
Evaluation of Outstandingly Remarkable Values - The Bonneville cunhroat trout fis hery
withi n these tributary streams to the upper Logan River is a significant population. because of its
size. diversity, di stribution within several suitable habitats. self-sustaining natural reproduction
and the size and vigor of the fish. The importance of thi s meta-population of Bonneville cunhroat
trout is an outstandingly remarkable value.
Eligibility and Classification - All six of the streams listed below are eligible for the !\ational
Wild and Scernc Ri vers System as they are free-flowing and fo r their remarkab le Bonnneville cutthroat fishery.
V -62
t
I
�1
,
They may be classified as indicated below:
Beaver Creek: Idaho State Line to Mouth - Scenic
White Pine Creek: Source to Mouth - Wild
Temple Fork: Source to Mouth - Scernc
Spawn Creek: Source to Mouth - Wild
BWlCbgrass Creek: Source to Mouth - \Vild
Linle Bear Creek: Source to Mouth - Wild
1
t
I
J
J
I
I
I1
-
V-63
�BIO / WEST, Inc.
I 063 'West 1400 North
Log~n , Utah 84321
Phone: (435) 752·4202
Fax: (435) 752-0507
January 21, 1999
Logan City Mayor and Council
. 255 North Main
Logan, UT i4321
Re: Log an River Wild and Scenic-River Designation and Logan Canyo n Highway
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I have been asked to provide you with a brief, independent assessment as to the
potential effects of a Wild and Scenic River (WSR) Designation for the Logan river on
the ongoing Logan Canyon Highway Improve ment Project. As you are probably aware,
a number of the aspects and implications of a WSR designation on the highway project
are not totally clear, thus the information below is somewh.at speculative and my own
opinion, rather than definitive facts .
First, you should be aware that designation on USDA Forest Service land is a threestep process: 1) a determination of eligibility, which includes an inventory (evaluation) of
resources and an assessment of the required presen, e of both "free f1owing~
c
. characteristic~ and one or more "outstandingly remarkable features"; 2) classification'of
eligible portions of a river as either recreational, scenic, or wild, based upon the results
of item 1; and 3) an evaluation of the suitability for designation in terms of worthiness
for inclusion in to the national system, status of land ownership in the area, potential
land uses, local governmental interest, cost, and other issues.
Suitability is typically add ressed in a detailed study report which includes environmental
consideration (analysis, public involvement, preparation of an enyironmental document,
etc.) and integration into th e pertinent local (Wasatch-Cache National Forest in this
case) Forest Management Plan. If the river meets all of the above criteria, it can be
recommended by the Forest Service (Washington level) for Congressional designation.
Obviously, the above process, particularly approval by Congress, can take a very long
time. Howeve r, the Forest SerVice is mandated to manage and protect the area in
accordance with the selected classification during this interim period once the first two
steps are completed, which is apparently the current statu s of the Logan River study.
As I understand it, the Forest Service has rece ntly determined that portions of the 'upper
Logan river are eligible' for designation, and has tentatively classified the portion from
Third Dam to its co~fluence with Beaver Cre'ek (near Franklin Basin) as "recreational "
--
.. ..
"
,I
�,
Logan City Mayor and Council
January 21 , 1999
Page 2
and the portion from the confluence to the Idaho border as "scenic", They are now
working through the details of how to integrate these classifications in their Forest
Manqgement Plan and determining at what level approval for any forthcoming proposed
activities in the area will be made,
My personal opinion is that nothing UD,OT is proposing as a part of the current highway
project (some improvements and structural replacements between Tony Grove and
Franklin Basin) will impact or be impacted by the anticipated river protection, UDOT
has 'continued to be very proactive in developing plans that avoid or minimize any
impacts to the river or its associated wetland I riparian communities. Their designers
and construction engineers have worked very closely with us to develop and adhere to .
mitigative measures, and to insure that their contractors do li~llwise, Given their solid
commitment in this regard and the preliminary plans which have been developed thus'
far, it would seem unlikely that anyone could reasonably argue for changes or a delay
as a result of any level of WSR designation on the river.
The only aspect for which I have concern is the potential for someone to delay the
project by filing some type of protest (frivolous or otherwise) against it on the basis of a
violation of tlie interim protection afforded the river under the Wild and Scenic Rivers '
Act. Unfortunately, it appears that the Forest Service does not have any proscribed
process for addressing and responding to such a complaint, and thus some delay could
occur. There is some 'effort underway at this time to get a handle on this issue, with the
goal of having the Forest clarify exactly how and with what time frame they would deal
with it should it arise.
.
Thank you for your confidence, and I hope this helps you somewhat. At your request: I
am more than willing to discuss the matter further with regard to this or other aspects of
the project.
Sincerely yours,
~~\~
Thomas M.. Twedt, PhD
Principal
�Ten ways dams damage rivers
( I)
Dams reduce ri ver levels
Dams remove water needed for heaJthy in-stream ecosystems.
(2)
Dams block rivers
Dams prevent the flow of plants and nutrients, impede the migration of fish and other wildlife, and block
recreationaJ use.
(3)
Dams slow rivers
Many fish species depend on steady flows to flush them down river early in their life and guide them upstream
years later to spawn. Stagnant reservoir pools disorient migrating fish and significantly increase the duration of
their migration.
(4)
Dams alter water temperatures
By slowing water flow, most dams increase water temperatures. Other dams decrease temperatures by releasing
cooled water from the reservoir bottom. Fish and other species are sensitive to these temperature irregularities,
which often destroy native populations.
(5)
Dams aJler timing of flows
By withholding and then releasing water to generate power for peak demand periods, dams cause downstream
stretches to aJtemale between low water and powerful surges that erode soil and vegetation. These irregular releases
destroy natural seasonal flow variations that trigger naturaJ growth and reproduction cycles in many species.
(6)
Dams fluctuate reservoir levels
Dramatic changes in reservoir water levels degrade shorelines and disturb fisheries, waterfowl, and bottom-dwelling
organisms.
(7)
Dams decrease oxygen levels in reservoir waters
Then the oxygen-deprived water is released from behind the dam, it can kill fish downstream.
(8)
Dams hold back silt, debris, and nutrients
By slowing flows. dams aJlow silt to collect on river bottoms and bury fish spawning habitat. Silt trapped above
dams accumulates heavy metals and other pollutants. Gravel, logs and other debris are also trapped by dams,
eliminating their use downstream as food and habitat.
(9)
Dam turbines cut up fish
Following currents downstream, fish are drawn into and cut up by power turbines.
(10) Dams increase predator risk
Warm, murky reservoirs often favor predators of naturaJly occurring species.
****************************
s, a cheaper and less hannful SOIUli
atts of power, that
************************* **
�Over the past 100 years, the United States has led the world in dam building.
The US Army Corps of Engineers has catalogued approximately 75 ,000 dams greater than 6 feet along the
waterways of the United States. So "on average, we have constructed one dam every day since the signing of the
Declaration of Independence."
Dams have depleted fisheries, degraded river ecosystems, and diminished recreational opportunities on nearly all of
the nation's rivers.
Hydropower s hould not be considered as clean power because of the destruction of river ecosystems and its
many social impacts.
Dam designers often fail to account for the impacts of droughts, meaning that dams often produce less
power than promised. When these risks of low river flows are factored into calculations of the costs of electricity it
can be seen that hydropower is now an expensive fonn of power generation. Private investors in power projects
are largely avoiding dams and prefer to invest in cheaper and less risky gas-fired power plants.
There has been a grow ing movement to remove dams where the costs - including environmental, safety, and sociocultural impacts - outweigh the benefits - including hydropower, flood control, irrigation, or recreation.
FLOOD CONTROL can often be accomplished more effectively and for less money by restoring wetlands,
maintaining riparian buffers , or moving people out of the floodplain. Updating antiquated irrigation systems and
replacing inappropriate crops can dramatically reduce the need for dams and reservoirs in the arid West.
*** *** *** *** *********
10 KEY POINTS
**** *** ** **** ** **
The Players:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (PERC)
Symbiotics, Rigby Idaho
Ecosystems Research Instate, Logan
Because of the political climate change in our nations capitol, Symbiotics is attempting to take advan tage of
the situation to make a quick buck with no thought, or consideration to the devastation they might leave behind.
THE MOTION STATES THAT:
the application is invalid
Symbiotics' admits that the company has no intention of either building or operating the 100 plus projects it has
proposed. Further, the company admits that it has no idea at this point who will build and operate the projects.
This is directly contrary to the Federal Power Act and the FERC regulation requirement that an applicant be the
person who will operate the project. The law is very clear that when an application is fi led by someone who has no
intention of actually operating the proposed project, that the application is invalid.
the application is incomplete
Symbiotics does not comply with FERC's regulations because it does not include any information on the financial
aspects of the project. This is further evidence that the applicant is engaged in an uniformed, unplanned, shot gun
approach to grab up any potential hydropower sites in the off chance that it might be able to tum a profit by selling
the sites off to another business venture capable of actually carrying a project to fruition.
Symbiotics fails to disclose the source or amount of financing available as required by PERC regulations and then
makes a vague statement that it "expects" financing to come from "private investors and members of the applicant. "
�UINTA NATIONAL FOREST DIRECTORY
Forest Supervisor's Office
88 West 100 North
PO Box 1428
Provo, Utah 8460 I
FTS and COMM 80 1-342-5100
FAX 801-342-5144
Heber Ranger District
2460 South Hi ghway 40
PO Box 190
Heber City, Utah 84032
FTS and COMM 80 1-342-5200
FAX 801-654-5772
Pleasant Grove Ranger District
390 North 100 East
Pleasant Grove, Utah 84062
FTS and COMM 801-342-5240
FAX 801 -342-5244
Spanish Fork Ranger District
44 West 400 North
Spanish Fork, Utah 84660
FTS and COMM 801-342-5260
FAX 80 1-342-5272
�Protest Bear River Dams!
Write, Call or Email Your Elected Official!
Legislative District #1
Eli H. Anderson
8790 West Hwy 102
Tremonton, UT 84337
435-854-3760
ehanderson@ut.gov
Legislative District #5
Brent D. Parker
2953 W. 6900 s.
Mt. Sterling, UT 84401
435-245-6275
brentparker@ut.gQv
Legislative District #3
Craig Buttars
540 s. 1600 W.
Lewiston, UT 84320
435-258-5015
Senate District #24
Peter C. Knudson
1209 Michelle Dr.
Brigham City, UT 84302
435-723-6366
cbuttars@ut.gov
pknudson@utahsenate.org
Legislative District #4
Loraine Pace
435 E. 900 N.
Logan, UT 84321
435-753-6154
lorainepace@ut.gQV
Senate District #25
Lyle Hillyard
175 E.IOON.
Logan, UT 84321
435-753-0043
Ihillyard@utahsenate.org
Find Your Representative or Senator:
Legislative District #1. Eli H, Anderson
Amalga, Benson, Clarkston, Mendon, Newton
Legislative District #3. Craig Buttars
Northwest Logan, Cornish, Cove, Hyde Park, Lewiston, N . Logan, Richmond, Smithfield, Trenton
Legislative District #4. Loraine Pace
Logan, part orN. Logan
Legislative District #5. Brent D. Parker
Southwest Logan, Collcg/Young Ward, Hyrum, Millville, Nibley, Paradise, Providence, River Heights,
Wellsville
Senate District #24. Peter C. Knudson
Cliffside area and south and west zones in Logan, CollegeNoung Ward, Hyrum, Millville, Nibley,
Paradise, Providence, River Heights, Wellsville
Senate District #25. Lyle Hillyard
Logan, Amalga, Benson, Clarkston, Cornish, Cove, Hyde Park, Lewiston, Mendon, Newton, N. Logan,
Richmond, Smithfield, Trenton
�NOTEWORTHY AVIAN RESOURCES OF THE GREAT SALT LAKE
Prepared by Don Paul o~ th~ Utah Di~si6n of Wildlife Resources
The following table outlines ·selected avian population and status values attributed to Great Salt
Lake habitats. The Great Salt Lake ecosystem is one of the most important wildlife habitats on
ihis hemisphere. .
.
SPECIES
WI1~on's Phalarope -
POPULATION AND STATUS VALUES
• 800,000, Largest staging concentration in the world. 1998 count
Red-Necked Phalarope-
280,000 in a single day estimate, Paul 1986
American Avocet-
250,000, many times higher than any other wetland in the
Pacific Flyway, Shuford 1994
Black-Stilt-
65,000 many times higher than any other wetland in the
Pacific Flyway, Shuford 1994
Marbled Godwit-
30,000, the onlistaging area in the interior USA, Shuford 1994
S~owy
10,000, the world's largest assembJage, representing 55% of the
entire breeding population west of .the Rocky Mnts., Paton 1
.992
Plover-
Western Sandpiper-
17,000, on.-flock, Paul 1994
Long-Billed Dowitcher-
32,000, single day count, Shuford 1994
White Pelican-
18,000 breeding adults, one of the three largest colonies in western
North America, Paul 1994
White-Faced Ibis-
7,500 breeding adillts, worlds largest breeding population,
US Fish & Wddlife Service status reporis 1982
California GoU-
160,000 breeding adults, worlds largest breeding population,
White 1992
Eared Grebe-
• 1.4I)1jJjj!,n--!O£Ond largest staging population in North America,
1998 count
Per~grineFalcon-
11 active pairs of this listed endangered species, Paul 1994
Bald Eagle-
Over 500 wintering bald eagles associated with GSL, one of top
ten winter populations in the lower 48 stat~s, National Wildlife
Federation mid-winter bald eagle survey reports
Bank Swallow-
Over 10,000 in one flock, GSL represents one of the largest
. migratory corridors in Western North America, Paton 1994
�-
NOTEWORTIIY WATERFOWL RESOURCES ·
OF THE GREAT SALT LAKE
Prepared by Tom A1dricb oftbe Utah Division ofW~dlifeResources
<
BREEDING
MIGRATION
SPECIES
Tundra Swan ~
0
60,000
· Ipoqooo
Pintail . Gadwall-
. 2000
100,000
40,000
Cinnamon Teal -
80,000
40,000
~.
500,000
<65,000
60,000
15,000
600,000
Rare
50,000
2,000
150,000 ·
20,000
50,000
Minor
100,000
10,000.
Mallard
Ruddy-
. Green-winged TealCanada Geese Redhead -
Canvasback ~
Shoveller -
"Approximately 30 percenl (3,000,000 of 10,000,000) of the ducb of the Pacific
and Central Flyways use the Great Salt Lake marshes". Rawley, Wildlife of the Great
Salt Lake
·
.
.
�Logan City Mayor
Members of the Logan City Council
Regarding the "Wild & Scenic" designation of the Logan River,
find attached one viewpoint regarding the economic implications
that can surround a quality fishery.
Thanks for your consideration,
Tim King
Conservation chair
Cache Anglers, a Trout Unlimited chapter
�& U€,>
&Maybe 1've mellowed some in recent years, or maybe I
just got tired of the lopsidedness of having infinite patience
with fish and almost none with my fellow humans, but I'm
beginning to get a somewhat different perspective on
crowded trout streams. It turns out there is more than one
way to look at this.
For one thing, fish eries conservation-as a subheading
under conservation in general-is a serious political issue
that will only get more important with time . W ith that in
mind I can now som etimes look up and down a river and see
not so much a crowd as a constituency: a mob of people that
any politician would be happy to see at a rally if they supported him , o r terrified to see if they dido't. There are days
when I even wish there we re two or three more people on the
water, like maybe the go'·emor and a couple of congressm en .
Not even the President of the Un ited States is immune to
what he ca ll s, with typica l style. "the environmental thing."
Exchange the politician fo r an investment banker and anothe r pe rspective kicks in . Call it environmental economics
or , if you prefer, econom ic environmentalism.
No fly fi sherman has [ 0 be shown studies to know that
large amounts of money are spent on the s port-not just on
tackle and licenses, but also on food, travel, lodging, guides,
beer and so on . Nor dQC!s he have to be told that trout a re an
indicator species that need cold , clean , unspoiled water.
When m ost of us look at a hog hole on a normal day, we
see a fine piece of trout water that's twenty times m ore
crowded than it should be , but a sharp investment type sees
something else: H e sees a si tuation where a healthy natura l
environment is not an im pediment to the development of
industry; he sees that in this case a healthy envi ronment is
the industry .
Yes, I have been hang ing out with with some of these guys
lately . A lot of them like to fish.
When access is finall y limited on som e of these waters,
most fishermen will see it as a shame, but already some
businessmen I know are say ing things like, " Wait a minute.
You mean you have a product so good you have to tum away
customers ?"
I cringe at the thought, but if we assume for the moment
that wild trout are a product and fishermen are the custome rs, there are some interesting implications.
For instance, m aybe the raving radical environmentalist
who was running around a decade ago demanding that the
envi ronment be saved and citing truth, beauty and poetry as
reason s can now come back and say. "My associates and I
would like to show you how minimum flows and special
regula tions on your stream could bring somewhere between
one and three million dollars a year into the local economy."
As an earth-hippie you were treated with strained politeness at best, but now, suddenly. they're calling you "Mister"
and paying for your lunch, even though your agenda hasn 't
changed a bit .
r
JOIf<.!
6, £/'LIfB'
�To put it another way. you can make conservation work by
convincing people that preserving this forest or that trout
stream is the right thing to do, or you can show them that it's
not only right, but lucrative .
What we're talking ahout here is a modest local industry,
but it 's one that involves no factories , no pollution , no new
housing, schools, sewers, water taps, fire trucks, police, etc.
Or you can see it as a tourist anraction that doesn't have to
turn the town into a carnival and half its citizens into cheap
hucksters in coonskin caps. A good trout stream won't bring
in the wealth of an oil field, but it will be clean, Quiet, dignified, permanent and profitable enough to make looking into
ih~ wa ter rights WO,1:hwhile~
-;;:;;;;;;;:;;;;;;;;;;======~-:.:..: ::::~====~
-
" Will this actually work?" asks o ne 01 the skeptics In the
chamber of commerce.
"Well," you can say, "look at that quality stretch of the
Such-and-such Riv. r. So many people fish it they're trying
to figure out how to cut down on the crowds ." At that moment you remember being elbowed out of your fa vo rite run
fondl y, because you can say with conviction, "Trust me, if
the trout are here, the people will come ."
Hell, they won't even have to advertise. You know how
hard it is to keep good fi shing a secret .
To man y activists, ,hi s kind of thing amounts to swimming with the sharks. 1 suppose it does when you think about
it, but it 's still possible that the most environmentally meaningfll l thing you can do right now is teach a h2n:"cr new to
fish and' then take him to the jewel in the crown of the state's
fisheries on a Saturda~' :afternoon.
From an economic standpoint , this kind of thing requires
what can seem like some radical thinking. After all, what
we're talking about is existing in some kind of long-term
harmony with the natur II environment and making a decent
living at it. but we're " at talking about getting fabulou sly
rich overnight. We're I. ' king at the possibility-or maybe I
should say the necessity --of being reasonabl e for a change .
Still (believe it or not) there are some bu sinessmen out
there who understand th.. : nur old boom-and-bust, exploitthe- resource-a nd-move-.m program is just not going to work
anymore. The problem i:., even if you can bring yourself to
sanction rape for profit , the re's getting to be a crucial shortage of victims.
And I th ink being reasonable should include us fisherm en ,
too . Unfortunately, some of us have gotten into a kind of
junk bond mentality from fishing the hog holes. I 've actuall y
talked to guys who won't admit the fishing was "good" unless they were tuna-boati n~ 20-inch trout all day long. But
the fact is. many of our be ho.~ holes are tailwater fi sheri es
that have been arti fi cially Haled by the effects of bottom draw dam s. Some of them veren't as good when they were
wild rive rs. and I know of . t least one that held carp ins tead
of trout before the dam we rll in .
�On the other hand, a normal, run-of-the-mill, healthy
trout s tream that's managed properly with minimum flows
and appropriate regulations will likely produce something
less spectacular; say, 12- to 14-inch wild, pretty trout with
the occasional 16· to IS-inch bomber. Some of us could
easily lin with that, and maybe 3 few more of us ought to.
If we spread out a little more, we'll not only have more
_ ._.__ ..=_ ====:.=I.~OO:
--..... , - ___ =
-, _ _
_
~
~
..fi.&h..mou-\Q.l\.t.w4~~~!
S5t>2 :oM~:C-'~3tlnU
hi iiiOf€
0') to
~ &ee.-w~:!I~also--opreaa..ttr~·wari:n=dOIM,$"""'\illOuild
~_ _ _
-==
y
businesses in more little towns.• and the local chambers of
commerce will begin to make the obvious connection: The
better the fishing is, the more money they'll make.
It's just conceivable that if we developed all our fisheries
to their full potential, the economic benefits would be
enough to make it worthwhile. In the end it's a matter of
attitude. (Remember that much of life, not to mention
some great ideas, depends on nothing more than your point
of view.) Crowded hog holes can be seen as proof that the
sport is headed for ruin, or they can be used as evidence of
just how much a good trout stream is worth in dollars and
cents .
And if you measure value in mor.e spiritud and aesthetic
terms, fine. Just between you and me, that 's what it really
comes down to in the end. All the rest of this is just a
convenient illusion , but it is convenient.
I know this sounds like an oversimplified romantic idea,
but then so did catch-and-release fishing a generation ago. I
know there is at least a handful of businessmen out there who
are beginning to like the economic approach to conservation
(or vice versa), and it 's easy to see how this could be used to
lever those politicians who are telling us we can have a
healthy environment and a healthy economy. Many of those
guys made that promise off the tops of their heads because it
sounded good. Imagine how relieved they'd be to learn that
it could actually happen.
.
�March 9, 1999
Mayor Douglas Thompson, Members of the Logan City Council
255 North Main Street
Logan, Utah 84321
RE: Logan River Wild and Scenic River Designation Proposal
Dear Mayor Thompson and Members of the Logan City Counci1:
I am writing to provide information relevant to the proposal that the Logan City Council support
designation of the Logan River as a wild and scenic River.
By way of introduction, I am a natural resource consultant with 25 years of river policy experience. I am a
recognized expert in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, having managed wild and scenic river programs for the
National Park Service and consulted with both the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management on wild
and scenic river issues. I have drafted Federal Wild and Scenic River legislation and was the originator of
many of the guidelines currently used by Federal agencies to evaluate wild and scenic river eligibility. t am also
a native Utahn (though exiled to Massachusetts for the past 20 years) and was a resident of Cache Valley for
several years. I am very familiar with the Logan River: I served as supervisor of recreational guards for the
Logan Ranger District and have visited the canyon frequently since then. I provided substantive comments on
the Wasatch-Cache National Forest's 1994 and 1999 draft rivers inventories.
The Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is a complex piece of legislation, and there is no end to the
misinformation regarding its effects on land use, private property rights, water rights, etc. To aid in your
deliberations, I have taken the liberty to address some of the questions that might arise on this subject (please
note that, while I favor protection of the Logan River, I have consciously tried to set my opinion aside and to
present objective, verifiable information based on my professional knowledge of the Federal Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act and of rivers that have been designated as wild and scenic rivers):
What are the general effects of a river being deSignated as a wild and scenic river?
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act has two primary consequences for designated rivers. First, no new dams
may be constructed within a designated river segment. Second, no Federal action may be taken that wouJd
have a negative effect on the river's natural functioning or on the natural resource values for which it was
designated. The term "Federal action" refers to: (a) Federal permits, (b) Federal funding, and (c) Federal lands
management. This does not mean that Federal permits and funding are prohibited, only that these must be
compatible with the continued conservation of the river. The effect on Forest Service land management is
discussed below.
What effect would designation of the Logan River as a wild and scenic river have on forest land use?
The Forest Service would continue to manage Logan Canyon and the river corridor. Campgrounds and
picniC areas along the river would continue to serve public needs and other land uses couJd continue.
However, in making management decisions, the Forest Service would have to explicitly consider the effect of
its actions on the river and would be prohibited from taking actions that would harm the river or the natural
and recreational resource values for which it was designated. (For Logan River, these values include fisheries,
scenery, geological and hydrological values, recreation, and, pOSSibly, wildlife.) This means that campground
improvements, trails, etc., would need to respect the river's natural processes (this would be required
regardless), and grazing permits would need to be monitored to ensure that the natural condition of riparian
areas is maintained and water quality is not impaired. Forestry and hunting would not be affected.
How would designation affect private property?
Most of the lands along the affected portion of Logan River are in Federal ownership. There are a few
private parcels and a block of State land. Private property will continue to be subject to the same State and
local land use regulations as is now the case (designation only affects Federal actions). The lands that are part
of the State/Federal land swap will likewise be subject to State and local land use regulations. While the
�Federal government could not dictate how these lands are used, it is reasonable to think that the State might
wish to cooperate with the Forest Service in conserving these important riverine areas. Several creative land
management strategies could be employed that both meet State needs and protect the river corridor.
Note also that research suggests that wild and scenic designation would have a positive effect on private
land values. This is because buyers are willing to pay a premium to live near natural areas when there is a
guarantee of continued conservation.
What effect would this have on tourism?
Only a select few rivers are designated as wild and scenic. No Utah river has been designated as such yet.
It stands to reason that designation of the Logan River would be perceived as an attraction for visitors
considering coming to the area. Research on the subject bears this out, but also suggests that the extent to
which tourism is enhanced depends on how actively local interests publicize this. (I am personally aware of
rivers where designation has been publicized and others where it purposely has not been publicized. Both
strategies have been used to good effect.) I would suspect that, in the case of the Logan River, Cache Valley
civic and business interests would be wise to tastefully publicize designation. For example, the State tourist
map could be modified to note this, as could Cache Valley tourism brochures. Tourism-related businesses,
Utah State University, and others could use the designation to demonstrate their proximity to important
scenic resources. From a national perspective, Federal maps showing important natural areas would include
the river.
Would designation prohibit highway expansion?
Wild and scenic designation does not preclude bridge repair, resurfacing, or even roadway relocation.
However, as referenced above, Federal permits (Clean Water Act, 404 permits, Forest Service special use
permits, etc.) and Federal funds could only be made available if these actions were compatible with continued
conservation of the river and its corridor. With regard to the Logan Canyon, decisions regarding whether or
not the proposed action would meet the standards of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act would be made by the
Forest Service. Based on the information I have on the highway proposal, it is my professional opinion that
.designation as a wild and scenic river would not ereclude improvement to the highway. It would, however,
r uire that UDOT take special precautions, bot in desi~ and construction to ensure that the road does not
and scenic resources are preserved, an
at short-term ISru tions
a ter ow re 'mes, that 1m or an na
"to t e river are mimnuz . ven if this costs a Itt e more, It wou a resuIfin a supenor project at meets ong:
term multiple needs.
Would designation affect existing downstream uses?
Designation would not affect the existing diversion of water to the North Logan Canal (which is govemed
by State law), nor would the downstream dams or power plant be affected. Repairs to and management of
these dams could continue as in the past. Designation would not affect downstream diversions, land use, etc.,
as the river flows through Logan and into the lower valley.
How would downstream water quality be affected?
This is an area often overlooked. Currently, the City of Logan has very little control over upstream Federal
actions that could have an adverse impact on wa ter quality. Designation of a river as wild and scenic places
significant constraints on upstream actions that would increase sedimentation, water temperature, or
pollutants. It also increases opportunity for local input into the Forest Service decision process. I can think of
few other actions that would ensure long-term protection of downstream water quality more than designation
of an upstream area as a wild and scenic river. In the long run, this may be the most compelling reason for the
City to support wild and scenic designation.
Can we trust that future management of the river will be in keeping with the concepts outlined above?
If the river is designated as a wild and scenic river, a management plan would be prepared that would
guide future management. Active involvement in the development of this plan by the City would help to
ensure that local interests are represented. Also, it is entirely appropriate for the Federal designating
�legislation to contain specific provisions that will guarantee certain agreements. For example, provisions could
be included that guarantee that the existing downstream hydro facility would not be affected by designation.
Or, it could be directed that the City of Logan have an active role in implementation of certain aspects of the
management plan.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information. If you have further questions about the effects
of wild and scenic river designation, please feel free to contact me. [f I don't have the answer, I will research it
for you or put you in contact w ith others who can help you. You can reach me by phone, fax, or email.
In dosing, I wish to emphasize that the Logan River is a very special place. It is the last intact large river
system along Utah's population belt. It is also, as was made evident in the recent Forest Service rivers
inventory, the most Significant river in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. You are very fortunate to have this
special natural resource in your backyard, and it is in Logan's interest to ensure that it continues to be
available for the use and enjoyment of future generations.
Sincerely,
Drew O. Parkin
15 Thingvalla Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
(617) 876-6173
(617) 491-3450
Drew _Parkin@msn.com
�February 16, 1999
Bernie Weinga rdt, Forest Supervisor
Wasatch-Cache Na tional Forest
8236 Federal Building
125 S. State
Salt Lake City, UT 84138
Dear Supervisor Weingardt,
Thank you for sending us a copy of the draft Wild and Scenic eligibility study for ri vers in
the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. We are pleased to see that seve ral rivers in the Logan River
drainage have been identified as eligible for desig nation. We appreciate the opportunity to
pro vide some co mments on this study. We are especially concerned about the eligible segment
of the Logan Ri ve r from Beaver Creek to Third Dam. We would like to discuss two issues: the
tentative classifica tion of this river segment, and the w ildlife a long this segment.
1. Classifica ti on of the Logan River from Beaver Creek to Third Da m
This segment has been given a preliminary classification of Recreational. We are curi ous
why it has received th is rating, as the stud y provides no reason whatsoever. We believe this
classification is not correc t for the upper stretch of th is segment. We recommend that this
segment be divided fo r the purpose of classification. The segment from Beaver Creek to just
below Lower Twin Bridge should be classified as Scenic, while the segment from just below
Lower Twin Bridge to Third Dam can be classified as Recreati onal.
The segmen t of the Logan from Beave r Creek to just below Lower Twin Bridge sa tisfies the
criteria for a Scenic river as outlined in the draft eligibility study, page E-14. The criteria for a
Scenic river are:
"'Free of impoundmen t. According to the draft eligibility study, there are no "full-scale"
impoundments in this segment (page V-57).
"'Largely primitive and und eveloped, with no substantial evidence of human activity.
Although highway 89 runs along the length of this segment, the ri ver and its banks are largely
primiti ve and undeveloped. The study notes that few obse rvers of the river would notice any
changes from a purely natural character (VS7). There is excellent riparian vegetation along much
of this segment screening the highway from the river and giving the river and its banks a
na tural appea rance. From the perspective of the river and its banks there is no substantial
evidence o f human activity.
*The presence of grazing, hay production or row crops is acceptable. The study does not identi fy
any concerns with grazing, hay production or row crops.
"'Evidence of past or ongoing timber harvest is acceptable, provided the forest appears natural
from the riverbank The study does not identify any concerns here.
�"Accessible in places by road . The river is accessible in places by road.
"Roads may occasiona lly reach or bridge the river; the existence of short stretches of
conspicuous or longer stre tches of inconspicuous road s or rail roa ds is acceptable. Highway 89
runs along the length of this segment, but for most of this distance the road is screened off from
the river by the ripa ria n vegetation. Logan Ri ver ripa rian vegeta tion is considered am ong the
"best preserved in the state" (U tah Department of Transportati on, FEIS, U.S. High way 89, 1993,
page 9-59). Along most of this segment the road is inconspicuous from the river and its banks.
People who fish, kaya k, picnic, and walk along the banks enjoy a na tural ri ver environment w ith
little or no intrusion o f highwa y sights and so und s.
This segment of the Logan satisfies the criteria for a Scenic river. It far exceeds the
stand ard s for a Recreationa l river, which allows low dams, river diversions, development, and
"substanti al evidence of human activity" (E-lS). This segment should therefore be classified as
Scenic. The segment from just below Lower Twin Bridge to Third Dam contains an
impoundm ent, the inunda ted area above Third Dam . Also, the highway is quite close to the
river, with little screening. This segment can be class ified as Recreationa L
We are pleased to note that, according to the d raft eligibility study, the Logan Ri ver from
Beaver Creek to Third Dam has five outstandingly rema rkable va lues, scene ry, the fishery,
ecology, geology and recrea tion. The study shows tha t this segment has more outstandingly
re ma rkable va lues than any other river in the forest. This provides an argument for a Scenic
classifica tion. The Logan fro m Beaver Creek to just below Lower Twin Bridge should be
classified as Scenic in ord er to better p rotect its fi ve outsta nd ingly remarkable values. A Scenic
classificati on woul d be an effective management too L It is not consistent with the construction
of dams and dive rsions, and with the development of the ri ver area for residential or
agricultural use. The re may be "no substanti al evidence of hum an activity." This man agement
prescripti on would help protect especially the scenery, fishery, and ecology of this river segment.
A classificati on of Recreational, on the other hand, might be interpreted as allowing
d evelop ment ha rmful to these values.
. Wildlife conce rns
As we sta ted in our letter of October 20, 1998, we believe tha t the comparison region used
in this study for eva lua ting wildlife is too la rge. It stretches north to include Yellowstone and the
Bighorn Moun tains, east to include the Colorado Rocky Mounta ins, and south to almost
Albuquerq ue. Rivers in the Wasa tch-Cache a re compa red to ri vers in Yellows tone National
Park, Grand Teton Na tiona l Pa rk, and Rocky Mountain Na tiona l Pa rk for di versi ty and
un iq ueness of species a nd hab itats. It's an unfa ir compa rison. The Wasatch-Ca ch e is not
managed for "big and showy" species such as bison, wolves, and grizzly bea rs. The Wild and
Scenic Rive r Review in the State of Utah, Process and Criteria for Interagency Use, 1996, states
"Compa rative regions should not be so large as to unreasonabl y limit outstandingly remarkable
rive rs to only those few that stand out as the very best in the nation." We believe the
comparison region fo r wild life in this stud y is inconsistent with this policy.
Furthermore, we are concerned that the discussions of w ildlife in the draft eligibility stud y
a re incomple te and possibly incorrect. The segment of the Logan from Beaver Creek to Third
Darn is about 20 miles long, yet the only wildlife species mentioned in the discussion of this
�segment is the western big-eared bat. This d iscussion seems incomplete. There is no men tion of
other important wi ldlife species known to occur in Logan Canyon, for example, the boreal owl,
flammulated owl, goshawk, and the three- toed woodpecker (Biological Assessment / Evaluation,
1995, Record of Decision, U.s, Highway 89, Logan Canyon, Wasa tch-Cache National Forest), The
wolverine has a medium probability of occurrence in Logan Canyon. These are all Forest Service
sensitive species. For these species, population and/or habitat viabili ty is of concern. By the
wildlife standard reported on page E9 of the study, these species should be included in the
discussion o f w ildlife in this segment. The stud y also does not mention moose and mule deer,
yet these species a re frequently seen along the Logan Ri ver. Elk are also sighted along the river.
For the upper tributaries of the Logan, including Beaver Creek, the study reports the
presence of moose, elk and deer. It also reports the presence of the flammulated owl. It reports
the presence of suitable habitat for the borea l owl, goshawk, wolverine and three-toed
wood pecker, but states that "none of these sensitive species are known to occur" along these
tributaries. However, the Wasatch-Cache in its ]995 Biological Assessment / Evaluation reports
the presence of these species in Logan Canyon.
We recommend tha t the discussions of wildlife in the Logan River drainage be rewritten
to be more complete. They should reflect information in the 1995 Biological
Assessment/ Evaluation. Also, the study should also adopt a more reasonable region of
com parison for w ildlife. We believe the segmen t of the Logan from Beaver Creek to Third Dam
is outstandingly remarkab le for wildlife based upon the presence of moose, mule deer, elk, and at
least fou r sensitive wildlife species including the western big-eared bat. The upper tributaries are
outstandingly remarkable for wild life based upon the presence of moose, mule deer, elk, and at
least four sensiti ve species including the flammulated owl.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Since rely,
Dan Miller, President
Logan Ca nyon Coalition
cc:
Gordon Steinhoff, Board Chair
Tom Scott, U.s. Forest Service
Drew Parkin, Consultant in Ri ver Resource Management, Planning and Policy
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Image Height
3329
Image Width
Image Width in pixels
2602
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/365">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/365</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Scanning resolution
Resolution in DPI
300
Colorspace
RGB or Grayscale, for example
Grayscale
Checksum
2445154653
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence/reports related to the Wild and Scenic River designation for the Logan River
Description
An account of the resource
Wild and scenic rivers act, reprints of articles printed in "Canyon Wind"
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Government agencies
Environmental policy
United States Highway 89
Logan River (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1996
1997
1998
1999
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1990-1999
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon/Logan Canyon Coalition Papers, 1963-1999, COLL MSS 314 Box 1 Folder 9
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63458">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv63458</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS314Bx1Fd9
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/c2655cf3f9b4674feb9edff3c00e94c0.pdf
4f27031cc2004e2a88dab133bddd15ca
PDF Text
Text
u.s.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
REGION EIGHT
555 Zang Street
P. O. Box 25246
Denver, Colorado 80225
December 18, 1979
eMr . Brian Beard, President
Sierra Club, Utah Chapter
93 East 1st South
Logan, Utah 84321
IN REP L Y REFER T O:
HED- 08
Dear M Beard :
r.
In your letters of November 20 and 21 , 1979, you requested copies of
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations for implementing
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) . Also , you requested
support documentation for determining that highway construction
activities proposed for Logan Canyon , Utah , w
ill have no significant
impacts.
Regarding the request for agency implementing regulations, we have
enclosed copies of DOT Order 5610 . 1C : Procedures for considering
Environmental Impacts , and the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for
Federal H ghway Administration 23 CFR 771 as contained i n the
i
October 15 , 1979 Federal Register .
For all NEPA- related activities and documents processed by FHWA after
November 30 , 1979, there must be compliance with the CEQ regulations
and DOT Order. Also , the proposed FHWA procedur~s should be used as
supplemental guidance .
Concerning the Logan Canyon construction activities , ~"e are enclosing
a December 10 , 1979 memorandum from Federal Highway Division Adminis trator Bohn to UDOT Director Hurley rescinding FHWA concurrence in the
preliminary Category III assignment to th i s project .
We believe the information provided addresses your concerns . If you
have any further questions , please feel free to contact Administrator
Bohn or our office .
Sincerely yours ,
r
-$di?/~d
Daniel Watt
Regional Federal H ghwway Administrator
i
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/162">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/162</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
2848903558
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
497059 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Keith Lautenbach to Brian Beard, December 18, 1979 (with signature)
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Keith Lautenbach (on behalf of Daniel Watt) to Brian Beard, (with Lautenbach's signature) in response to Beard's previous correspondence about the FHWA's compliance with NEPA and other agency regulations.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Lautenbach, Keith P.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Colorado. Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-12-18
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_9.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/dcdf2ec0c0be7aaf4c543c23d4062d42.pdf
fedd069da0646cbe5e5093ede8f28b18
PDF Text
Text
If
/
��
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/157">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/157</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
4032967712
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
269162 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Discussion with Dale Bosworth about Forest Plan and EIS, May 1, 1987
Description
An account of the resource
Discussion with Dale Bosworth about the consistency of the Forest Plan with the draft environmental impact statement.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-05-01
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Rich County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Utah Wilderness Association Records, 1980-2000, COLL MSS 200 Forest Service Series III Box 6
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS200_Forest Ser_Item_18.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/a12b0012f144e5a72d9e206851045ab4.pdf
672f6fad409f71743ace78bbbc89bbc9
PDF Text
Text
January 11, 1988
Mr. James Naegle
Utah Department of Transportation
4501 So. 2700 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
Dear Jim:
Thank you for your recent letter concerning my efforts in the
Logan Canyon DEIS study.
While I appreciate your comments, I find them inconsistent with
your actions. After spending the better part of two years attending meetings, reading documents, checking calculations, etc., I consider it an insult not to be provided with a copy of the preliminary
DEIS. It cost us (Sierra Club, Audubon Society, Utah Wilderness
Association) $20.00 to duplicate the Forest Service copy, which I
understand was made available to us only reluctantly and at the insistence of the Forest Service. So much for the good faith of UDOT.
I also wish to make some comments on the role of the 10 team
in this study. It was agreed early on that all technical memos
would be approved by the team. This has not been done. It was
my understanding the DEIS would be approved by the team. This is
clearly not to be done. Finally, it was also my understanding the
10 team would make recommendations concerning a preferred alternative. Again, this is clearly not to be done. I regard this as
a breach of faith by both UDOT and CH2M Hill.
The preliminary DEIS has several major problems:
I.The Spot Improvement Alternative must be considered as encompassing all 35 spot improvements. It is a violation of NEPA
requirements to present a shopping list, with UDOT selecting some
number of improvements from the list at a later date.
2.In view of this, there is no environmentally acceptable
alternative in the preliminary DElS except No Action.
3.NEPA requirements have not been met with respect to a range
of alternatives. The Spot Improvement alternative with all 35
projects at the level described is essentially the same as Alternative C.
Unless our alternative (now in the Appendix), or a reasonably
similar alternative, is included as a legitimate alternative, we
will oppose all alternatives except No Action, or request that the
DEIS be rejected as not meeting NEPA requirements. Legal action
with respect to this request may also be pursued.
I regret the culmination of two years of effort has resulted
in this situation. The environmental representatives on the 10.
team have repeatedly tried to convince UDOT and CH2M Hill that
�their concerns need serious attention. It is clear we have failed,
and the present situation must be regarded as adversary.
Sincerely,
jad;~~1 cL
cc:Dale Bosworth
Dave Baumgartner
Lynn Zollinger
Stan Nuffer
UWA
Rudy Lukez, Sierra Club
Steve Flirit, Audubon Society
I
Jack T. Spence
\/ 361 Blvd.
Logan, Ut 84321
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/149">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/149</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
4051767304
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
694873 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Dick Carter to Dale Bosworth, April 24, 1987
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dick Carter to Dale Bosworth about use of the forest plan in the proposed improvements on Logan Canyon.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Carter, Dick
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-04-24
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Rich County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Utah Wilderness Association Records, 1980-2000, COLL MSS 200 Forest Service Series III Box 6
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS200_Forest Ser_Item_19.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/42fdb10dbd203b43360306ea5ce6c384.pdf
210433ebebf259d35cf10b755f31b33c
PDF Text
Text
u.s.
..
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
REGION EIGHT
UTAH DIVISION
P.O. Box 11563
Salt Lake City, Utah 84147 .
Decembe r 12, 1979
•
IN REPLY REFER TO:
HBR-UT
Mr. Brian Beard, President
Utah Chapter Sierra Club
93 East First South
Logan, Utah 84321
Dear Mr. Beard:
Reference is made to your letter of November 21, 1979, regarding the
proposed construction activities in Logan Canyon, Utah.
In accordance with Federal laws, the methods and procedures followed in
the development of highway projects from initial conception to the point
of advertising for construction are contained in the State's approved
Action Plan. The purpose of this plan is to define how the State intends
to comply with various legislative requirements such as the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, the plan also outlines
how the State will coordinate with other government entities and the
public in developing plans for highway projects. For a clearer understanding of the process, a copy of the Action Plan may be obtained from
the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 Code of Federal
Regulations 500, et seq.), as provided in section 1506.12, were effective
July 30, 1979, for direct Federal projects; however, agencies administering programs under section 102(2)D of NEPA are allowed an additional
4 months for State agencies to adopt implementing procedures. Consequently, for the Federal-aid highway program, the effective date of the
CEQ regulations is November 30, 1979. .
As a result of the CEQ regulations, the UDOT's Action Plan is currently
being revised to incorporate the latest environmental changes. Although
the revisions are not completely documented in the Action Plan at this
time, all projects (including Logan Canyon) processed through the State
and this office after November 30, 1979, will be in full compliance with
the CEQ and all other appropriate environmental regulations. Since these
regulations have just gone into effect, it is considered somewhat premature to imply that the UDOT is not in compliance with the CEQ regulations
or is in apparent violation of public law. There has not been, nor will
there be, any violations on environmental regulations with respect to our
actions on this or any other project.
�2
After a recent meeting with the UDOT regarding the scope of the project
and in accordance with Federal Highway Administration policy, a review
of the project and category assignment was undertaken. The currently
proposed improvement is of the type normally considered a nonmajor action
(categorical exclusion). However, the continuing controversy regarding
this proposal has convinced us that it merits special consideration. We
have concluded that the project should not be processed as a nonmajor
action (categorical exclusion) and have withdrawn our concurrence in the
~ategory I I I assignment.
The UDOT has been informed of this action.
We trust this response has addressed your concerns regarding this project.
Should you have any further questions concerning the project or its
future development, we suggest you contact the Utah Department of Transportation.
Sincerely yours,
ftKL
W. Bohn
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/148">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/148</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
549439783
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1051380 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from George Bohn to Brian Beard, December 12, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from George Bohn to Brian Beard defining the action plan which must comply with various legislative requirements such as NEPA, and outline how the State will coordinate with other government entities and the public in developing plans for highway projects, and that the proposed construction activites in Logan Canyon were withdrawn from nonmajor action.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bohn, George W.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Government agencies
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Utah. Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-12-12
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_12.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/9d92669817f1913d3146ceaac3b45674.pdf
e3f491f784b589d87701f551b72f1e3b
PDF Text
Text
SIERRA CLUB
Utah Chapte r
I~formation Offic e r
" tan uepa r tment of Tr anspor:. E.:' io.
~ist r ict 1-0 . i Office
123 17t. 0 treet
6oen , tah 344 '4
-;) '::"icy 'c
"'~e Co nc':i on ~nviro: _, e:-', - f:.:" , 'J.o.:"ity .-es:,:,:"~· i:>:--l.3 ,"
3':ons of the ~'o.t"'=o ,:.c.- ~~';~:'J ...enta:" PO:'~ci .. ct. ~eC:. ' .3
~ection
15J7 .3
pe rt:
~ ~en~J ~~ocej~ re~
.ot ':'c.ter :::&';'l ei:;ht .0r:~ . 5 c. ·"ter ?Jb :':-: c.:'~on .J: ::.ese re~ 'J.:"E..".,io.'1~
E.3 "'L'1a ... y a 'opte ::-. :':-.-= ?e"':'e Ef:.:' :.e~:".3:.er, or :"':"-;-2 -:;.J!1~::s c. :"'-:e
::"i5h.. e:1t 0" en e.;encj' , ,.(:- ~c: ever sh~ - :. C.J:71e '::"e:'e~, ;;cc~ a~e .. cj s' all c.S "1-3CeS3erj f:.d.opt p r ocec.i'..:.!"-=...: :',J ;3'?~ :e'1e i t :.~e -e re,;" ~E:.:' :0:15.
(0)
.. e E. cove
.J':"
~3 ~entione
Sn t~e ~~~E.~ : &'P~ ~~ te ' ao~¥~ , ~::"QE..3e
t ,J': Transp0r+. ct,~0:-: ''':'5~S .: r :'''':1:'':'e::1en::.-_..; ~~~?,... .
~C:.rt,:1e.
.,':"::' :-:e'::"p in
n crs:c:.n" i::.:; ::-:i3 -:1c.l,ter
'.·;i:'~
e
... ...
<..
58._
~e re~ _L
.:.,. j ~ 2.i~:"):,.c. . . .
~:..~)re . . :_:ei •
t:-c
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/142">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/142</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
2451296569
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
447535 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to Information Officer, November 21, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to Information Officer requesting the regulations that the Utah Department of Transportation uses for implenting NEPA.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beard, Brian
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Vendell, Karen
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Sierra Club. Utah Chapter
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_16.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/44552cd269f8a7267cb339b84b514d9c.pdf
bebc492466ae4fa5a165fc56cb481ab2
PDF Text
Text
SIERRA CLUB
Utah Chapter
93 East 1st South
Logan, Utah 84321
November 21, 1979
(801) 753-D987
ARCHES NATL. PARK by Karen Vendell
!-m.
David W tt
__
Regional Adrniniatrator
Federal Highway Administrator
Region VIII
P.O. Box 25246
Denver, Color~jo 80225
RE: Proposed construction activities
Dear Mr.
in Logan Canyon, Utah.
\~att :
The utah Chapter Sierra Club is concerned about recent proposals for widening the
existing road in Logan Canyon, utah. The Sierra Club is particularly concerned abou·~
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
Please provide information on the following subjects:
1.
Finding of 1~O Significant Impact
The Utah Department of Transportation has determined that an Environmental Impact
Statement is not required for construction activities in Logan Canyon. ~ Please send
a copy of this "finding of no significant impact."
.
,
Environmental Assessment The decision to proceed without the preperation of an Environmental Impact Statement
was made befoee the preperation of an environmental assessment. Council on Environmental
uality NEPA compliance regulations state that the environmental assessment is to be
used as the foundation for determination of need or lack of need for an Environmental
Statement . How can the Ut&h Department of Transportation comply with NEPA if they have
decided an Environmental Statement is not necessary ~"lit >. out using the environmental
assessment in this decision?
2.
Due to the timely nature of this matter, a response i£ .requested within ten working
days .
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/129">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/129</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
584092401
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
561584 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to David Watt, November 21, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to David Watt asking for a copy of the "finding of no significant impact" and asking for information as to why UDOT decided to proceed without an Environmental Assessment as required by CEQ NEPA.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beard, Brian
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Vendell, Karen
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Sierra Club. Utah Chapter
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986,COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_17.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/4aead02edbd3e75ba1a5985a07af1dbc.pdf
4c56dbacfded7d11ebeadc6a0e47dc55
PDF Text
Text
u.s.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
IN REPLY REFER TO:
.1
have
I, rDvi r~0
~
·I ~as::;.
Wl
r>.~
I
pl j'c..t . .·
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/126">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/126</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
172972509
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
444698 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from K.P. Lautenbach to Brian Beard, December 18, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Keith P. Lautenbach to Brian Beard of the Sierra Club in response to Beard's previous correspondence about the FHWA's compliance with NEPA and other agency regulations.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Lautenbach, Keith P.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Colorado. Department of Transportation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-12-18
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIIIBox 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_5.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/3a5cb59e56a1e78a14029288825b5b61.pdf
4e9fb6f20a5fd371be6b2f92b0b70d98
PDF Text
Text
January 11, 1988
Mr. James Naegle
Utah Department of Transportation
4501 So. 2700 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
Dear Jim:
Thank you for your recent letter concerning my efforts in the
Logan Canyon DEIS study.
While I appreciate your comments, I find them inconsistent with
your actions. After spending the better part of two years attending meetings, reading documents, checking calculations, etc., I consider it an insult not to be provided with a copy of the preliminary
DEIS. It cost us (Sierra Club, Audubon Society, Utah Wilderness
Association) $20.00 to duplicate the Forest Service copy, which I
understand was made available to us only reluctantly and at the insistence of the Forest Service. So much for the good faith of UDOT.
I also wish to make some comments on the role of the 10 team
in this study. It was agreed early on that all technical memos
would be approved by the team. This has not been done. It was
my understanding the DEIS would be approved by the team. This is
clearly not to be done. Finally, it was also my understanding the
10 team would make recommendations concerning a preferred alternative. Again, this is clearly not to be done. I regard this as
a breach of faith by both UDOT and CH2M Hill.
The preliminary DEIS has several major problems:
I.The Spot Improvement Alternative must be considered as encompassing all 35 spot improvements. It is a violation of NEPA
requirements to present a shopping list, with UDOT selecting some
number of improvements from the list at a later date.
2.In view of this, there is no environmentally acceptable
alternative in the preliminary DElS except No Action.
3.NEPA requirements have not been met with respect to a range
of alternatives. The Spot Improvement alternative with all 35
projects at the level described is essentially the same as Alternative C.
Unless our alternative (now in the Appendix), or a reasonably
similar alternative, is included as a legitimate alternative, we
will oppose all alternatives except No Action, or request that the
DEIS be rejected as not meeting NEPA requirements. Legal action
with respect to this request may also be pursued.
I regret the culmination of two years of effort has resulted
in this situation. The environmental representatives on the 10.
team have repeatedly tried to convince UDOT and CH2M Hill that
�their concerns need serious attention. It is clear we have failed,
and the present situation must be regarded as adversary.
Sincerely,
jad;~~1 cL
cc:Dale Bosworth
Dave Baumgartner
Lynn Zollinger
Stan Nuffer
UWA
Rudy Lukez, Sierra Club
Steve Flirit, Audubon Society
I
Jack T. Spence
\/ 361 Blvd.
Logan, Ut 84321
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/115">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/115</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
3548137190
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
985181 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Jack Spence to James Naegle, January 11, 1988
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Jack Spence to James Naegle expressing his concerns about the role of the Interdisciplinary team, concerns about the Environmental Impact Statement, and concerns about his faith in UDOT and CH2M Hill.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Spence, Jack T.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Logan Canyon Environmental Study
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1988-01-11
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Rich County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Utah Wilderness Association Records, 1980-2000, COLL MSS 200 Forest Service Series III Box 6
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv75259</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS200_Forest Ser_Item_21.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/9c42ef44b6c177b95dbd1538e001debd.pdf
c9bb8b13fcab0b986ab316e8551c42d9
PDF Text
Text
SIERRA CLUB
Utah Chapter .
93 East 1st South
LOjan, Utah 84321
November 21 , 1979
(801) 753-0987
ARCHES NATL. PARK by Karen Vendell
George W. Bahn
Diy~sion Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
P. O. Box 11563
Salt Lake City, utah 84147
Proposed Construction Activities in Logan Canyon, Utah
HE :
Dear Mr. 13ohn:
The utah Chaptee Sierra Club is concerned about proposed construction in Logan
Canyon, Utah. Present plans call for widening of the existing highway. We are particularly concerned with compliance under the N
ational Environmental Policy Act.
As I understand the situation your office has decicied to change Logan Canyon from
a Category I (environmentally sensitive) designation to a Category III designation; the
Category III designation means that the area is not environmentally sensitive. This
decision allows the Utah Department of Transportation to proceed with construction without the preperation of an Environmental Statement.
Under Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for compliance with NEPA an
environmental as se 'sment is regularly prepared on all federal actions. This brief review of environmenc.a.l impacts is uSed to determine i f an Environmental Irrrt-act Statemen:'
is neen~d or not needed.
The Utah Department of Transportation has stated publicly
several times that they ~ill r~t need an Environmental Statement for construction activities. However , they do not plan to release the environmental ~ ssessment until Jhe
spring of .'1980. The Sierra Club is now investigating this apparent violation of public
law. Answers to the following items will help tis in obtaining a better understanding
of the pr.)ject.
1.
{hen did your office decide to change Logan Canyon from a Category I designation to a Category III designation? How was the public involved in this
decision making process?
When was this decision announced to the public?
�George
\~ .
Nove ~ ber
Bohn
21, 1979
Page two
2.
3.
lS
lnfornation on the Utah Depart~ent of Transportation Regulations f or
compliance with rWA ':vcu~d be appreciated; and
H O~I can the Utah Department of Transportation oo:nply vlith the C~ rezulat ions'
when they have decided an Environmental statement is not needed. even though
the environmental assessment has not been prepared?
Be.cause of the timely nature of this matter a response
reque sted.
Sincere
(-\/
~oJithin
•
"
· ~~i~
Brian .3eard
President
Utah Chapter Sierra Club
cc:
Craig Rayle
Jo Jo Jones
Brant Calkin
Anthony Ruckel
Esq.
ten working days
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/110">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/110</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
1585976578
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
993811 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to George Bohn, November 21, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to George Bohn requesting that any and all information regarding Utah Department of Transportation's compliance with NEPA be sent for review, espeicially as to why Logan Canyon was removed from a Category I and put in Category III for environmental sensitivity.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beard, Brian
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Vendell, Karen
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Sierra Club. Utah Chapter
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_18.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/5a1ca9887219168c1abf23cfb35353c4.pdf
b23f205700019fc5d4421366bc1e918b
PDF Text
Text
SIERRA CLUB
Utah Chapter
93 East 1st South
Logan, Utah g4321
Novemoer 21, 1979
(801) 753-iJ987
ARCHES NATL. PARK
by
Karen Vendell
Gary Lindley, Engineer
District No.1 Engineer's Office
Utah Department of Transportation
128 17th st_eet
Ogden, Utah 84404
HE:
Proposed construction activities in Logan Canyon.
Dear Mr. Lindley:
I have recently talked with Craig Rayle, and others concerning the proposed highway
construction activitae.s in Logan Canyon. The Sierra Cluo is concerned about actions ta _en
_
to date by the utah Department of Transportation in efforts to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act. The purpose of this letter is to obtain answers to quest i ons
we have about NEPA com
pliance decisions. A rep~ to the following it~ms is requested.
1.
re are an Environmental
act Statement
Section 1501.4 c of the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementting the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (hereafter called
C~ NEPA Regulations) reads, Federal agencies shall:
"
Based on the environmental assessment make its determination whether
to prepare an environmental impact statement."
As I understand the current situation your office has determined that an Environmental statement is not necessary for construction of the Logan Canyon HighW
ay. However,
this decision was made prior to preperation of the environmental assessment; the assessment is to be released in the Spring of 1980.
This reversal of decisions appears to
be contrary to the ~ NEPA regulations.
Has your office decided that an environmental
impact statement is not needed for construction of the Lo5 an Canyon Highway from Right
Hand Fork to Ricks Spring? Is the environmental assessment 10 be finalized in t he spring
of 1980?
�Mr. Lindley
ovember 21 , 1979
Page two
nificant
act
of the C~ NEPA Regulations reads Federal agencies shall:
2.
" Prepare a finding of no significant impact if the , agency determines
on the basis of the environmental assessme~t pot to prepare a statement.
It
(1) The agency shall make the finding of no significant impact available to the affect public as specified in Section 15.6.6"
The Utah Chapter Sierra
impact" as noted above.
3. Public
Section
C~ub
requests a copy of the "finding of no significant
act
federal agencies shall:
n .. In certain limited circumstances, whi~h the agency may cover in its
procedures ••• make the finding of no significant impact ~vailable for
public review for 30 days before the agency makes its final determination
whether to prepare an environmental impact statement and before the action
may begin. The circumstances are:
" (i) the proposed action is, or is closely similar to, one which normally
requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement under the
procedures adopted by the agency ••• "
Did your office allow for public review of the finding of no significant impact?
When Yias the finding of no significant i:rlpe.ct made? How was the finding of no significant impact made availab~e to the public?
4.
~egmentation of the NEPA Process
Section 1508.27 of the CEQ NEPA Regulat ions reads in part:
ff
Significance cannot be avoided by ter~ing an action temporary or by breaking
it down into small cOllponent Darts ." (Emphasis added.)
The distance frot. Logan C:ity-. - to Bear Lake is approximately 40 mile s • This 40
mile stretch of road includes several miles which have allready been widened. The maj ority of the canyon roaj 15 not wiiened . Your office now plans to widen a stretch
of highway approximately 6.5 miles long, from ight Hand Fork t~ ~icks Spring. Did your
finding of no significant impact include an evaluation of constrction planned from from
aight Hand Fork to Bear Lake, or just an evaluation of the mileage from ight Hand Fork
to Ricks Spring?
Additionally, we are concerned about Forest Service Campgrounds which are associated
with the highway proposal ; specifically food Camp Hollow and Rick Springs campgrounds.
Did the determination that an Environmental Statement was not necessary include the
environ~ental impacts associated with these two campgrounds?
�~r. Lindley
l ovember 21, 19 7 9
Page three
A~~ additional information you can provide which will he l p in understanding compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act will be appreciated.
3ecause of the timely nature of this matter, a response is requested within ten
worki.n6 days.
I look forward to hearing from your office.
cc:
Craig Rayle
Jo Jo
JO ~ le3
Brant Calkin
Anthony uckel
Esq .
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/107">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/107</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
3256351554
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1611146 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to Gary Lindley, November 21, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to Gary Lindley regarding the proposed construction activities in Logan Canyon. The Sierra Club is concerned about UDOT's compliance with NEPA and wants to have an Enviromental Assessment drawn up.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beard, Brian
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Government agencies
Environmental policy
Sierra Club. Utah Chapter
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Correspondence
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_14.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/95c76aee566a1526be638b3a5d6d9ddc.pdf
b8ec6eb75529d43b3121fa89004e367e
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON HIGHWAY:
DISTRICT
1 OFFICIALS:
GAR'( LINDLEY
DYKE LEFEVRE
LES ABBEY
THE,
UDOT
IMPORTANT NAMES ,
'. UDOT DIS'TRICT , # '1
128 17TH STREET
OGDEN, UT ,84404
PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM:
STAT~ OF,FICE BUILDING
SALT LAKE CITy,UT
,
'
GENE STURZNEGGER, LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
ALSO ADVISER TO DISTRICT 1 .
SHERMAN JENSEN, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SPECIAL STUDIES
ALSO CO-ORDINATOR FOR THE UTAH HIGHWAY ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL (SEE B~LOW)
J. Q. ADAIR, ROADWAY DESIGN
JIM BRADEN, COMMUNITY RELATIONS DIR~CTOR
LESTER JESTER, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
HOWARD LATHAM, PLANNING A~DPROGRAMMING
SHELDON 'MCCONKIEiPRE-CONSTRUCTION '
RICHARD ' RoBERTS, FISCAL PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING
, THE UTAH HIGHWAY ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL:
HARRY TULLIS, OGDEN,
STEVE LAWSON, OGDEN
DAVID LLOYD, SLC
JANET MINDEN, SLC
LARRELL MUIR, MURRAY
BERTRAM HARRISON, PROVO
JOHN BONNETT, AMI FORK
HAL CLYDE, SPRINGVLLLE
BATES~~ILSON, 'MOAB
FEDERAL HIGH\1AYADMINISTRATION: ' 127 S STATE, SLC
GEORGE BOHN '; DIVI S'lON ADMI 'NI S
'TRATOR
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/106">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/106</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
3530602949
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
493264 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Logan Canyon highway: Important names
Description
An account of the resource
List of district officals, UDOT managment team, Utah highway environmental council, and Federal Highway Administration.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
United States Highway 89
Government agencies
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Rich County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_3.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/dabd2f58d6ba5114ac75d658061a7dbc.pdf
b5c7b3ef5a9ef2049a68619ad604c681
PDF Text
Text
SIERRA CLUB
Utah Chapter
93 East 1st South
Logan, Utah 84321
November 21, 1979
(801) 753-1J987
ARCHES NATL. PARK by Karen Vendell
Vern Hamre
Regional Forester
Region IV
United States Forest Service
324-25th street
Ogden, utah 84401
HE: Road construction activities proposed for Logan Canyon.
Dear Mr. Hamre:
The Utah Chapter Sierra Club is concerned about recent events in the proposal to
widen and realign the Logan Canyon highway. The Sierra Club is interested in Forest
Service involvement in the project and would appreciate a reply to the following items:
Establishment of Lead
encies
Section 1501.5
d
of the Council _ Environ~ental Quality Regulations for
on
ing the Procedural Provision of the National Environmental Policy Act reads:
1.
ft
L~lement
Any Federal agency, or any state or local agency or private person
substantially affected by the absence of lead agency designation, may
make a written request to the potential lead agencies that a lead agency be designated."
The Sierra Club requests your office to designate a lead agency for construction
of the project. Is the Forest Service the lead agency or the Utah Department of Transportation;
2.
Project approval!aisapproval authority
Information on the Forest Service permit requirements for construction of the highway
is needed. Wbat kind of permits will your office issue for construction of the highway?
v/ill the public be involved in the decision to issue or deny the permit(s)?
Data on
how the public may be involved in the permit process is requested.
Will the issuance
of a permit require preperation of an Environmental Statement, or an Environmental Analysis
Report:
�Vern Hamre
November 21, 1979
Pa6e tiiO
3. EvalUQtion of the environmental issues
Section 1506.5 ( b) of the Council on Environmental ,. .:uality n.egula tions for Imp e:nenting the Procedural
Pro~isions
of the National Environmental Policy Act reads:
"
Environm3:1tJ.l Assessments. If an agency permits an applicant to prepare an environmental assessment, the agency, besides fulfilling the requirements of paragraphs (a) of this section, shall make its own evaluation
of the environmental issues and take responsibility for the scope and conten\:' of the environrnental Ci.ssessment. It
As I understand the present situation, the Utch Department of Transportantion has
decided that an Environmental Impact statement ~ill not be required for construction
activities in Logan Canyon; the decisio n to proceed without an Environ~ental State ~ent
included little if any p~blic involveMent; the Sierra Club is planning action to reverse
this decision.
W
hat is your office doing to evaluate the "enviroI1llental issues •••
and content of the environmental assessment'? The environmental assessment will be released by the Utah Department of Transp~ rt Ltion in the spring of 1980 ; we would l Lke to
e. couro 6 e your office to evaluate t~e environ.~ental issues at the earlie st date possible ,
ental assess~ent. The environmental ass and specifically before release of this environr.o
essment should include compliance with Executi~e Orders 11990 and _1988 , Protection of
'/io
etlands and Floodplain t-1anagement , respectively.
Any additional information which will help in understandin6 Forest Service involvement
be appreciated.
in this project will
Sierra Club
cc:
Craig Rayle
Jo Jo Jones
Brant Calkin
Anthony Ruckel
Esq.
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/95">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/95</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
2714828073
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1220410 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to Vern Hamre, November 21, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to Vern Hamre questioning who is the lead agency - UDOT or the Forest Service - in the road construction activities proposed for Logan Canyon. He also requests an evaluation of the environmental issues.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beard, Brian
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Vendell, Karen
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Sierra Club. Utah Chapter
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_19.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/d7b106d2885137dc0a64a7ed4d841987.pdf
95ea04e38299147e5e890a6588849f8a
PDF Text
Text
SIERRA CLUB
Utah Chapter
93 East 1st South
Logan, Utah 84321
November 21, 1979
( ~O l) 75 J-!J9~ 7
ARCHES NATL. PARK by Karen Vendell
M.J. Roberts
District Ranger
Logan Ranger District
21 West Center
Logan, Utah 84321
HE:
Proposed construction activities in Logan Canyon
Dear Mr. Roberts:
I he.ve recently ta.lked with Craig Rayle and others concerning the proposed road
construction activities in Logan Canyon. This area is environmentally sensitive,
and should receive the attention of public and private organizations before any decisions are made on construction of the highway.
The Sierra Club has expended considerable efforts on obtaining information on the
project; additional information is requested from your office. As I understand the
situation, the Utah Department of Transportation has decided that an Environmental Im• pact statement is Iwt necessary for construction of the highway from Right Hand Fork to
Ricks Spring. Furthermore I understand that the road alignment will be altered considerably in the Ricks Spring area, including placing the highway on the opposite side
of the River. Associated with this realignment will be the development of a Forest
Service campground and recreation facilities at Ricks Spring.
Additionally, I understand that the Forest Service is planning to construct a campgrouni L~ ~iood Camp Hollow. As you may recall the Sierra Club has urged the Forest Service to include Wood Camp Hollow in the Mount Naomi Roadless Area.
As I understand the
situation fill material from road construction in Logan Canyon will be used in the construction of the road base to the campground and construction of the campground itself.
The proposed construction of the highway will include the removal of large amounts
of rock and dirt. The disposal of this cut material is of concern to the Sierra Club.
Relative to the three paragraphs immediately above, answers to the following inquiries
is requested.
�M.J. Roberts
November 21, 1979
Page two
1.
rlicks Spring Campground Development
Does, the Forest Service plan to construct a campground and recreation facility at
nicks Spring in associaticn with the proposed highway construction? If 50, please provide information on the size of the campground and recreation facility. Information
on impacts on the riparian and floodplain resources is requested.
2.
Wood Camp Hollow Campground Development
Does the Forest Service plan to construct a campground in Woodcamp Hollow in association with the proposed highway construction? Will cntllaterial from the highway construction be used in the campground development? Information on the size of the campground is appreciated.
3.
Disposal of Fill Material
The Sierra Club would appreciate information on the disposal of cut material. Jpecifically, we would appreciate information on where the cut material is to be placed. Will
fill material be placed in Temple Fork, Logan River, -Wood -: Camp Hollow and/or "1tauled out
of the canyon!
4.
Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
How does your office plan to compl~ with the National Environmental Policy Act in
construction of the Wood Camp and Rick Springs facilities? If an Environmental Assessment
Report is to be prepared,please give the estimated date for preperation of said statements.
Due to the
tL~ely
natur3 of this matter, a reply is requested within ten working days.
I look forward to hearino frOM your office in the near future.
Sincere
~:
President
Utah Chapter Sierra Club
cc:
Craig aayle
JoJo Jones
Brant Calkin
Anthony rtuckel Esq.
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/92">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/92</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner.
Checksum
2829141562
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
2538847 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to M.J. Roberts, November 21, 1979
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Brian Beard to M.J. Roberts regarding the camp grounds that are proposed for construction parallel with the road construction and asking what is to be done regarding the disposal of fill material. Also asks how they intend to comply with NEPA and if an Environmental Assessment will be prepared.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Beard, Brian
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Vendell, Karen
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Government agencies
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Sierra Club. Utah Chapter
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1979-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 28 Folder 8
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Special Collections and Archives, phone (435) 797-2663.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd8_Page_2.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/9a63f9ddcadd9a924228c4b92154118e.pdf
e711cc54ec0dd456383f57dab4b7ede2
PDF Text
Text
REVISED
ROLE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM
LOGAN CANYON STUDY
The interdisciplinary team (1.0. Team) is made up of representatives from Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT),
the consultant (CH2M HILL) the United States Forest Service
(USFS), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and a
, representative(s) of the environmental community. A roster
of the proposed team members is attached.
The functions of the I.D. Team are:
1.
Provide Management Input
The I.D. Team will meet regularly to review areas
of study, responsibility for execution, schedules
of work, and public involvement.
2.
Provide Technical Input
Specialists from CH2M HILL with input from the
USFS will prepare technical memorandums covering
the required areas of work distributed at the
June 10 1.0. Team meeting.
t
~ ~~~
i'~
Review Technical Memoranda and Draft Environmental
Report
.
All members of the 1.0. Team will review draft
copies of technical memoranda and provide timely
written comments.
~~)\...
r
<:J
Level of Environmental Action Determination
The I .D. Team will provide a recommendation on the
appropriate class of envi 0
tal actio to be
made t q UDOT and the cooperating agencies.
t:-.""'lS ,"ti
The 10 Team will meet one to two times per month on the
average to accomplish the functions outlined above. Proposed
schedule for the next 3 months.
~
14
July 28
August 4
August 18
Sept. 8
Sept. 22
SLC74/08
3:00
3:00
7:00
3:00
3:00
7:00
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
District
District
District
District
District
District
Office
Office
Office
Office
Office
Office
�6-26-86
REVISED
LOGAN CANYON IMPROVEMENT STUDY
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN
PURPOSE OF PLAN
To inform the public and interested agencies about the study,
to obtain public input that can be incorporated into the
decision-making process, and to comply with the National
Environmental Protection Act and other regulations and policies calling for public involvement in Utah Department of
Transportation projects.
The following public involvement plan is based on four study
milestones. Public involvement will take place shortly
after the designated milestone in the study has occurred.
In addition to the program proposed upon reaching each study
milestone, the following activities will occur continuously
throughout the study.
o
Maintenance of a Mailing List - all individuals
and interest groups requesting mailings will be
included on this list (attached to this plan)
o
Local Study Liaison - Valley Engineers in Logan
will maintain copies of all informational material
on the study in its Logan office, and will answer
or refer questions to the appropriate person.
CH2M HILL will also perform this service in its
Salt Lake City office
o
Local repositories for study materials will be
arranged at the Logan Public Library, Utah State
University Library, Garden City municipal offices,
and Salt Lake City Public Library. All informational materials will also be available at Wasatch/
Cache National Forest offices in Ogden and at the
Utah Department of Transportation offices in Salt
Lake City
MILESTONE 1 - BEGINNING OF STUDY
Task 1, the analysis of transportation needs, is scheduled
to begin in early June 1986.
Objectives
o
To explain to the public what the study will entail
o
To explain why the study is necessary
1
�o
To explain that UDOT has an obligation to the
public to keep Highway 89 open, and therefore some
level of improvement is needed even to implement a
no-action alternative
Techniques
o
Press Release to be submitted to all media included
on mailing list - week of July 6
o
Project Introduction - a detailed written explanation of the history of this study, the reasons for
conducting this study, and the tasks to be conducted,
will be mailed to all groups/individuals included
on the mailing list - week of July 13
o
Written Summary of public involvement activities,
responses, and issues will be prepared upon completing this phase of the public involvement
program - week of July 28
MILESTONE 2 - COMPLETION OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ANALYSIS
The analysis and conclusions of this study should be close
to completion by July 31.
Objectives
o
To report the findings of the study regarding
safety problems, maintenance problems and design
factors that cause traffic flow problems now and
in the future, at specific sites in the canyon
o
To identify the need for actions, and the general
magnitude of the actions needed to provide certain
levels of service
Techniques
o
Press Release to be submitted to all media included
on mailing list - week of August 4
o
Summary Report of Findings/Fact Sheet will be mailed
to all groups/individuals on mailing list - week
of August 11
o
Town Meeting to discuss findings, answer questions
to be held in Logan - week of August 25
o
Meetings With Interest Groups as requested - following town meeting through September 12
2
�o
Written Summary of activities, response, and
issues will . be prepared upon completion of the
second phase of the public involvement program week of September 15
MILESTONE 3 - COMPLETION OF ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT
(Prior to environmental impact analysis) - This should occur
near the end of November.
Objectives
o
To explain the proposed project alternatives to
the public and relate them to an approximate level
of service. Each project alternative will consist
of action plans for a number of sites on the road
where problems have been identified, which together
will maintain or improve the road to a certain
level of service.
o
To identify specific concerns of individuals and
interest groups regarding the proposed alternatives
o
To obtain consensus among interested parties on
the issues to be analyzed in the environmental
analysis of the proposed project
Techniques
o
Press Release giving brief review of study findings to date, explaining proposed alternatives,
and reviewing the proposed scoping activities will
be submitted to all media on the mailing list week of November 24
o
Fact Sheet giving detailed explanation of each
alternative with graphic . illustration, explanation
of level of service provided by each, and general
advantages and disadvantages, will be sent to each
entry on mailing list - week of November 24
o
Meetings With Interest/Service Groups expressing
strong interest in the study will be held during
the first 3 weeks of December to discuss the alternatives and identify their concerns. A maximum of
four such meeting are planned, and as a result
some groups might be requested to meet together.
Groups that request such a meeting might include:
Sierra Club
Utah Wilderness Association
Bridgerland Audubon Society
3
�Rich-Cache Tourist Council
Cache County Chamber of Commerce
Bear River Association of Governments
Bear Lake Convention and Visitors Bureau
Cache Economic Development Council
(
December 1-19
o
Town Meeting will be held in Logan to summarize
alternatives, report on concerns voiced by groups/
individuals, receive testimony on other concerns.
Issues to be addressed in environmental analysis
will be summarized - week of January 5
o
Press Release reviewing scoping process activities
and is~ues to be studied in environmental analysis
will be submitted to all media included on mailing
list - week of January 19
o
Written Summary of all public involvement activities, response, and issues will be prepared after
the activities of this phase have been conducted week of January 26
MILESTONE 4 - COMPLETION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
Approximately May 29.
Objectives
o
To report findings of environmental analysis
o
To answer questions regarding conclusions drawn in
the document
o
To receive comments regarding the findings of the
document
Technigues
o
Videotape explaining the alternatives and discussing
the environmental tradeoffs will be developed prior
to Milestone 4 to be presented during this stage Months of February and March.
o
Summary Report reviewing findings of the draft
analysis will be mailed to all groups/individuals
included on mailing list - week of June 1, 1987
o
Press Release reporting findings of environmental
analysis and schedule for public input/hearings to
be submitted to all media listed in mailing list week of June 1, 1987
4
�o
Workshop Meeting to present videotape, discuss
environmental analysis findings, allow questions
and answers ' - Logan, week of June 15
o
Public Hearing to present videotape and Feceive
testimony on draft environmental analysis - Logan,
week of July 13, 1987; possible hearing in Ogden
or Salt Lake City, week of July 13, 1987. Written
testimony will be accepted for 30 days after last
hearing
o
Written Summary of all public involvement activities, response, and issues will be prepared after
the activities of Phase 4 have been conducted week of August 10
All aspects of the public involvement program will remain
flexible since it must be responsive to the conduct of the
project and the needs of the community. Public involvement
activities will be announced in all press releases.
SLC78/d.401
(
5
�LOGAN CANYON PROJECT
MAILING LIST
Group
Sierra Club
Phone
Contact
Jack Spence
Rudy Lukez
(801)750-1626
(801)863-3702 (W)
(801)753-5568 (H)
Utah Wilderness Association
Tom Lyon
(801)750-1603
Bridgerland Audubon Society
Steve Flint
Address
(801)752-9102 (H)
(801)750-2474 (W)
P.O. Box 3580
Logan, Utah 84321
Sun City Travellers
Rich-Cache Tourist Council
Dean Smith
Cache County Chamber of
Commerce
Paula Bell
(801)752-2161
Bear River Association of
Governments
Bruce King
(801) 752-7242
Bear Lake Regional
Commission
Al Harrison
(208)945-2333
Bear Lake Convention and
Visitors' Bureau
Jenny Archer
Cache Economic Development
Council
Bobbie Coray
(801)753-3631
Cache County Farm Bureau
Lynn Meikle
(801)563-3633
c/o Cache County
Chamber of Commerce
Greater Bear Lake Chamber
of Commerce
Bear River Resource,
Conservation, and
Development Coordinator
170 North Main
Logan, Utah 84321
Garden City, Utah
Kent Hortin
1305 Canyon Road
Smithfield, Utah
84335
USDA Service Center
1075~ North Main Street
Logan, Utah 84321
Raymond N. Malouf
Malouf Law Offices
150 East 200 North
Suite D
Logan, Utah 84321
Cache County Commissioners
J. Owen Yeates
Dean H. Parker
Jay A. Monson
Rich County Commissioners
Kenneth R. Brown
Blair Francis
Dee Johnson
Utah Travel Council
Barbara Fjelsted
Local Legislative
Delegation
Stephen Bodily
c/o The Sportsman
Logan, Utah 84321
(208)258-2844
L. Keith Gates
(801)752-7335 (H)
(801)752-7445 (W)
1
810 S. Main
Lewiston, Idaho
84320
665 N. 200 E.
Logan, Utah 84321
�LOGAN CANYON PROJECT
MAILING LIST (Continued)
Group
Phone
Contact
(801)752-4304
Evan L. Olsen
Address
2009 S. 3200 W.
Route 1
Young Ward, Utah
84339
Lyle Hilliard
(801)753-0043 (H)
(801)752-2610 (W)
175 E. First N.
Logan, Utah 84321
John Holmgren
(801)279-8679 (H)
(801)753-5229 (W)
4570 W. 5400 N.
Bear River City, Utah
84301
Utah State University
City of Logan
City of Smithfield
City of Hyrum
City of Providence
City of North Logan
City of Wellsville
City of Richmond
City of Hyde Park
(
City of Lewiston
City of River Heights
City of Nibley
City of Millville
City of Mindon
City of Newton
City of Clarkston
City of Paradise
City of Trenton
City of Amalga
City of Cornish
City of Randolph
City of Laketown
City of Garden City
City of Woodruff
2
�LOGAN CANYON PROJECT
MAILING LIST (Continued)
Group
Contact
Phone
Address
MEDIA
Logan Herald Journal
Tim Vitale
(801)752-2121
75 West 300 North
Logan, Utah 84321
Mel Baldwin
(307) 789-6560
P.O. Box B
Evanston, Wyoming
82930
(801)237-2045
P.O. Box 867
Salt Lake City, Utah
(801)237-2150
P.O. Box 1257
Salt Lake City, Utah
84110
KSL Television Channel 5
(801)237-2500
145 Social Hall Ave.
Salt Lake City, Utah
84111
KTVX Television Channel 4
(801)972-1776
1760 S. Fremont Dr.
Salt Lake City, Utah
84104
KUTV Television Channel 2
(801)973-3000
2185 S. 3600 W.
West Valley City, Utah
84120
Cache Citizen
Uinta (Evanston) County
Herald (bi-weekly:
Wednesday and Friday)
Salt Lake Tribune
Utah State University
Statesman
Salt Lake Deseret News
Joe Bauman
Ogden Standard-Examiner
KVNU Radio
KUEZ Radio
KUSU Radio
Lee Austin
SLC78/d.402
3
�LOGAN CANYON
TRAFFIC COUNTING AND FORECASTING
OBJECTIVE
1.
To determine the volume and type of traffic currently
using Highway 89 between Logan and Garden City.
2.
To develop an estimate of traffic volume in the year
2010.
DATA SOURCES
The primary source of traffic volume data is the permanent
counting station located west of Garden City. The information available from data gathered at this station includes:
~
Daily and hourly traffic totals for 1974 through
1985 (see attachment 1 for month of June 1985).
~
A ranking of the 100 highest traffic flow hours
for 1974 through 1985 (see attachment 2 for 1985).
~
Authomatic recorder data by months (see attachment 3 for 1985).
METHODOLOGY FOR COLLECTING ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC DATA
Three coverage stations have been established in the Canyon.
Traffic counts will be taken at these stations up to 4 days
during the course of this study. These stations are at
Right Hand Fork, Terry Grove Intersection and Beaver
Mountain Intersection.
The Federal Highway Administration,
Volume Counting Manual, recommends counts at coverage
stations be taken 2 to 4 days per year.
The primary
function of the coverage station counts will be vehicle
classification.
The data gathered at these coverage stations will be used to
establish the volume and classification of traffic at points
along the road and to supplement the data provided by the
permanent counting station. See attachments 3 and 4 for the
results of the February 22 counts at the Beaver Mountain
Junction.
METHODOLOGY FOR FORECASTING FUTURE TRAFFIC LOADS
There is apparently no universally accepted methodology for
forecasting future traffic volumes. When forecasts have
been required by other state or federal agencies (the Federal
Highway Administration for example) UDOT has provided the
forecast and a description of the methodology used.
The
1
�current methodology used within the State of Utah to forecast traffic volume is not totally applicable to a situation
like Logan Canyon.
This methodology assumes traffic into
and out of, a major employment center. The traffic between
Logan and Garden City is heavily influenced by the summer
recreational development on the south and west shores of
Bear Lake. The average daily traffic (ADT) recorded in 1985
by the permanent station was 1240. However the ADT for the
months June through September was 2374 and for the remainder
of the year 673 vehicles per day.
In preparing previous
forecasts for S-89, two methodologies have been used. One
methodology assumes full development of the proposed Bear
Lake recreational facilities by the end of the planning
period. The second methodology uses past trends to forecast
future changes in traffic volume. Both methodologies will
be briefly discussed below.
FULL DEVELOPMENT
The full development approach to forecasting the future
traffic volume assumes that all planned or proposed cabin
lots or condominium units in the Bear Lake area will be completed within the planning period.
Traffic is then expected
to increase in some proportion to the increase in cabins or
condominiums.
In 1981
surve'_ showed 1011 develq2ed _ca in
lots or condominlums units along the south and west shores
At that time there were 17,420 planned units. Using a full
development senario the estimated ADT for 1990 was 4489,
with 8360 vehicles per day forecast for the summer months.
PAST TRENDS
Using past trends as a means of forecasting future ADT provides a significantly lower estimate of traffic volume.
Using this ~ method, the trends
ears are used
to estimate future AmT. A recent UDOT study forecasting ADT \_
throu gh the C
.
amy ou-rn the year 2005 shqwed ~ tO , a 3 percent ~
~er vear increase. U$ing this metfiod, the estimated .2
~T ~
would be 2400. This is approximately double the volume today.
For this study, a past-trends approach appears to be most
realistic for preparing a forecast of the future traffic
volume.
The ADT will also be determined for the summer
months in addition to the annual.
The ratio between the
summer ADT and the annual ADT would then be used to forecast
the summer ADT at the end of the planning period.
SLC77/61
2
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/79">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/79</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000.
Checksum
2238679222
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
6790578 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Information about interdisciplinary team and Logan Canyon study
Description
An account of the resource
Information about interdisciplinary team including contact information and mailing lists and Logan Canyon study with traffic counting and forecasting, purpose of Logan Canyon improvement study and public involvement plan, and the revised role of intersiciplinary team.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Government agencies
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-06-26
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 3
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB27_Fd3_Page_1.pdf
Highway 89;