1
50
167
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/509f27206759d6edf1d7e77e23b54b41.mp3
34659bfa06a5d0b9d134ce7d3a5c4703
http://highway89.org/files/original/e566740ec0489f8f2fe614dca02881b6.pdf
2f1ecf5962716452b8083b8faff4bf9e
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Dennis D. Austin
Place of Interview: Quinney Library, Utah State University, Logan UT
Date of Interview: 18 February 2009
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Barbara Middleton
Barbara Middleton
Recording Equipment:
Radio Shack Tape Recorder, CTR-122
Transcription Equipment used:
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Susan Gross
Barbara Middleton; Dennis Austin; Randy Williams (8 March
2011)
Brief Description of Contents: Dennis Austin discusses his career in the Division of Wildlife
Resources and all the time in the field he spent and his role and opinions on various policies
involved; he also talks about his role in influencing and teaching land owners about conservation
easements.
Reference:
BM = Barbara Middleton (Interviewer; Interpretive Specialist, Environment &
Society Dept., USU College of Natural Resources)
DA = Dennis Austin
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcribed. As well, Mr. Austin edited/deleted some
words/portions of the interview for clarity. All additions to transcript are noted with brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 2: A]
BA:
[It is] Wednesday, February 18. We’re on the Utah State University campus in the
Quinney Library Conference Room [conducting an interview for the] Logan Canyon
Land Use Management Oral History Project. My name is Barbara Middleton and our
interview today is with Dennis Austin.
Dennis, would you please introduce yourself and give us a little bit of your background,
biographical information?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
1
�DA:
Dennis Duane Austin and I was born on May 4, 1947 in Salt Lake City. I grew up in Salt
Lake, came up to Utah State University in 1967 after spending two years at the
University of Utah in the business or mathematics. And on the lark came up here and
walked into the Dean’s office and said, “Who can I talk to?” And they sent me over to
Dr. [George B.] Colthrap. Ten minutes later I was signed up in the Watershed program.
BA:
And at that time who was the Dean of Natural Resources?
DA:
The Dean of Natural Resources I think was Thaddeus Box.
BA:
That was Thad?
DA:
I believe it was Thad.
BA:
And Dr. Colthrap was a professor in Watershed Sciences.
DA:
He was.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
I graduated with a Bachelors in [19]’70, a masters in ’72. I worked briefly for the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM). I had a career with the Division of Wildlife [Resources:
DWR] in Utah for about 30.5 years, with almost 22 of those years or so at Utah State
University in a research capacity; the last nine or so years, as a biologist for the Cache
Unit in Northern Utah.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
Retired about 2003, and since have continued to do many of the same things I was doing
professionally, but now do them as a volunteer.
BA:
Back to your BLM reference – where did you work with them and what was your
position?
DA:
Oh, it was just a summer internship up in Malta, Montana.
BA:
Doing what?
DA:
Range inventory.
BA:
And you mentioned the DWR – there’s a large part of that (22 years) where you are
associated with USU and research. Can you tell us how that worked with DWR and
USU?
DA:
That was an extremely unusual situation because it was a cooperative position in that the
university [Utah State University] provided the facilities: the room, the research
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
2
�opportunities; and the Division of Wildlife paid my salary and directed the research
issues.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
And my supervisors were first, Arthur V. Smith and then Phillip Urness and they were
also in very unusual appointments in that they were paid half-time university and halftime the Division of Wildlife (even though they worked full time here at the [Utah State]
University).
BA:
That was for 22 years, focusing on what areas?
DA:
Primarily big game/livestock relationships. This project began about, probably 1950 with
Art Smith. And then later on after, oh probably somewhere around 1980, I changed the
title of the project to “Wildlife Problems,” solving problems. We expanded our role from
just habitat and animal relationships to problem-solving. For example, depredation was a
very big part of my job for many years, in terms of research.
BA:
So it became part of something called “Wildlife Problems”? Has that evolved into
anything else?
DA:
The whole project ended about 1994 when DWR ran into financial difficulties.
BA:
I just wasn’t sure if there was another unit that had picked up that issue.
DA:
After the project was eliminated by the Director, research in Utah (from the wildlife
perspective) ended up on a consulting basis (like with BYU and the co-op unit here) and
there was no further research being done (that I’m aware of) by DWR employees. Maybe
on an in-house basis a little bit, but not much and not very technical.
BA:
So in that time that you were here, you obviously have spent time on the Cache National
Forest, as well as in Logan Canyon. But before we get real specific to Logan Canyon, can
you just give us an idea of the territory that you did cover? Let’s start with the largest and
then we’ll focus down on the smaller, local scale.
DA:
Well as a research biologist at the university we just went where the research needed to
be done. I had projects out in Uinta Basin, out near Dinosaur National Monument. I had
projects out in the west desert on the Sheeprock Mountains. I had the depredation studies
that went basically from Cache Valley and Rich County, clear down to Paragonah (in
southern Utah), catching part of the area down by Price. [We did projects in the high
Uintas] we put research sites all over the state. We had a really good mix. And my
research experience was very broad.
BA:
In terms of those areas, like the Uinta Basin, was there a specific focus for being there? A
specific wildlife or group of wildlife?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
3
�DA:
Yes! Each research project had its own goals and research questions. The first one dealt
with Pinion-Juniper habitat. The state and the Bureau of Land Management had been
doing rehabilitation work for Pinion-Juniper for decades – clear cutting and chaining.
And the question that we started with out there was, “Does it really help in terms of
habitat and wildlife?” And that was the first major project I worked on. And then it just
went from there.
So there were a lot of projects!
BA:
And just another detail on the west desert – what were you doing out there?
DA:
That study was looking at summer range because most of our big-game ranges – the
winter range is the controlling factor – whereas out on these desert ranges it’s the amount
of summer range. And so from a wildlife management perspective we were trying to
figure out carrying capacities, how it was limiting, deer diets and nutrition, and habitat
selection. [After three or four years], we came up with, I thought, some very good
conclusions.
BA:
Great. That’s helpful just to get an idea of how far ranging you were. Because what we
are going to focus on today is looking at the Cache National Forest, specifically some of
the work that you’ve done in Logan Canyon. Okay?
DA:
Okay.
BA:
So let’s move into that area. And again, 30 years you’re with this program, but the
program is taking you all over the state.
DA:
It has.
BA:
So what were some of the problems that you were approaching in Logan Canyon and
when you looked at wildlife? And again, I know its Logan Canyon and the forest and
some other entities.
DA:
Let me back up just a half a step.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
Because one of your questions asks, “What is the first thing you can remember?”
BA:
Yes.
DA:
“In Logan Canyon?” When I came up here in 1967 I took a social dance class and I met
my future wife. Probably the earliest memory I have of doing anything in Logan Canyon
was a ski trip with her. We cross-country skied from Franklin Basin and ended up at dark
at the Logan River and I carried her across the river!
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
4
�[Laughing]
BA:
Oh, that’s great! Was she a skier?
DA:
We were skiers. She was a skier and I was beginning – that was probably my first
memory.
BA:
And that’s cross-country skiing we’re talking about?
DA:
That was cross-country.
BA:
So, tell me about the gear you used on cross-country skiing in that –
DA:
Still have it.
BA:
Do you really?
DA:
Yes.
BA:
Wooden skis?
DA:
Yes, wooden skis. And this year the lamination’s finally started coming off and I had to
retire them – and that was just a month ago!
BA:
[Laughing] And that was 1967?
DA:
Yes, so basically 42 years on wooden skis.
BA:
That’s great.
DA:
Okay.
BA:
So that’s your first memory. And Ann – we’re talking about Ann Austin?
DA:
Ann Berghout at that time.
BA:
Would you spell that last name?
DA:
B-E-R-G-H-O-U-T.
BA:
Thank you. That helps our typist. Ann Berghout, who is now Ann Austin and is the
Assistant Provost?
DA:
Vice Provost.
BA:
Vice Provost at USU?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
5
�DA:
Vice Provost over Faculty Development and Diversity.
BA:
Thank you.
DA:
Okay, now. My research in Logan Canyon was minimal, but I did do a lot of data
collection, especially as a biologist.
BA:
Tell us about the data collection.
DA:
I always felt like our biologists were not collecting as much data as they could have, and
as much detailed data. So when I took over the biological position I did things that either
hadn’t been done in years, or I began new projects. One of them was snowshoe hares.
Nobody knows anything about snowshoe hares, basically, there’s very little data
collected on them. But I set up plots on snowshoe hares and began looking at track counts
and pellet group accumulations over winter and kept that data going until I retired and
then the Forest Service subsequently has picked that up and is using those plots. Those
are probably the longest term set of data that we have on snowshoe hare in the state, and
maybe the intermountain region.
BA:
Hmm.
DA:
And those data are available. I also started setting up wing barrels for forest grouse.
BA:
What is that?
DA:
In other words, when hunters harvest birds and come out – if you have a wing barrels set
up, you can request that they deposit their wings in the wing barrel. I started doing that to
try to keep track not only of populations, but to determine the ratio of ruffed to blue
grouse or dusty grouse.
BA:
So ratio of species.
DA:
I kept that up for ten years as well, and those data are available. As soon as I retired, that
ended! I also set up a series of over winter big-game transects which looked at browse
utilization by species and pellet group accumulations. And I not only did big game: deer,
elk and moose, but I also did rabbits, to get a really good idea of the relationship and the
number of animals on the range and the habitat utilization. I did that for ten years or so
and as soon as I retired they (DWR) didn’t do that anymore either!
BA:
That’s interesting – you comment on that – with the data collection is that there was not
enough being done. What was it like prior to your establishing some of these?
DA:
[With] the snowshoe hare, there was absolutely nothing being done. The forest grouse
probably amounted to checking a few hunters from our law enforcement people. Now, on
the other hand, there’s been a forest grouse check station at Blacksmith Fork for many,
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
6
�many years; and I continued to do that and I think that’s been more or less continued
since. That’s probably the longest set of data anywhere in the state (or maybe anywhere),
in terms of harvest to forest grouse from a check station standpoint. And those data are
available for many years.
Then I also restarted the deer check station in Logan Canyon. They’d run it back in the
1960s maybe, or the 1970s a little bit, and then because of one year where they [DWR]
had a couple of car accidents at the check station they quit doing it. And so in 1994 when
I took the position I re-upped with quite a bit of objection [with them] saying, “This isn’t
going to work, you’re going to run into accidents,” and that sort of thing. So I put out a
dozen good signs that slowed the traffic way down and we ran that check station every
year for ten years [without any problems or accidents.] I think that’s still being run. The
changes in the populations of deer being harvested are enormous and that data set is
clearly shows that, clearly shows that. Those data are also available.
BA:
Give us an example of what kind of changes you see, like in the deer harvest.
DA:
Well, I’m now recalling from memory, but some of the earlier data – and I worked at the
check station in the mid-80s (I think it was 1984). We would check 200 deer coming out
on the opening weekend. As I remember, there were data back in the 1960s when they
ran that station and they checked 400 deer on opening weekend, more or less. You’ve got
to go back because we had these severe winters that not only crippled our deer herd and
killed them, but they annihilated the winter range because of the extreme overuse. Then
because of the lack of livestock grazing the browse couldn’t get going. The competition
wasn’t favorable to browse production which sustains big-game winter. Anyway, we had
the die off in ’83-’84; we had the die off in ’91-’92. The ’91-’92 was the last really major
statewide die-off and we’ve never recovered from it. And so when I was a biologist – the
ten years that I ran it – we ran a check station there on opening weekend and instead of
200 deer we were checking somewhere between 60 and 90, somewhere in that range.
Then we’ve had more problems in Logan Canyon with the increased traffic, the speed of
the traffic, highway deaths/highway mortality. Now I think this last year they checked
somewhere – they’ve been checking somewhere between 30 and 40 deer the last few
years. I think they had 28 this year. The number just continues to go down.
All these longevity data sets are all available.
BA:
Now when you are at a deer check station as the biologist, what are you checking for? I
mean what are you looking at, specifically? Are you looking at fat? Teeth? Tongue?
DA:
[Laughing] Well years before, at most check stations all they (DWR) do is count the
number of deer.
BA:
Okay.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
7
�DA:
And that’s all they do: buck, doe but that’s about it. As a research biologist working out
on the desert – the Sheeprock Mountains or out in the Uinta Basin on Diamond Mountain
area – we did quite a bit more. When I started to do the Logan Canyon check station, I
started collecting considerably more data when the deer would come in. I look at the
number of antler tines, spread of the antlers, the age of the animal for sure.
BA:
From teeth?
DA:
From dental. We were collecting teeth for [inaudible] and then I developed a fat index
that is an index to physical condition of deer going into the winter (which is at the
zyphoid process) and then there were a couple of other measurements that I just can’t
bring to mind right quick. Anyway, the state adapted the method for at least a few years. I
know that throughout at least the northern region everybody was doing it the same way
and they were using seven pieces of data that we were collecting. For several years we
did it all the same, but I don’t know what’s being done now.
BA:
Now mule deer aren’t just in Utah; so when you look at your partners where the mule
deer population is, were they watching what you were doing in terms of the data
collection and starting to mimic that? Were you leading the edge here?
DA:
I don’t know. I know that I published that paper on fat depth at the zyphoid process, and I
know that it was used in Utah. I had a few inquiries from Colorado. I know it was used
with white-tail deer in either Minnesota or Wisconsin for awhile, but I don’t know
whether it was picked up and how permanently it was used. It’s kind of one of those
things that, you know, it’s good to know but what are you going to do with it? I was
trying to tie it into when to start over winter feeding? You know because of severe
winter, when do you start feeding deer in the winter? And that was my idea because if
you’ve got a deer herd that’s going into the winter in skinny condition you may want to
start a little earlier; your criteria may loosen up a little bit.
BA:
And these winter feeding stations . . . . can you give us idea of where some of these might
be or have been?
DA:
The Olympic year was 2002 and in 2002 during the Olympics, all the officers in the state
basically, were tied into the Olympics and so I was up here basically alone. If you
remember we had record snowfall that year.
BA:
Right.
DA:
We had 22 inches in the valley in one day, and more on the mountain and I was the only
one here. I was working – I don’t know, 100 hour weeks [laughing] trying to keep up
with all the difficulties and the problems. That was also the year that we fed deer in
various stations and it took a little bit of gearing up to get the state on board to do it,
because they had to authorize it. But that year we kept track of what was being fed and
we kept track of die-off rates. And that particular year feeding was very effective in
survival rates. I have those data.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
8
�BA:
And so you’re basically feeding at the mouth of the canyons in Cache Valley?
DA:
Mouth of the canyons. We had about 12 or 13 feeding locations that were authorized; we
had three over in Rich County. It really made a difference on those sites in terms of
survival.
BA:
And you’re feeding what? Alfalfa?
DA:
We fed primarily alfalfa and that’s been recommended for years because that’s what we
fed our tame deer. We fed them alfalfa a second and third crop ad libitum (meaning as
much as they wanted), and then we would feed a little bit of deer pellets or lamb growth
pellets which are basically the same thing. Deer pellet composition is just a little bit
different, but the land gore pellet worked great and it was commercially available. And
then we would use rolled barley for ice cream. That’s what we used to train them and to
tame them down because they would eat it out of your hand with the rolled barley. It was
just a favorite.
BA:
Interesting. Because I have seen feeding stations around the valley and I know there’s
one in North Logan at Green Canyon.
DA:
Correct.
BA:
Yeah.
DA:
Yes, and we still do that. We still feed them on occasion if the conditions are right and
the Division of Wildlife approves it, and then we have volunteers that are set up. And it
helps, it really helps. The earliest feeding that was done on the Cache was done in the
1940s, and I believe the researcher was Rasmussen.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
They fed in what used to be the deer pen facility, just south of Green Canyon, between
Logan and Green Canyon. There’s about 120 acres in there that was sold to Logan City
about 2004 for a cemetery and other things. That was the first feeding experiment that
I’m aware of anywhere in the west. They fed on the range out there – and they would
feed up to 1000 head of deer a year on this range. Then they kept track of their losses and
that was the very first feeding experiment, and obviously was successful.
BA:
And as an experiment – again, is the question we’re looking at – “how do we get a
healthier population during the winter?”
DA:
Yes.
BA:
Okay.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
9
�DA:
And feeding works. There is absolutely no question about the fact that feeding works.
Phil Urness did a summary of feeding that had been done in the west about 1995 – that’s
a published paper. Then I have the exact data from our feeding experiments in 2002.
Then Chris Peterson, a PhD (I think she’s finished with her PhD at USU now) has done –
that’s what her PhD was about: the effects of feeding on wildlife deer populations. The
effects on their habitats, and how well they’ll survive and reproduction, that sort of thing.
We pretty much know what it does and if you have a bad winter and you run out of
browse, feeding makes a big difference. If it’s just a normal winter, it’s not going to
really make much of a difference in terms of reproduction success.
BA:
How does it affect other wildlife? Is there any connection with available forage or
movement of animals?
DA:
Well, there’s always the competition with elk. Because elk are the competitors – they’ll
go out and out compete anything we have on the mountain. They’ll out-compete deer,
they’ll out-compete moose, they’ll out-compete pronghorn. The only thing they can’t outcompete, basically, is bison. And the reason is that with most of our wildlife species they
don’t herd up in large groups like elk do. But elk in the wintertime are more sociable,
they get in large groups, and then they get into an area and they camp. They just kind of
camp on an area and chew it up and then move on to the next area. Whereas for instance,
mule deer will walk in small groups of two or three or four, or even larger groups
sometimes, but they’ll walk through an area and take a bite of a shrub here, and a bite of
a shrub there and just kind of move through. Whereas an elk will get in their groups and
they’ll find, “Oh! I like this bush.” And they’ll eat it until it’s all gone. [Laughing] That’s
one of the major differences and that can create conflict between those species. Moose
tend to stay up higher, but moose tend to do the same thing, except they’re usually single;
moose will hunker down all winter in a very small area and just stay there all winter and
just eat whatever is there.
BA:
So, the other question I guess is there a down side to feeding?
DA:
Well you do have disease problems occasionally, but not very often; and you do have
habitat destruction in the vicinity of the feeding grounds.
BA:
What do you mean?
DA:
Because they just use everything. It’s just basically you over-utilize the shrubs and it
causes decadence and then usually mortality of the shrubs. But the deer pen property is
kind of interesting because it was purchased in 1937 for research. The reason they
purchased it is because the early guys out there noticed that this is one of the two major
areas on the Cache Valley bench where the big game (primarily mule deer) stayed in the
winter time, so that’s why the state purchased it. The other area was the Millville face.
That tends to dry off – not dry off – but the snow tends to melt on it sooner and you have
more open ground all winter and that’s why it was purchased; it was a very effective
winter range for many years.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
10
�It was used by research. Art Smith did the very first piece of research up there in 1947
and he compared areas grazed by livestock and areas ungrazed by livestock on deer
winter range. That was the first big game/livestock relationship study, I believe, ever
recorded. I think that was published in 1949. But it came directly from that area and then
I went back and re-did his data in the mid-[19]80s (I think that was published in [19]84).
I compared his data – same ground, same technique, but the change had been that
livestock grazing had ended decades ago. So the habitat had gone back to a situation
where the differences in plant communities between where his old fence line was were
almost gone. There were almost no differences after 30 years of utilization without
livestock – deer utilization in the winter; livestock utilization in the spring.
BA:
Interesting. So these two pieces of land: the Millville and Logan deer pens were
purchased by DWR, and that’s because you’re saying the face melts off so it’s an easier
place for the deer to herd up; better vegetation because of that?
DA:
Well, in the winter time it melts, leaving the ground open and allowing the deer to move
around. And it has a little bit warmer micro-climate, which makes a difference in the
winter time. The Millville face and the face up here between Green and Logan Canyons
(which is sometimes called “Saddle Mountain”)
[Stop and start recording]
[Tape 1 of 2: B]
BA:
This is [Barbara Middleton, I’m here with] Dennis Austin, we’re on Tape 1 and we’re on
side 2. And this is February 18, continuing our discussion.
DA:
If you go out on the Valley View Highway, toward the Wellsville Mountains and pull off
the road and look back during the winter on the Cache range, you can see Saddle
Mountain baring off of snow before any of the other mountain ranges in the area, except
for the Millville face. The Millville face tends to bare off at about the same rate. Very
interesting pictures.
BA:
So you have a weather condition there and you also have pre-existing patterns in the
wildlife that they’re already coming down to those areas probably for those very reasons.
DA:
That’s correct.
BA:
So no other downsides then to the feeding operations?
DA:
Costs. The costs almost never justify what you pick up in survival. The costs are just
enormous, even with free man-power it becomes extremely costly. If you have
organizations such as the Mule Deer Foundation or the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
that are supplying the money to run the feeding operation then it helps everyone. But the
costs are just prohibitive to do it.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
11
�BA:
So those might be some of your partners then, in that.
DA:
You have to have the partners in feeding.
BA:
Are there any other partners that would help– would the cities assist in any way?
DA:
Oh, sometimes; private organizations sometimes do, ranchers do. It’s pretty variable,
depending on what the interest is. You could just about have any group volunteer to help,
and they do.
BA:
Even like scouts?
DA:
Scouts have helped; Pheasants Forever have helped, Audubon I think has helped. So it’s
just a matter of who is interested and wants to put a little money into it.
BA:
Just so our listeners can understand the feeding operation, you are via truck delivering the
food to the sites on a daily basis? A weekly basis?
DA:
A daily basis.
BA:
A daily basis. So all those sites have to be accessible in any kind of weather?
DA:
Right. So you have to be able to go up on a vehicle. Now on a couple of occasions we
stock-piled materials away from the road. The guys went in there on snowmobiles and
daily took out a little bit out of the feed stock. But that was only one case. Generally
speaking, you have to have access.
BA:
So what time of day do you re-stock this?
DA:
Oh, it doesn’t matter – just when the volunteers have time.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
In the evening is usually the case, but some people did it in the morning.
BA:
It’s interesting to me because we have one of those in North Logan where there is food
being put in and I go up and see that it’s there, but I didn’t know what the parameters
were with it. But that’s fairly serious when you’re talking about the snowstorms, like
you’re mentioning in 2002 –
DA:
Yes.
BA:
-- significant snows like that and you have animals dependent on the food brought out.
DA:
That’s right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
12
�BA:
The dinner bell.
DA:
It was a very drastic situation because we had all the factors line up: we had massive
over-winter loss on the Cache National Forest that year. It was interesting, they got all
ready for the Olympics and the storm was supposed to come in and drop all this snow in
Salt Lake, but it didn’t make it to Salt Lake. It dropped it all in Cache Valley. And it was
such a heavy storm – there are some people that think there was cloud seeding that went
on for the Olympics, and that was one of the reasons that it was such a heavy storm. But
that’s never been verified.
BA:
And there’s a very distinct line where that snow –
DA:
That’s exactly right.
BA:
Yes, yes.
DA:
We really got hammered!
BA:
That’s very interesting. You know, it’s interesting too for me to look at the transition of
the research when you’re saying there were other things you could’ve collected for other
kinds of reasons. And that’s helpful, I think, for the listener to understand how that
transition happens. But you also mentioned then that as you leave and as either people
retire or as policies change, that some of those activities don’t continue. Could you talk a
little bit about that?
DA:
Yes, that’s pretty true. We have transitioned in natural resources. Logan Canyon is a
good example from the biologist in charge spending most of their time in the woods and
in the field, to spending most of their time in the office and on the computer. This is a
transition that has taken 30 years. When I retired, I was probably the only wildlife
biologist left in the state that spent at least half my time in the field. I was probably
spending 65-70% of my time in the field. I was shocked when my colleagues were saying
how little time they spent in the field anymore. An example was one of my colleagues
(and I won’t say who) we were talking about his work and he says, “Well, I do the same
job you do, but I’m only spending 10% of my time in the field anymore.” And that was
the figure he gave, 10%. I was dumbfounded because biologists just did not use to do
that. Because it takes so much time to deal with questions, and public, and telephones and
trying to keep up with the bookwork and the computers – I wouldn’t do it! And didn’t do
it.
But it’s a real transition. So when a biologist sets up transects and data collection means,
the new biologist probably doesn’t have the time to do it, plus the fact that the new guys
taking over do not have the background in knowing how to do some of these methods.
BA:
Why is that?
DA:
They just didn’t learn.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
13
�BA:
So the NR training has changed?
DA:
The NR training has changed and we don’t teach field methods very much. Summer
Camp did at USU. Summer Camp is gone. We just don’t teach field methods hardly at all
anymore. A good example is when Chris Peterson started her doctoral study and needed
to learn how to measure browse and vegetation in the field, I was the one that taught her.
Not the State Division of Wildlife because there’s nobody that knows how to do it.
BA:
And normally a student like that would have received that training somewhere in there.
DA:
You would think, but it’s not being taught hardly anymore – anywhere that I am aware
of. Because we don’t use it anymore. We don’t use it, we don’t go out and we don’t
collect browse transects, we don’t determine over-winter use. We probably don’t even
collect pellet group samples to determine density of deer on winter ranges. We don’t look
at the range conditions like we used to, and it’s because we just don’t have the expertise
or the time to do it as biologists.
BA:
So it’s an expertise and experience factor, but it’s also time and cost?
DA:
Time and cost. We have switched over from field work to data sets that we use instead.
And instead of having the biologist go out every year and look at his range, we have the
range trend crew which looks at the area every five years. So every five years we get a
piece of data that looks at long-term trends, but we have no idea what’s going on in those
intermediate years. Instead of going out in the field and looking at elk and trying to do
moose like I used to do and classify them, now we use helicopter counts and that’s what
we rely on. Helicopter counts are great: they give us some of the best data we can
possibly get. But that’s what we rely on because it’s quick, it’s easy. It’s very expensive
but it’s effective. So we use helicopter counts to count elk and moose. And that works
extremely well, it gives us good data sets, and then we don’t do anything else.
BA:
Well, exactly. When you talk about the deer in the previous station data that you
collected – you’re getting the number, but you’re not getting the quality.
DA:
Yes.
BA:
So you know, quantity, but not quality of a population.
DA:
Right. We use harvest numbers and modeling to determine our populations. But the
relationship of the number of animals and the range conditions is not looked at except
every five years. And then only during the summer – kind of a situation that only gives us
long-term trends. And the long-term trends are not good. That’s true for Logan Canyon.
We are losing our browse and our vegetation and our carrying capacity for deer a little bit
every year. In the 1950’s, Art Smith stated that curl-leaf mountain mahogany was
providing the (now I’m trying to remember exactly how he said it) – it was one of the top
three, if not the number one browse species in terms of winter diet for mule deer on the
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
14
�Cache unit. Now you’d have to find a very big mule deer to reach that vegetation because
it’s all been highlined.
BA:
Right.
DA:
And now the elk have used it up to the point that they can hardly reach it. The moose are
having a hard time too. So we have lost that vegetation, not because of over-use, but just
because of the maturity of the stands; because curl-leaf mahogany does not reproduce.
But the point is that we are gradually losing the carrying capacity of many of our big
game winter ranges. Logan Canyon is a good example where we have lost considerable
carrying capacity. You go up on the mountain and you look up there and you see junipers
all over the place – but there is nothing else. There is very little understory left under it
because it has all been utilized extremely heavily, then you get decadent plants that are
low in productivity, no reproduction and then you get mortality. And it’s hard to get it
back.
BA:
So you’re talking about major stand structural changes?
DA:
Major stand structural changes, yep. Also whenever we had fires on our winter ranges,
we end up with cheat grass. As you know from experience trying to plant, it takes a lot of
effort to re-plant browse and often we don’t get much success. I know of places where we
have replanted areas, oh five or six times, and still have almost nothing coming back. A
lot of it is because of the difficulty of south and west facing slopes that dry out quickly
and then the competition with the non-native weedy species.
BA:
So it sounds like a wave that is just getting stronger and larger and almost – I mean what
does it take to turn that wave? What does it take to make a major change?
DA:
Well, the best thing that we can do on most of these ranges is to re-incorporate livestock
grazing. Because it was livestock grazing that got us our good winter ranges. Then as we
developed we gradually removed livestock from our winter ranges and built houses or we
just – on the Forest Service grounds, some of the BLM ground – we just don’t graze it
anymore because of the difficulties of highway traffic in the bottom of the canyons. It just
doesn’t get grazed. Most of our foothill ranges are a climax community as a grassland. If
you go way back to when the pioneers came into the Salt Lake Valley and a few years
later up here in Cache Valley, our foothill ranges were grasslands and there were no deer
because they needed browse to sustain them in the winter time. It was the livestock
grazing that created the browse complement. Then as livestock were reduced (beginning
about 1935), we gradually lost our browse complement in many areas.
BA:
Why was the reduction in 1935?
DA:
The mud rock slides of the 1930s from overgrazing caused all of a sudden land managers
thinking to go to more of a conservative grazing strategy, especially for the Forest
Service. We had the mud rock slides and they did contour trenches on mountains (which
you can still see in places). So watershed became more important than livestock
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
15
�production and that’s when grazing numbers began to decline. They’ve continued to
decline even to today because of those kinds of concerns; erosion and over-utilization.
Riparian and adjacent habitats are extremely important also.
BA:
So at the mudslide point in 1935 –
DA:
In that era.
BA:
In that era, in that time period – you’re talking about the Wellsville concern? Would that
be one of the examples with the overgrazing on the Wellsvilles?
DA:
Well, I think it was really broad-spread. In that time period, every landowner that could,
had livestock. We were running cattle and sheep on these mountains to the point where
they were creating dust areas on the meadows in the summer. It was just extremely
overused. And it was not just Utah, it was the intermountain area, totally. If there was a
blade of grass, watch out! It was probably going to get eaten. [Laughing] But it did create
winter range for us.
That winter range gradually increased from, from when the pioneers first came here,
probably reached a peak right in the 1930s someplace in terms of development. But our
deer population hadn’t caught up with it yet. So our deer population probably maxed out
in the 1940s. It took a few years to catch up with all that vegetation productivity. Of
course we had some bad winters in there too, which kind of reduced those herds and kept
them down. Then once the deer population got really heavy, then they started overutilizing that winter range forage base which caused it to reduce gradually. Not only from
lack of reduction in livestock use, but from over-utilization by deer. So those two factors.
BA:
Okay.
[Stop and start recording]
BA:
Alright, we’ve turned the tape back on again. And I’d like Dennis to mention – he
mentioned early on that he was born and raised in Salt Lake – but was there any
connection with any family land use traditions that you can think of?
DA:
Not directly, but indirectly, yes. My father came back from the war. He and his brother
found a stream up near Coalville. It was the south fork of Chalk Creek. At seven years
old I began fishing in that stream on private property. I’ve continued to fish that every
year, with the land owner’s permission since (and got to know them very well). In about
1995, I first started talking to the family about putting their land into a conservation
easement. Last year they put half of it in – about 2500 acres – and this year they’re
planning to put the rest of it in.
BA:
That must be gratifying!
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
16
�DA:
That was kind of my long-term connection with them. They thanked me for it. They said,
“You are the first one that ever suggested this.” So that’s a connection. Then about 1993 I
sat my family down because we’ve been saving money for about ten years, we had an old
van and we needed to replace it and we also found a piece of land up in Wyoming that
was for sale that I really liked. So I sat the family down and asked them, “We’ve got
$8,000 in the bank, how should we spend it?” And the kids said, “That’s not a question!”
[Laughing] We bought 40 acres up in Wyoming!
BA:
Great!
DA:
I’ve written about that. That became a family connection that has done our family
tremendous good.
BA:
And whereabouts is that?
DA:
Oh, that’s just inside the Wyoming line on your way to Jackson on the little stream called
Cold Creek.
BA:
And when you mention that you’ve written about that, where -- ?
DA:
Oh, that’s in my Herald Journal writings.
BA:
Okay. It’s interesting because you open that up with direct and indirect connection with
family, but your father got you started fishing. You must be very proud of what that grew
into as far as working with the family.
DA:
Oh yes. My daughters are better fly fisherman than I’ll ever be – they’re better than my
sons! [Laughing]
BA:
You’ve returned to that stream with them?
DA:
Oh yeah. Every year for – I was seven – so it is 54 years. And good relationships – I see
the land owner almost every year. Of course, the original landowner has passed on and
now we’re looking at his sons (which are also very old now). But it looks like they’re
going to get it all into an easement.
BA:
That’s great.
DA:
So, nice piece of protection.
BA:
So it’s not only your immediate family, it’s also families that you connect with – in this
case, through a landscape connection with the creek.
DA:
Sure, oh sure.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
17
�BA:
Can you just explain for our listeners that are not in natural resources what a conservation
easement is? What it means to that family and what it means to the landscape there.
DA:
Sure. Conservation easements started about 1994 in Utah (there might have been a few
before that, but not many). What it is a landowner has a bunch of land, usually
contiguous (like maybe anywhere from 40 acres, to 10,000 acres). Then this individual
decides that instead of having this land available for development (which basically all our
private land will become), they decided to retain this land as an agricultural base. So they
contract with an agency or an organization, such as Utah Open Lands, or Nature
Conservancy, or Utah Forestry and Fire Control, or Division of Wildlife and they set up a
conservation easement so that the buyer of the easement buys the development rights of
the land. Once the development rights are bought, that land can no longer be developed.
But the landowner has the complete control as to what he wants to develop on it; so if he
wants to eventually put cabins on it (five cabins, two cabins, one cabin, no cabins), roads
– the landowner says what will happen to this land down in the future and puts those
restrictions on it. Then the conservation agency buys the rest of the development rights.
The landowner receives the money for those development rights (usually at about 75% of
the appraised value of those developments) and then it becomes a permanent piece of
agricultural or range land that preserves our environment and our agricultural base. For
many landowners they don’t want to see it developed. Some of them want to see it
developed a little bit for their kids and maybe their grandkids, but they want the
agricultural base to retain it’s integrity. That’s the reason that we started developing these
easements and now they’re becoming very popular. Evan Olsen did the very first one
here in Cache Valley, from an agricultural standpoint. There was one before that, but it
wasn’t for agriculture it was just for land preservation.
BA:
And with this family, they were obviously interested in protecting that landscape in
perpetuity –
DA:
Correct.
BA:
-- so the parents at that time, and then the children, were in agreement?
DA:
The parents had passed away before they began to talk about this easement. But the two
brothers and three sisters (I believe that’s correct), they decided they wanted to keep it in
a family agricultural ranch where they could raise livestock. It takes about 5,000 acres of
rangeland, with some irrigated cropland for hay and so forth, to be able to make a living
on the land; about 5,000 acres is what it takes. A family can make a living on that land,
and once it’s sold into an easement, it will retain that ability into perpetuity.
BA:
Now, have you worked on other conservation easements?
DA:
I haven’t worked directly on very many, but I’ve sure encouraged a lot of land owners to
do it. When I ran for the legislature (and that was 2002, I believe, or 2003), there was
almost nobody signed up to put their lands in conservation. Because they didn’t
understand it. They were in control of whatever they wanted and that was one of the
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
18
�tenants of what I ran on. By the time I got done (even though I lost by a landslide), we
had 40 or 50 people that were interested in putting their lands into conservation
easements. And that has continued. We have more people applying for it than there is
money available.
BA:
Right.
DA:
To buy them.
BA:
Right, interesting. That, again, must be very exciting from a wildlife biologist
perspective, to see those parcels.
DA:
Oh yes, being protected.
BA:
Right.
DA:
You know when John White did his in the south end of the valley – that was the first
really big one that was being done. There’s one being done over in Bear Lake valley –
probably I shouldn’t give names.
BA:
That’s fine.
DA:
I think it’s 2,000 acres, and that’s been encouraged. Then there’s a bigger landowner over
there that owns about 7,000 acres that I just talked to a few weeks ago. He said, “Well,
I’m thinking pretty seriously about it now, but I want to see what this one does.” Then
there’s one over on the east side of Bear Lake that is in an extremely highly wildlife
productive area that the family has been working on for several years – I have written
letters for. That looks like that’s finally going to go. That’s extremely expensive because
it has shoreline associated with it.
BA:
Oh, sure.
DA:
So we’re getting a few. If we had more money from the state or other agencies, we’d
probably have a lot more of them.
BA:
But it could be a partnership between the state, and you also mentioned TNC (The Nature
Conservancy).
DA:
It’s really variable as to who holds the conservation easement, who buys it.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
Whoever has the money to buy it will buy, and then they hold it. And I’ve never seen one
reversed. The landowner can sell it, but the conservation easement stays on the deed
perpetually. I have never seen one reversed. It would take an enormous amount of money
to get one to reverse. I’ve seen them changed – where they’ve set up an easement on a
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
19
�parcel of land and then decided that they wanted to expand it. So they re-write the
easement; eliminate the first one and re-write the second one.
BA:
So expand it to include more land?
DA:
To include more land.
BA:
So like an addendum to the original?
DA:
Correct. But that’s the only case I’ve seen it changed. And I’ve never seen one reversed.
BA:
Interesting. And then just one last question on conservation easements with Utah – where
are we in terms of the national perspective on easements? Do you know?
DA:
I guess I’m really not sure where we’re at on the national basis. We’re probably about as
far along as other places. I know back east they’re concerned about agricultural
production in certain areas has become so critical that they are now – cities and towns are
going out and buying conservation easements just to maintain agricultural base near
cities. Because the development has become so broad; so widespread. Where are we at in
Utah? I think we’re doing pretty good in this state. I’ve always thought – and what I
proposed was – for every acre of land that is developed, we should put an acre of land
into an easement for range or especially agricultural production. But that hasn’t happened
yet. You know, we’re losing about 500 acres in Cache Valley a year, and we’re almost
getting that much in conservation easements now. So we’re getting closer.
BA:
So you’d like to see a 1:1 ratio?
DA:
Yes, I would.
BA:
Thank you. That’s a little bit of a diversion, but –
DA:
It was.
BA:
Very interesting in terms of what’s happening in Cache Valley. Especially something that
was a connection for you early on and how that has translated into policy, and especially
long-term policy. So thank you for answering all of my questions on that.
DA:
[Laughing] You’re asking a lot more than I ever expected. I thought I would be out of
here in ten minutes!
[Stop and start recording]
[Tape 2 of 2: A]
BA:
This is Barbara Middleton, I am here with Dennis Austin. We are on Tape 2, side 1, and
this is our February 18, 2009 interview.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
20
�What I’d like to move into now is a look at policies that have impacted some of the areas
of Dennis’ work. One of the things I’ve asked him to explain is a little bit about state’s
authority. And then also the idea of what would be some of the policies that would be
very helpful in terms of wildlife in Logan Canyon. But let’s start with state’s authority.
DA:
Well, this is a complicated issue because the way that the United States is set up, the rules
and regulations of land and wildlife management may not have been the best way.
Because the states were given the authority to manage the wildlife, and that’s their
perusal; but the land management agencies manage the land. Sometimes, the two are not
exactly compatible because of the people use factor. From a wildlife perspective, if you
manage land particularly for wildlife you generally eliminate people use.
A good example of this is on our wildlife management areas; in about 1996 I initiated a
program where these wildlife management areas were on big game winter range (such as
the Millville face, such as the Richmond wildlife management area, and then the one over
in Rich county). We began to exclude people use totally from December 1 through April
31 to maximize the use and availability of those lands for wildlife, because that’s what
they were purchased for. If you could eliminate all people use (at least at critical times)
on the Forest Service and the BLM, you would maximize your opportunity for wildlife.
But you can’t do that because you’ve got the people factor in there and you have to
provide for recreation. So it becomes a balancing act for the Forest Service to try to
manage their lands so that they are providing for people but also for wildlife resources.
One of the examples that we dealt with in terms of developing land planning and policy
was with the Forest Service about eight or nine years ago when they were in one of their
planning regimes. The snowmobilers in the winter wanted to open up the Temple Fork
and Spawn Creek area – totally open up to snowmobiling. Well, from our aerial surveys
of (we’ll talk about elk, but also moose to a lesser degree) we found that that’s where a
very large herd of elk stayed all winter. They stayed in that Temple Fork and we knew
that they would be moved out by snowmobile use. I’d been going up there on my skis in
the Spawn Creek area since at least the mid-1970s. I skied up there every year and the elk
would use the creek as a travel lane when the snow got deep. They would sit up there in
those curl-leaf mahogany stands. I think we convinced the Forest Service to leave at least
part of that area excluded from snowmobile use, to maintain some wildlife habitat that we
knew was heavily critical to our elk up in that area. So, that was one example where we
came together and I felt like the agencies worked together pretty good.
BA:
Are there any other examples in Logan Canyon that you can think of?
DA:
That’s the only one that really came to fruition that really seemed to work for everyone. I
think that the snowmobiling group kind of got on it and said, “Yeah, we can back off a
little bit here.” Now the use has increased so much from the skiers and the snowshoers,
I’m not sure that it’s that effective anymore. Because when I used to go up there, I’d go
up there on my skis and I did my curl-leaf mountain mahogany study up Spawn Creek
and it went for a full year. I’d go up and collect samples of the trees for nutritional
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
21
�analysis on a bi-weekly basis. I’d go up there and ski up one day and then I’d come back
two weeks later and I would ski over my same tracks. There was nobody else up there –
nobody! There were no snowmobiles – they were almost non-existent – and no other
skiers because I was the only one. I would do that all winter and once in a while I’d cut
another ski track, but it was really unusual. Usually I’d ski up there all winter and I would
be the only track up there!
[Laughing]
BA:
Wow!
DA:
But it was kind of fun.
BA:
You’re still going up there now?
DA:
I still do.
BA:
So the changes you’re seeing are what?
DA:
Vegetatively, not much. You know, the Forest Service has done an excellent job in
putting the new road up there and rehabilitating the old road along the stream.
Vegetatively we haven’t seen many changes. In terms of animal use, there’s a little bit. I
think the elk are pretty much moved out of there now for a large part of the winter, where
they used to stay up there the whole winter. I know because I used to see them. The
moose are still up there in the curl leaf mahogany forest type, and their numbers are
probably comparable to what they were before. The birds are still there. The forest in the
winter time situation hasn’t changed probably hardly at all. Still a few bobcats; still cut a
cougar track once in a while. A few years ago I cut a wolf track for the first time. I know
it was a wolf because I followed it for a long way, so we know they’re coming in too. But
the wolf is probably the newcomer, coming back of course. Most of the vegetation really
hasn’t changed. The fishery hasn’t changed very much; it does have heavier pressure, but
most guys can’t catch fish anyway!
BA:
Well, now there were severe road changes up there, or significant road changes.
DA:
Oh yes.
BA:
There was that high road that was put up and around.
DA:
Yes, and that was an excellent move. Except the only bad thing about it is that it changed
my breeding bird survey route.
BA:
Oh! [Laughing]
DA:
I had to realign my stops on my BBS routes, but other than that it was great. And I can
handle that.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
22
�BA:
I never saw the area before the road went in because I haven’t been here that long, but I’d
seen previous pictures and it looked like it was a great addition to –
DA:
They did a great job on that. That was a fantastic, very excellent job. And it did a lot of
good; the planning has done a very good job. So, kudos to the Forest Service on that one.
BA:
That’s great. You know, it’s interesting to talk about policy because one of the things that
I think about is policies that are directly the front door of the agency, like NEPA, you
know in terms of the public involvement process and a direct impact on the agency. But
then there are also policies that are very external to resource management that begin to
affect your work or people’s access, or quantity of use, or change of use. When I think of
policies like within the industry of snowmobiling or cross-country skiing and technical –
maybe they’re not policy changes, they’re technical changes. But they begin to affect
policy on the landscape as far as what – like the Yellowstone condition. If the
manufacturers make changes in snowmobiles then will Yellowstone take a different look
at their snowmobile policy? Because of an air quality or noise reduction, or whatever.
So can you think of policies that would be external that have maybe had some impacts on
your work? Or some of your research? Or just some of the changes you may have seen.
[Stop and start recording]
DA:
Okay, the BLM for instance, they graze most of the ranges all summer long on season
long grazing on sage grouse ranges and sage grouse is kind of a sensitive species. One of
the areas over there [Rich County] had a good lek on it, it was called the Otter Creek Lek.
We researched that over a couple of years to find out where those birds were going. Sure
enough they were all on BLM grounds, and it was being grazed on a season long basis. I
recommended to the Bureau of Land Management to build one fence line in addition to
the ones they had there because most of the birds were nesting in this one area. Because
of the cattle grazing in there, their nesting success was not very good. There was more
open ground, there was more predator potential (especially from eagles and raptors and
that sort of thing). So our reproductive rate was pretty shallow. I asked them if they could
just fence that off during the months of June through mid-July until the chicks were big
enough to be able to kind of survive on their own a little bit. That would have increased
our reproductive capacity. Then they could go and still graze it at the same level and not
change their animal months of livestock use in there. Well, they weren’t able to do it. If
they would have been able to change that policy I am still convinced that it would help
that sage grouse population in that area immensely.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
That’s an example maybe of a policy that could be changed without affecting the land
owner or the grazer, but would have positive effects on wildlife.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
23
�BA:
That’s great, no that’s a great example. Anything else that you can think of? Well I’m
sure in your time period of 30 years there were so many policies that you have run across
your desk.
DA:
Out in the deserts on the summer ranges, the cattle stay there year long. The question that
we started out with there was – and it applies to summer ranges on the Cache and other
places too – the question is, “Can livestock grazing on summer range affect big game?”
The general answer is, no, they don’t. Except when the grazing becomes so significant
that they begin to remove the browse complement of the vegetation on the summer
ranges. When the grazing gets to that point, then they’re affecting mule deer because
they’re pushing them to alternative areas, and they are affected. But until you get to that
extreme type of grazing, you are not affecting them on summer range. So what we said to
the Forest Service on that, and the BLM, was that, you know it’s fine to graze these
livestock to that point, but once they reach that point of extreme overgrazing on these
summer ranges then you need to pull them off. Because that’s when the deer put on their
fat for the wintertime, so they need the berries [and fall vegetation].
BA:
Okay.
DA:
But until they reach that point, you’re okay. So if you end your livestock grazing at the
first [of] September for at least half the area then you’re probably really well off, because
the deer will find those areas that aren’t being grazed. But there is a competition
potential, say from the last week in August through most of the month of September.
That’s the only time that it’s there.
BA:
So it’s a timing – you could remove them during that –
DA:
It is.
BA:
Remove the cow during that time. Is it also a lack of other vegetation available that
would push them into the browse?
DA:
Yes, it is. They’ve eaten everything else up.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
Now they’re all of a sudden eating the stuff they don’t particularly care to eat, but they’re
hungry so they’re eating it. Now wildlife do not need all the area. You’ve got a 5,000
acre range, you could put 2,500 or 2,000 acres for the wildlife and they migrate in there.
And they do. And then they would have that for them. That’s kind of a rest-rotation
grazing system that works. It really works for wildlife.
BA:
Great. I’m going to do a little change here with a question – you have two books that are
sitting here that I’d like to find out a little bit more about.
DA:
I’m not sure I want to talk about them.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
24
�BA:
Okay! [Laughing]
DA:
Because they’re not published.
BA:
Well then let me go back to in terms of some of your influences in your interest in
wildlife management and especially in the big game, but also in just conservation in
natural resources in general. Do you have any significant books that you can remember
that were fairly pivotal for you? And in the same light, when I think of – you’ve
mentioned some people – but were there significant people along the way? Your dad took
you fishing and that was an interesting connection for you, especially with that
conservation easement part. But books or people?
DA:
Well, I’ve said for years – this gives me a chance to vent one of my frustrations that I
believe that USU (and every other college of natural resources anywhere) is remiss in not
offering a course in classic readings in natural resources. We do not do that here. I don’t
think we’ve ever done it here, and it really should be done.
BA:
And what would you include?
DA:
Well first I would go out and survey as many professors and as many universities as I
could and just ask them, “What would you want your students to read as far as the
background of natural resources?” So you would want to read Leopold, you would want
to read The Monkey Wrench Gang group, Desert Solitaire, you’d want to read Stegner;
you’d want to read probably some stuff I tell you Roosevelt, Gifford Pinchot, a number
of authors, certainly Silent Spring (Rachel Carson). Maybe a dozen or so books that you
would want to have in that reading group. I think my reading of all of them has been
effective. I think it really kind of set me in motion as to what really natural resources
finally is about. For example, as I read Stegner’s stuff, especially his book Beyond the
Hundredth Meridian, he talked about how in the early days the surveyors and the early
explorers, they knew the west was dry and they tried to get congress to build state lines
along watershed boundaries, rather than the straight lines that we have. But they couldn’t
quite get the votes in congress because congress wanted to make it real easy rather than
along watershed boundaries. It was close, they almost got it. It was a shame that they
didn’t, and it’s a shame that we don’t go back and redo the state boundaries.
BA:
Um-hmm.
DA:
But those are some of the books that I thought were pretty influential. I think that Dr.
Colthrap was probably very influential to me in my first few years at USU.
BA:
And that was the watershed person?
DA:
Yes. Dr. Hanks over in Agriculture who was my thesis director for my Master’s degree
(which was in soils) [laughs] was very influential. Fred Gifford who was my Master’s
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
25
�thesis committee chair was also – I had a really unusual schooling! And then Phil Urness
and Dr. Smith when I got into my professional work.
BA:
Art Smith. And what was the first name?
DA:
Arthur.
BA:
But you’d mentioned –
DA:
Oh, Phillip Urness.
BA:
Phillip Urness, okay.
DA:
U-R-N-E-S-S.
BA:
Thank you.
DA:
We did a lot of stuff together. I think I’ve got 53 technical publications, I think most of
them are done with Phil.
BA:
So the first three people are really your education?
DA:
Yes.
BA:
Influences in your education.
DA:
Right.
BA:
And then Art Smith was also here.
DA:
He was my first boss.
BA:
That sounds very much like a very close colleague in terms of Urness and publications.
DA:
Yes, we were. He was my boss but we worked really good together for years.
BA:
Okay, so those are two DWR employees?
DA:
Well, no they were university.
BA:
They were USU?
DA:
Yes, and they were very influential.
BA:
Is there something you can describe about that influence that was important to you that
you can think of?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
26
�DA:
Well it was really good because a lot of times university professors will take publication
credits – first authorship – for their students on their publications. In the early days when
I first started, we sat down and we decided that we weren’t going to it that way. We
decided that whoever did most of the work was first author. Everything that I did in terms
of fieldwork I was first author on, with one exception. That one exception was when it
was kind of on the border and I took second author on that. That was a tremendous
incentive to do it right! I think I said I have 53 publications, I have one rejection; one
paper I was never able to publish. So that’s a pretty good percentage.
BA:
Yeah, no kidding! Going back to the books, when you look at all of those books, those
are dated in time, but not dated in importance.
DA:
Correct.
BA:
Are there some current titles that you would look at that you think of emerging or have
emerged as being important? Because my guess is that you are a big reader.
DA:
I read a fair amount. I haven’t read any of the newer stuff that I was as impressed with,
very honestly.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
You know, I go back and I’ll read Leopold or Muir and I’ll get a lot out of it. To me, and
maybe I’m wrong, but to me the older authors (including Audubon and these guys) they
were on the field, in the land and looking at the land from an inside point of view. The
authors that I’m reading today are extremely good writers and they have more knowledge
available to them, but it’s like their looking at the system rather than within the system.
That’s kind of my view. Even though a lot of it is emotional and there’s lots of great
experiences, I just feel like there’s a different point of reference from what I’ve read over
the last several years.
BA:
Well and based on some of the other things you’ve said, that seems to fit very closely
with the idea of how NR has moved away from being as field based as it could. Because
that experiential approach of field camp, classes in the field, and the work in the field;
then when you become a professional, spending much more time –
DA:
Right. I just feel like that is the real difference. If you can show me a person that spends
80 or 90% of their time in the field and is still able to write, that’s the kind of stuff that I
think you can really relate to. But I shouldn’t say anything because these authors are
doing very well.
BA:
Oh yeah.
DA:
Some of them are doing very well.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
27
�BA:
But as you’re saying, there’s a different orientation with that.
DA:
Um-hmm.
BA:
And we see that with other aspects: observation, experience, and that common
knowledge.
DA:
Even some of the older writers you can look at some of the stuff they do, and you’re
going, “he was there, but he’s looking at it rather than being in it.” There are some of the
other writers that I don’t care for that express their views in that kind of a setting.
BA:
Hmm. Interesting. Well thank you. This has been fascinating. I have a feeling we have
some unanswered questions here. I would like to maybe pursue it at a later date. What
we’re going to do though, right now, is ask Dennis if there are any final comments that he
would like to make.
[Stop and start recording]
BA:
We’re going to pick up with Dennis again.
DA:
I’m going to talk about a few of the experiences and situations that have occurred in
Logan Canyon over the years.
The first one I’ll talk about is pine marten because in the early days we had pine marten
on the Cache. They apparently died out around the 1930s because that’s the last time they
were seen. And then the Forest Service (about 1995) transplanted about 20-30 pine
marten from Island Park up in Idaho, to the Cache National Forest up in the Franklin and
Gibson Basin areas. Those marten have taken and they are continuing to maintain their
population up there to this time. Now I haven’t seen any in the last two years, but I used
to go on my cross-country skis way back up from Beaver Creek all the way to Gibson
Basin. Once you get to the Idaho line, everybody stops, but if you go further, you’ll run
into habitat that is inhabited by marten. They’re still there and that’s an unusual species
that is pretty neat to have around.
BA:
Could you describe the habitat that they really thrive in?
DA:
Mostly dense conifer; their major prey species are voles. But they’ll also eat red squirrels,
which I’ve seen them chase. That’s fun to see if you’ve ever seen a pine marten chase a
red squirrel, it’s really fun. [Laughing]
BA:
How do they do it?
DA:
Just as fast as they can go! Up trees, down trees, across the ground, over piles of wood.
Annie and I saw that, a really interesting chase up in Yellowstone one year, coming out
of Union Falls. But that was fun. So that’s the pine marten.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
28
�The wolverine is really a little more interesting because I’ve got a little more observation
there. The question that came up years ago is, “Do we ever get wolverine on the Cache?”
Wolverine, lynx, and the pine marten. And we talked about pine marten. In ten years we
had one lynx that came into the Cache Valley mountains. The tracks were cut by me, and
then two weeks later by a Forest Service employee. That’s the only verifiable lynx that I
know of.
But the wolverine. I began to ask sportsmen and Forest Service employees – anybody I
could that was in the woods a lot – “have you seen a wolverine?” Over a ten year period I
put together a map. And every time I’d get an observation that I felt like was probably a
wolverine (like 95% -- if it was less 95% probability I’d throw it out). So everything I got
is highly probable; then I would put a dot on the map. After ten years, I had like 20 dots
and they are all centered in the same area. Like there was none over in Blacksmith Fork,
there was none on the Wellsvilles, there was one over toward Monte Cristo: they’re all
centered in the top of Logan Canyon, basically to the north of Logan Canyon near the
top.
BA:
A forest type and elevation?
DA:
Yep, forest type; often in rocks, rocky terrain, but not necessarily. High Creek Lake has
several reports up there. But they’re all centered in that Gibson area, Gibson Basin to
High Creek Lake area. And we put together a little piece that I published in the Herald
Journal on that. [In 1995] I saw a wolverine. [Before that the only one that I had scene
was] when I was like 17 down in Salt Lake. [In 1995] I was skiing way back into Gibson
Basin and had gotten almost back to the basin itself, but not quite. There’s a transitional
zone there where the canyon gets steep and there’s some really warm micro-habitat in
there. I cut through wolverine tracks – and it was an adult and a juvenile (because of the
size of the two tracks).
BA:
What size are we looking at with these?
DA:
Oh, they’re about four inches in diameter – they’re between a cougar and a bobcat,
generally, and they’re a furrier track and a little more round. They’re not easy to
distinguish, but you can. I followed those two wolverine for a while and that was kind of
a unique observation. So we do have wolverine on the Cache forest. They do get here
once in a while; my guess is we have two to four permanent wolverines that range from
Logan Canyon road, north clear to Soda Springs – in that entire range.
BA:
And they range in that area?
DA:
Yes.
BA:
That’s how large they range?
DA:
Wide, wide ranging critters.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
29
�BA:
Holy cow!
DA:
That’s why we just don’t see them very often.
BA:
Right.
DA:
And since I wrote that article, I’ve had two more additional people call me about two
sightings that I accepted were wolverines. On this particular study or analysis, I was
probably rejecting about two thirds, to three quarters of the observations that people were
giving me because they just weren’t good enough.
BA:
Do people document them with pictures for you?
DA:
No, no one had a picture. It was all either visual sighting – “I got a really good look at
him, but I didn’t get a picture.”
BA:
Right.
DA:
In a couple of cases I accepted tracks, but they had to be good biologists, you know. They
had to be able to say, you know, you could see the fifth claw and that sort of thing.
BA:
Interesting. Go back to the lynx for a minute. When you talk about they’re just so rare –
what’s your reason for it?
DA:
And lynx are tied into snowshoe hare and the snowshoe hare population – that’s part of
the reason I started snowshoe hare transects, is to find out what is going on with our
population. Because the idea is that as you go further south from boreal forest type, that
your population cycles: snowshoe hare populating go extremely high and extremely low.
We didn’t know what it was doing here. That’s the only lynx that I have ever encountered
one way or another. I don’t think they’re here.
But the cougar is the really interesting. There’s a lot to be said on the cougar on the
Cache District in Logan Canyon. The stories are innumerable.
BA:
Well tell us a little bit about your experiences with them.
DA:
Well my first experience with a cougar was when I was 16 or 17 (I can’t remember
which) and I had a date and she forgot. So I went up the canyon and with a weak-beamed
flashlight, I was hiking back in one of the canyons at night and I heard this scream. And it
scared the daylights out of me. My teenage invincibility was gone, and I didn’t know
what it was. It was a cougar. And since then we have had a lot of cougar experiences as a
family.
[Stop and start recording]
[Tape 2 of 2: B]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
30
�BA:
Tape 2, side 2.
DA:
We [family] were camped outside Yellowstone Park and I had the kids with me and they
were all pretty young. I thought everybody was asleep and I heard this cougar screaming
– it was way out. We had the stream running by us, there was a little bit of water noise,
and this cougar got closer, and closer, and closer. It screamed about every three or four
minutes. If you’ve ever heard them scream (and very few people have) it sounds like a
woman in mortal terror. That’s the best way to describe it. But the cougar got pretty
close, and I said to the family (because I thought everybody was asleep), I said, “Is
anybody awake?” Instantly Annie and every one of the kids sat up in their sleeping bags
– they’d all been hearing it thinking everybody else was asleep! [Laughing] We pulled
the kids out of their sleeping bags, threw them into the van (even though I didn’t think
there was much danger), but I mean this cougar was screaming at the top of his lungs,
and it was right by us. I got everybody into the van and turned my flashlight on and there
– ten feet from the van was this cougar. You could see his eyes in that beam. There
wasn’t much of a reflection, but you could see him right there. My kids can still
remember it. [Laughing]
BA:
Holy cow! So why was he so gregarious with coming in?
DA:
Well, that’s the time when they’re breeding.
BA:
Okay.
DA:
He was calling, screaming for a mate – she or he, I don’t know which. What a great
experience!
When I took over the Cache position, we had a lot of cougar and not very many deer. The
first year – they’d had one or two permits on the Cache Forest for years in terms of
cougar harvest. The first year I just went into the RAC meeting not knowing very much
and I asked for 30 permits.
BA:
Tell us what RAC is?
DA:
Regional Advisory Council for the Division of Wildlife Resources, which makes their
recommendation to the board which sets policy.
BA:
Okay, and they’re made up of local citizens?
DA:
They’re made up of seven people – well the RACs are local people generally, that have
an interest.
Anyway, I went into that meeting and I ended up getting I think two permits that first
year. I didn’t like that because I knew there were cougars all over the place. So the next
year for the recommendation process, I prepared a two or three page summary of what
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
31
�was going on and took it first to a committee meeting of DWR biologists. At that time we
had a biologist who was the predator manager– I don’t know what his title was, but he
did cougars. We sat in this meeting and I said, “I want 30 permits because I’ve got 120
cougars on the Cache.” (Because that was my estimate.) He looked at me and he said,
“Dennis, you don’t even have 30 cougars on the Cache, let alone 120!” (Actually I was
asking for 40 permits, that’s right, I asked for 40.)
He said, “You don’t even have 40 permits on the whole Cache!” And I called him by
name and I said, “You give me 40 permits and three good weekends of snow and I’ll
show you 40 dead cougars.” I got 35 permits, we had three weekends of snow, we killed
37 cougars.
BA:
Wow.
DA:
We went over our limit because some of the cougar hunters had gone out that last day
when I had 34 and we ended up killing three the last day. [Laughing] So we got on top of
the cougar population. It took us a few years to do it, but we got on top of it.
BA:
And then the deer population?
DA:
The deer population responded a little bit. Hard to say. You know, there are so many
other factors involved. But we did get on top of the cougars. I had cougars coming out of
my ears! I had people calling me. Dry Canyon in Providence in Canyon – we had a
cougar that would come down in this lady’s backyard. I would go over there (of course I
could never find it when I was there). Come hunting season I would send a cougar hunter
right there. He went up that mountain, found a cougar and got it. I had a cougar just
above Mantua, Malibu Campground – in that little housing place (I can’t think of the
name of it off hand) and this cougar would come down and sit on the porch. It started
growling at people – and we sent a hunter after that cougar. And we killed that cougar.
Then we had the cougars in (oh, what’s the name of that canyon? Just above the Forest
Service house in the canyon there.)
BA:
I know where you mean.
DA:
I can’t think of the name off hand. But we had sheep being killed up there by cougars in
the summer. So we got ADC to go in there (Animal Damage Control), federal people, to
go in there and kill these cougars. They didn’t kill one cougar – they killed five cougars
in that one little drainage! You know the old concept was that cougars kill each other
(and they do) and they’re very territorial and they still are because under the long-term
environmentals where they developed over the last 10,000 years they had to be because
the deer resource was very sparse. Since man came along we began livestock grazing,
controlling predators; all of a sudden cougars have got all kinds of stuff to eat – they
don’t have to worry about it as much. So my theory was they didn’t have to kill each
other to maintain their territory, so they were all enjoying feasts. So that’s one of the
reasons that I think cougar populations are much harder to control now is because they
have – over the last century – adapted to a higher prey base than they ever had before.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
32
�BA:
How do you know – when you look at sheep when someone called you out and they said,
“we think it’s cougar” – how could you tell that it was not something else that had
attacked that animal?
DA:
By the bite marks.
BA:
And what would they be?
DA:
They would be the bite marks – I am not an expert at that by any means. The ADC guys
(the Animal Damage Control guys) are really experts. They can just skin it back, pull the
skin back, and then they just look at the bite marks on the neck. That will distinguish a
cougar practically every time.
BA:
Now did you ever work with trappers in your time? You mentioned ADC.
DA:
Not very much. A few trappers. The most interesting story was I had a trapper, I won’t
tell you his name, and he trapped bobcat (because you can’t trap cougar). He was
trapping bobcat and he was very successful at it for years (probably still doing it); a very
good man, a very good trapper. I get this call one night and he says, “Dennis, I got a
cougar in one of my bobcat traps.” It was night so I said, “Let’s go up and get it in the
morning.” So we went up in the morning and hiked up the mountain where his trap was.
Sure enough, there was a cougar in his bobcat trap. He said to me, “How are we going to
release this?” Because he couldn’t do that. And I said, “There is no way in this world that
either one of us is going to go try and release this cougar.” I had a gun and we just shot it.
We killed the cougar. Then the interesting thing was we checked his next trap (which was
just around the bend) and it also had a cougar in it! So we got two cougars in two bobcat
traps right there. That was an interesting experience!
BA:
I can’t imagine even trying to release.
DA:
Yes, but they’re there. And we don’t know whether trappers, when they get cougars,
would kill them or not. We just don’t know. It’s impossible to check them all. But it
probably happens. We had a river otter taken one year in Logan Canyon. It was captured
and killed by a trapper who was trapping beaver up there. He brought us this river otter; I
think it is still frozen in one of our freezers some place! But that was the only river otter
that I know of that’s been in Logan Canyon, except that about two weeks before we got
the carcass, I had a report of a river otter in Logan Canyon that was seen sliding down (as
they typically do) the snow banks into the river.
BA:
Oh my!
DA:
That report was by my son. One of my sons had seen it and I said, “Oh no, you must have
seen something wrong.” Two weeks later, we get a river otter that had been trapped in the
same area. Fascinating.
BA:
Hmm.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
33
�DA:
The cougar situation is being controlled a lot better now and I think they’ve done a pretty
good job. My best experience – and I’ve seen seven cougars in the wild over my career
which is a lot. There is hardly anybody that can say that they’ve seen that many. The one
that was the most unique was when I was classifying deer (it was in the fall) and I was
coming up out of Garden City. I was about three miles up Garden City road – I was
classifying deer – it was in the evening, late evening, and I see seven deer off to the side
of the road. Well, the highway has a little turnoff there at the corner, so I pulled over to
that little gravel area and got out and looked to classify those deer. There were four does
and three fawns, I can still remember. I looked at them and the strange thing was they
weren’t looking at me. They were looking a little off into the bushes. And I go, “what is
going on?” Then all of a sudden – just simultaneously – they just ran! They were just
gone, strutting away. I am looking around, and there (well I measured the distance, I
can’t remember what it was), but it was like 30 feet or less was this cougar.
BA:
Laying low?
DA:
He’d been sitting there laying low in the bushes watching those deer, sneaking up on
them. He was not happy with me; he stood up and just kind of cowered through the
sagebrush. I watched him, [it was] quite an experience.
BA:
Oh! That would be.
DA:
That was fun.
BA:
I bet you had dozens and hundreds of those kinds of experiences with different kinds of
wildlife in your career.
DA:
I have.
BA:
You know, especially with your comment about being so oriented to the field and then
the family time that you’ve spent out.
DA:
Yes I did. There was a lot of wonderful experiences and things that, you know, you just
can’t replace. You can’t replace them.
BA:
Well, thank you very much. This has been just thoroughly enjoyable.
DA:
For me too.
BA:
It’s really good talking to you. I appreciate it.
[Stop recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dennis
Austin
Page
34
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/90">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/90</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Radio Shack Cassette Recorder: CTR-122
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-08-22
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
Dennis D. Austin interview, 18 February 2009, and transcription
Description
An account of the resource
Dennis Austin discusses his career in the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and all the time in the field he spent and his role and opinions on various policies involved he also talks about his role in influencing and teaching land owners about conservation easements.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Austin, Dennis D.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Middleton, Barbara
Subject
The topic of the resource
Austin, Dennis D.--Interviews
Biologists--Utah--Interviews
Austin, Dennis D.--Career in Wildlife Research
Utah. Division of Wildlife Resources--Officials and employees
Utah State University--Research
Range management--Research
Research and development projects--Utah
Wildlife management--Research--Utah
Wildlife research--Utah--Logan Canyon
Deer--Research--Utah
Deer--Feeding and feeds--Utah--Cache County
Big game animals--Wintering--Research--Utah
Browse (Animal food)--Research--Utah
Conservation easements--Utah
Habitat (Ecology)--Utah--Logan Canyon
Habitat conservation--Utah--Logan Canyon
Range management--Utah--Logan Canyon
Natural resources--Study and teaching
Puma--Control--Utah
Wildlife resources--Subsistence vs. recreational use--Utah--Logan Canyon
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral histories
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
Millville (Utah)
North Logan (Utah)
United States
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
20th century
2000-2009
21st 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 & Archives, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 2 Fd. 1
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx2fd1DennisAustin
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
18 February 2009
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2009-02-18
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/0b9702331cb03a29e4287af0cbb66f50.mp3
d9194660a07c0c2d5586679413fdc4ba
http://highway89.org/files/original/d086d7694ee188f757e113a90fd883ee.pdf
7b7b84870fb24b512c88d9ec13c5c68d
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Garth Barker
Place of Interview: Downtown Logan, Utah
Date of Interview: 4 February 2009
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Brad Cole and Clint Pumphrey
Brad Cole
Recording Equipment:
Marantz Professional: PMD660
Transcription Equipment used: PowerPlayer Transcription Software, Executive
Communication Systems
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Susan Gross
Brad Cole; Randy Williams (8 March 2011)
Brief Description of Contents: Garth Barker discusses his involvement with issues regarding
multiple-use access for the Logan Canyon. He talks about meeting with politicians about
concerns. He also speaks about his experience as a member of Search and Rescue.
Reference:
BC = Brad Cole (Interviewer; Associate Dean, USU Libraries)
CH = Clint Pumphrey (Interviewer; USU history graduate student)
GB = Garth Barker
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcribed. All additions to transcript are noted with
brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 1: A]
BC:
Hi, this is Brad Cole from Utah State University Merrill-Cazier Library, Special
Collections and Archives. It’s February 4th today; we’re visiting with Garth Barker in
downtown Logan and we’re talking about Logan Canyon Land-Use Management Project.
And also sitting in with us is Clint Pumphrey [USU Special Collections graduate student
worker and project fieldworker].
Garth, I always like to start an oral history at the very beginning and ask when and where
you born?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
1
�GB:
I was born in Logan, 1949.
BC:
Okay. So you grew up in Logan?
GB:
Been here all my life.
BC:
And if you don’t mind, maybe tell us who your parents were.
GB:
They’re still alive: Levere and Lunella Barker, and they’re still here.
BC:
And there were from Logan also?
GB:
Yes, not born here, but they moved here from other parts of Utah.
BC:
The project [Land Use Management] is working on Logan Canyon; and so maybe you
could tell us a little about your experiences with Logan Canyon and land use issues that
are -- .
GB:
Well, I’ll start in the beginning. Growing up here, before the valley grew so much, kids
lived, you know around the foothills. That’s where you spent your time. Whether you
were riding a horse or hiking or later on skiing; when motorized come along it was
motorcycles and snowmobiles. Back in the [19]‘60s and the late ‘50s you didn’t have a
mall; nobody went “downtown.” You bummed around the hills and because you are a
product of your environment, that’s kind of where all your interest went. We hunted; at
times you would start with the first season and go all the way through and fill the holes in
with fishing. And of course, long time before the valley grew so quick; seems like only
the last 15 years has all the holes filled in.
Later on, around 1985-84, when the Forest Plan was being re-done at that time, they started
closing things down. Way back during MJ Roberts time—he was the District Ranger at the
time—and this come as a surprise. How could they do that? Why are they closing this down and
closing that down. And at that time most of us had been exploring on with motorcycles, trail
bikes, horses. Snowmobiles weren’t a big thing, but they come along with winter travel plans.
And that started to affect the snowmobiling. At the time—up to about 1988-89—I was a skier.
And I remember crossing the first other cross-country ski tracks one day, wondering who in the
world was up here in my mountains, on skis like I was. Because before that I’d seen trappers
(guys that were trapping using snow shoes) but I was the only one that I knew of on cross-country
skis. And it was just purely for recreation; or sometimes you would go out on skis to hunt coyotes
or something. But it was a shocker. So I tracked the guy down and it ended up being a guy and
his girlfriend. And I had had my wife with me at the time. We set up on a sunny hillside and
talked. But that was probably 19—that would have been about 1980—when I bumped on to the
first other cross-country skier. But, pretty interesting.
Then I got into snowmobiling about 1986; mostly to supplement my skiing opportunities in the
winter. And you have to understand that during the summer it was still motorcycles and horses
and four-wheel drive trucks. But things were getting shut down. And being involved with a lot of
local people because the business here, the gas station and everything, attracted a good variety of
people. You become like a barber shop; you become aware of the issues. And they were
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
2
�concerned and so I got involved. They made me the president of the Snowmobile Association.
And that really forced me into it. And of course it’s gone on since then.
BC:
How long has there been a Snowmobile Association? Is it the new association, was that -- ?
GB:
It had been around a long time before I got involved. I think it was formed in 1975 by some of the
locals out of Providence, Utah. And so it had been around a long time. And of course the
machines grew and advanced and become a little more reliable about the time I was getting into
it. It was a viable form of winter transportation. It should be excused!
BC:
[Laughing]
GB:
But there was also – for me it was a tool to get me into the backcountry so I could use my skis.
BC:
Um-hmm.
GB:
But as you get older and your knees start to go that machine becomes a better tool than the skis.
CP:
So when do you remember the first real challenges to snowmobiles and Logan Canyon and places
around here?
GB:
When I heard that they were closing down the base range in Green Canyon because it was going
to be included in the 1984 Utah Wilderness Act. And prior to that time the two canyons:
Providence Canyon and Green Canyon were access for the snowmobiles into the backcountry.
They removed the Green Canyon at that time, that access, and left the Providence access. Mainly
because Providence was quite developed with the Johnson Quarry up there, it didn’t fit the
description of Wilderness. So it was an area that we lost. And since then there’s been attempts at
in-roads adding to that area and I’ve been fully involved in that. As early as 1993-94 we formed a
group of people from all aspects. Headed up by the Chamber of Commerce we produced a
Citizens’ Proposal. And we tried over a course of three years to iron out the problems between the
two winter user groups; and produced a document that still has some viability today and has been
used numerous times during arbitration and mediation. But way back in ’93-94 we were really
involved in it.
BC:
Back up a little bit about the 1984 Wilderness Act, were you involved in the meetings and stuff
leading up to that?
GB:
CP:
No, no prior to that. And it was a mistake on a lot of us’ behalf is we wasn’t involved. Yeah,
Wilderness is a good thing. I mean as early as the Wilderness Act of 1964, it’s a good idea –
preserve it. But by 1984, a lot of us out west didn’t pay any attention to it until it hit home. And
of course back then the parameter set for wilderness were a lot better; they’ve been degraded and
watered down since then. What’s considered wilderness now, or a Wilderness Study Area
certainly doesn’t have the same quality that they did back then. But when they started hitting
home and shutting you down, then you start getting involved. And still even as late as probably
1990, we didn’t understand the process. And I would daresay the majority of backcountry users
still don’t. We tried to educate them on it; they don’t want to get involved. And I would say that
is the majority of people: “don’t take away my snowmobiling,” or “don’t take away my skiing,”
is as far as they want to get involved.
Why do you think that is?
GB:
I think, well if I could answer that question I’d be [inaudible].
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
3
�[Laughing]
GB:
Too busy; too busy with making a living and playing. And until some things are taken from them,
removed from their opportunity, they don’t care. You talk to the guys up here – they don’t care
what’s happening in Southern Utah unless they’re a group that goes down to Moab or something.
They’re not going to make comment on it. They might once a year go hunt sage grouse, but when
a comment period comes around, put out by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, they’re not going to take
time to make a comment on it. And then I think the other thing that has made it far easier is the
advances in computer technology and of course the web. Now information can be disseminated to
almost everybody, instantaneously. So today, as opposed to ten years ago, there’s far more people
involved. I think both sides now are holding their own. They’ll squabble over little pieces like we
have here. But I think both sides are more understanding now because of that tool.
CP:
So how have your efforts to combat the restrictions on outdoor recreation and things, how have
those changed over the last – well since you’ve been working on them?
GB:
How have they changed? They changed . . . our approaches changed because we learned that
grassroots movement didn’t work. We involved at one meeting (which was a workshop), during
the early stages of the forest planning, we had almost 500 people to a public meeting. That had
never been done before! To a Forest Service meeting over a Forest Plan. And it was kind of a
shocker, but it didn’t amount to anything. It made no difference to the changes they were making;
which was really kind of a low blow. You would think: okay, you’ve got 500 people here as
opposed to the opposition (if you will) 50 people. And it made no difference. And I was a bit
taken back by it and questioned which avenue to take at that point. And so I started to meet with
politicians and I found out that the politicians needed the people. They didn’t particularly care
about the issues either, but they voted. And if you go to a politician and say, “I have 750
registered voters that think like I do. I need your help.” They’ll say, “Okay, what can I do?” They
need the people, you need the politicians and the people to get anything done. And that was a far
better way to get things done.
BC:
Which politicians? Local politicians, or congress?
GB:
Actually, not even so much on local because you are dealing with a federal agency with the
Forest Service, you had to deal with our federal senators and congressman. And worked real close
with Jim Hansen while he was in office, and actually become a board member of a political pack
that involved 11 other chairs from different aspect of outdoor recreation: from backcountry pilots
to bighorn sheep hunters. And we would meet monthly in the back room of a Salt Lake restaurant
that looked like a Mafia setting. Big dark oak table --
[Laughing]
And being a political PAC of course we could have the politicians there. And they would be
looking for our support and we would be looking for their support. And I met a lot of the current
senators and congressmen at that point. That group of people numbered – the people they
represented – probably a million and a half people. Not just in the state of Utah. So if a politician
come in and said, “I need your support.” And you listen to him and his ideas, it was a big thing
for him. Matheson wouldn’t be one of our congressmen without the support of that organization.
But he understood that in his district there were an awful lot of people that hunted. And he
sought out the support of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, which was one of the chairs. And we
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
4
�discussed it and talked with his opponent (who was a Republican) and we decided that this
Democrat was a better choice.
BC:
Hmm.
GB:
He had a far better view of what the people needed that his opponent. And we supported him. It
didn’t really matter if he was a Republican or Democrat, but which one addressed the views of
the people the best.
CP:
So what were the opinions of Matheson that you liked so much, specifically?
GB:
He was willing to listen to his people. He cared more about the guy existing on a ranch, than what
was happening in the city; he had some pretty good homegrown values. And as a congressman, I
think he’s a pretty good congressman.
BC:
GB:
Did the pack have a name?
Macc. M-A-C-C: Multiple Access Conservation Coalition.
CP:
So you talk about how you worked with a lot of federal politicians in your efforts. What was the
makeup of your opponents? Were they federal environmental groups, or local type people, or?
GB:
Mostly, dealing with our issues here I was the only chair that was concerned with more than one
aspect. I was concerned with motorized access as opposed to Backcountry Pilots or the
Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife or something like that. Because there were issues that we
bumped heads on within the coalition, within the pack. The hunting groups didn’t particularly
advocate ATVs, and yet my concern for my area was access. But we worked it out within the
group. Of course on the issue here on the Logan Ranger District it was a forest issue. And with
the right political help you can force things, and we did.
BC:
How has your experience with the Logan Ranger District, how well has the management been
and what would you think of the condition of it today versus 25 years ago?
GB:
Like any federal or state agency, they’re worth – not the job that they’re assigned to do – but their
worth and ability to get the job done is directly determined by the people in there. If a particular
District Ranger or department head has a personal agenda that’s going to affect how that entire
section works. Over the past 20 years we’ve had good District Rangers, we’ve had a lot of interim
District Rangers here. And for the most part they were good people, but they had their own
personal agendas. Or maybe the worst case was they came into it unbiased but they allowed
themselves to be affected by – and I hate to say it -- but they allowed themselves to be affected by
university people. The University is a big entity here. The Outdoor Rec Department has a direct
relationship with the Forest Service. District Rangers and Recreation Line Officers have let
themselves be – their biased was removed or enhanced, if you will. If they didn’t have any bias,
they certainly did after awhile because of the university’s influence. And you had to battle that.
And you had to battle it with the use of politicians. I’m not sure I answered your question. We
had to fight against the ideals that the university popped out. Which we did. It was effective.
I think we have a good mix right now. On the last round everybody lost something, but you have
to understand the views of the local people that access it using machinery. One time they could go
anywhere they wanted.
BC:
Right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
5
�GB:
Then along came the Wilderness. Their area was cut by 274,000 acres. And then along come a
Forest Plan; and other areas were closed down. Whether it was a wildlife closure – which nobody
minded – or whether it was another user group that wanted another area closed. The same thing
still applies. A non-motorized user can still go anywhere they want, but the motorized people
were always the ones losing ground. And that’s tough for them to swallow.
BC:
How often do they do the Forest Plans? Is that a –
GB:
Congressional mandated every 10-15 years. There’s generally – takes five or six years to get a
Forest Plan done. We’ll be looking at the same issues again here in another five or six years.
BC:
I imagine the population growth puts more pressure on them too.
GB:
Yeah, it does. We’re still behind up here on this ranger district. There are still programs that
should be implemented that aren’t. And a lot of it is dictated by budgets and money. There should
be a Park and Ski program. There should be non-motorized trailheads established, where you can
buy a tag and go park there and you won’t have any opposition from other users that don’t buy a
tag (other non-motorized users). I mean Idaho, Oregon, Colorado – they all have Park and Ski or
Park and Access or whatever they call it – not in Utah.
BC:
Hmm. That would probably help –
GB:
Oh yeah.
BC:
-- (inaudible)
GB:
There you’ve got your own trailhead and nobody’s going to bother you. And somebody pulling a
trailer that wants to park and camp for a couple of days during the winter and fish, or whatever,
can’t park there without a sticker. You’ve got your exclusive -- . I’ve sent Idaho’s, Colorado’s,
Oregon’s bills, amendments, rules, off to our state people time and again: “can’t we implement
this?”
BC:
Does it have to be implemented at the state level?
GB:
Yeah.
BC:
What other kinds of programs do you think that we haven’t -- ?
GB:
That would probably be the most important as far as winter goes. Up here they pushed through
the Shoshone Trail System, but it’s not taken off here (this is for summer OHV use). It’s not
taken off here like it has in other parts of the state. In other parts of the state: the Piute, the
(inaudible) and some of the other trail systems, have done so much to improve the economics of
the regions they’re in – we don’t need it. Our little towns aren’t dependent on tourism.
BC:
Right.
GB:
We’re a university valley. And we have a lot of good light industry – who cares about a trail
system?
BC:
Now are those trails you mentioned, are they a part of that Great Western Trail System?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
6
�GB:
Yes. Well, that’s a little different. They’re not under the same organization. The Western Trail
covers a lot of states. Each state has a section, but it’s its own organization. The Piute – the other
trails are Utah trails and in cooperation with the Forest Service, BLM. A little different. The
Great Western Trail is its own entity.
CP:
So when you promote motorized transportation to the federal government, to the Forest Service
when you brought it – what is your and your organization’s stance about the benefits of motorized
transportation to having more access to the forest property?
GB:
Well let’s not use the word transportation, let’s use the word access.
CP:
Okay.
GB:
Ever since the west was settled, man has used whatever the best means was to access it; whether
it was a horseback or a boat or foot, or whatever – Model A’s and trucks and vehicles come along
and give access to the backcountry. Why? Well, not everybody is young and healthy. My 82 year
old father is not going to go up there and hike into the backcountry. I know some 85 year old
people that do, but he’s not going to. Or how does a person take all their kids back? And you’re
limited with how far you can go. Now you can drive up to Tony Grove and hike up and you
know, take the kids and hike up for a day. Probably not going to venture very far into the
wilderness. And because there’s more and more people all the time, and everybody wants to get
back in further – the way to do it is motorized. Plus, everybody should have an opportunity –
whether they’re non-motorized or motorized. There is your premise right there is something for
everybody, responsibly. I don’t know if that answers it.
CP:
Yes, that definitely is good. So, you know on the flipside of that, do you see in validity in your
opponents’ arguments that it should be limited?
GB:
Absolutely. Yeah, because I was a skier first before I become a snowmobiler and I don’t want to
get into philosophical reasons, but a non-motorized user has a different value base for the area
they are going to. And it may be the trip in is far more important than the destination. And they
may develop a – whether you want to use the term – sense of place, more so than the
snowmobiler. Yeah, he enjoys the ride probably as much as a skier enjoys a ski run, but is the
reward at the end bigger or better? Probably not. But he probably enjoys it for a different reason.
It’s not quite a religious thing – you can go under your own power and huck up a canyon and get
to the top and jump and down like Rocky and say, “I made it!” You know, he might do the same
thing on a hill with a machine, but – a little different. A little different.
BC:
I’m kind of curious because I don’t really know much about snow machines, but you mentioned
that when you first got involved in the early ‘80s they were a little less dependable?
GB:
I used to like to leave the summit – where the Limber Pine Trail is right now – put my skis on and
I would ski along the ridgeline and hunt snowshoe rabbits. And I’d to watch them stinking,
smoking machines down there try to get where I was at. I always thought that it was interesting –
why would you mess with this thing, it looks like you’re stuck half the time. You know, I
couldn’t understand why they was doing what they was doing. But one day a couple of us decided
– there were five of us – we was going to ski from the Sinks area to Hardware; that’s 35 miles.
That’s a pretty good huck for people on their legs. It took us all day, into dark to do that on skis.
And I can do it in 30 minutes on a snowmobile.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
7
�BC:
Right. The machines have changed greatly from then, as far as where they can go?
GB:
Oh! Every year they change. I don’t know where they can’t go now. The limitation being whether
it’s motorized or non-motorized. That’s the way they are. Technology has really improved them.
BC:
That probably then has created more clash, potentially, or not?
GB:
Probably not created more clash because skiers never got back there either. Mountaineering,
backcountry skiing – as opposed to cross country or light touring – is fairly new. And it’s new to
technology too: new types of materials, how the skis are made; the bindings, the boots.
Backcountry skiers are relatively new too. And the funny thing about it all is that you’ve got
machines that will get back in there in a hurry (as opposed to getting stuck on their way in like
they used to); you’ve got guys who can use their new skis and get back in there. Now you’ve got
a whole new segment, which we call them “snowmo-boarders” – they’re the guys with
backcountry skis or snowboards that are using a snowmobile to get back in to make tracks where
you can’t take a machine (or take you all day or two days to get on your skis). They are using the
best of both worlds for their recreation. And so both the “purist” groups, if you will, are looking
at them going, “Wait, wait a minute. We’ve got a new form of competition.” Just smarter.
BC:
Yeah. Poor man’s helicopter skiing.
GB:
You got it.
CP:
What areas in Logan Canyon right now are open for snowmobile access? Showing my ignorance
here.
GB:
Well, I don’t remember the numbers without digging into my books. Of course the Wilderness
area is closed. And you have closure up to Blind Hollow; you’ve got the Bunchgrass complex and
the Steam Mill complex and Hell’s Kitchen complex that are closed to motorized – which
encompasses over half of it. You have quite a bit that’s open, but it’s certainly not the same
quality. The Tony Grove area and on into Idaho is as good of snowmobiling that you’ll find
anywhere, maybe better than most nationwide. Same for skiing. You don’t find that type of
backcountry access and availability anywhere else close by. So we’re kind of unique that we have
one area up there that is el primo for both user groups.
BC:
So is the current plan overall working do you think?
GB:
It’s working. Yeah. Hopefully there’s no violation. I haven’t heard of any this year. And I think
people are pretty much satisfied with what we’ve got, other than the extreme ends.
BC:
Right. Which is always the case.
GB:
It’s always the case, yeah.
CP:
So how do you feel the plan here compares to plans in other parts of this area?
GB:
Every other forest that had to go through revision watched this district and this region real close.
They watched the fights; the lawsuits. And I think they took a lesson from them. And so most of
them are formed the same way: a little bit for everybody. We set a poor example, but a good
example. Our fights were long – I mean we went three years over what most Forest Plans take
because of litigation and mediation and ultimately arbitration and more lawsuits.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
8
�BC:
Have the groups learned from that? Do they work together better now?
GB:
It’s an uneasy truce.
BC:
Yeah.
GB:
We’re kind of like the Hamas and Israel.
[Laughing]
GB:
Nobody wants to throw the first rock, and they’re going to get a little bit complacent about it. And
maybe come the next time we need a Forest Plan there might be minor adjustments, but I think
it’ll work. I hope so. It was a long fight.
CP:
Why do you think it was particularly contentious here?
GB:
We had a real good gene pool of advocates from the university, as opposed to a real good gene
pool of advocates from the redneck community. In this valley the competitiveness among
snowmobilers is extremely high. We’ve got more world champion hill climbers in this valley than
anywhere else in the west or Canada. And same goes for the other race circuits in snowmobiling.
Providence has probably produced more snowmobile competitors in all aspects than any other
single town in the whole country. So a lot of fierce competitive people pitted against a university
gene pool, or recreation pool. Good mix for a fight.
[Laughing]
CP:
So has the fight ever gotten particularly nasty or do they keep it pretty civil?
GB:
You know, ironically nobody ever threw a punch until a skier lost it. It was a skier who threw the
first punch a few years ago, where he dove on the back of a snowmobiler and pulled him off his
sled and wanted to beat him up.
CP:
Just out on the trail?
GB:
Actually it was right on the road. The guy had drove his vehicle up there, parked it, let his dogs
out. He was going to put his skis on and some snowmobilers using the same access into Tony
Grove went by him. He didn’t like it. He thought the same ones were coming back and so he
jumped on the first snowmobiler that come back and was going to beat him up. And of course the
Forest Service happened to be coming along right then, they had to break it up. But it was just an
emotional thing. Nobody got hurt. I had a rock thrown through my window after one public
meeting; and a few death threats, but I didn’t take them serious. One of them, I wished I would
have recorded it. He says, “You’re ruining Mother Nature. We’re going to get you; we’re
watching you.” And I said, “You know, we ought to talk about this – get together some time and
talk about it.” “Well, that won’t do any good, but we’re going to get you.” I said, “Hey, what’s
your name so I can call you back and talk to you about it; I’m kinda busy right now?” “It’s uh –
no wait! I can’t tell you that!”
[Laughing]
You know, how can you take something like that serious? You just can’t.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
9
�CP:
So before we started the interview, we talked a little bit about your responsibilities with the
Search and Rescue and things. Why don’t you just talk about that. What your role is and all that.
GB:
Oh, I’ve been in there 16 years. Maybe 15 years too long. I do search and rescue because I’m an
adrenaline junkie. It’s not because I love humanity so much.
[Laughing]
We are highly trained professionals, unpaid. It costs us a lot of money, a lot of time. But there are
few things more rewarding than saving somebody. I have friends that are big-game hunters; go all
over the country hunting big game. I would rather go up and find a kid than hunt big game – and I
enjoy hunting. But if I had to take a choice between going after some trophy and going after a lost
skier, I would take the skier. I don’t know why – it’s really not good snowmobiling when you’re
out searching in the winter. Because you are usually out at night and you’re going into places
where people shouldn’t have gone anyway, but it’s enjoyable.
CP:
And so what area do you cover for that?
GB:
I do high angle water rescue – I’m not a diver. Of course winter, whether it’s on skis or
snowmobile. Well, every aspect of it.
CP:
You do summer – like with ATVs and things too?
GB:
Year-round. Yeah.
CP:
And is it just for this area?
GB:
Just Cache County.
CP:
Cache County?
GB:
Yeah. I’m not an advocate of ATVs. I had ATVs -- I prefer my horse. If I have to take my Jeep
into an area on a rescue, that’s what I do in the summer. If a horse is a more viable choice for a
search, I’ll use a horse. If I have to get on an ATV or motorcycle I could do it; I’ve rode both of
them for years. I’m just not a big advocate of them. But because I’m older than the young ones
coming in now, I let them do a little more of the grunt work. I have to sit back a little bit. But
because I’ve been in it so long, I act as an advisor and a safety officer. If avalanche conditions are
such, I’m going to make a call or make my recommendations to the commander and the sergeant.
But because of my knowledge of the backcountry up here I usually end up as a spotter in a
helicopter or as a consultant when we’re going over the maps. There’s few places I haven’t been
up here.
BC:
How is the organization structured?
GB:
We have two teams, two team leaders and a commander. We are under the direct supervision and
part of the Sheriff’s office. We have a sergeant who is our liaison as well as our commander. He
works very closely with the unit commander, hand-in-hand. On every situation they’re at base
camp making calls. I’ve been a commander, I’ve been a captain, I’ve been the state commander (I
just got out of that job, thank heavens) – state Search and Rescue commander.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
10
�But we break down into teams – whether it’s a snowmobile team or a high-angle teams, or water
rescue – we have some guys that are better at running the boats than other guys – they’ll be team
leaders. We have a dive team; we have guys that go into caves – this country is full of caves – and
so we’ll have guys that are specialized for that. But we only have 35 members. So we all crosstrain and it makes a tighter-knit group. If I’m not a lead on, say a high-angle team, I’m ground
support. And I don’t dive, but I’m ground support for the dive people. So it works good.
CP:
I just kind of wanted to go back. I felt like there was one thing that we didn’t cover very well
about your background a little bit. What is your training, your profession? What did you start
doing when you started in the work world?
GB:
When I wasn’t hunting and fishing, I of course graduated high school. I graduated from USU. I
had a composite major/minor in Advertising Design and Illustration, Photography and Drawing.
And after I graduated I went out and freelanced for awhile until my wife wanted more stable
paycheck. And so I went to work for Thiokol in their Art Department, I did all of their corporate
advertising. But I found out that my painting, my western painting, was a whole lot more fun to
do, so my father says, “come and help me build a building” (he had an old gas station here) “help
me build a building and we’ll see to it that you’ve got time to paint.” Which I couldn’t paint here.
I mean I did for awhile (this was through the ‘80s).
Business kind of sucked you up, and of course all the involvement with all the other issues, there
wasn’t a lot of time to paint. I’ve always enjoyed writing and communications because I had to
work with account reps, and writers. And I write a column for the newspaper right now, every
two weeks, as a conservative voice of the valley. And I feel myself going green sometimes. I
work as a government liaison for an energy development company – Vince’s company. I go down
and I’m usually the first contact with local governments and go meet the people and the ranchers
and the farmers. I worked real close with SITLA over the years, whether it’s on forest issues or
other issues.
BC:
And SITLA is?
GB:
School Institutional Trust Land Administration. They are the ones that give money to the school
kids, but it’s Trust Land Administration.
BC:
Right.
GB:
They own about, or are the care-takers of 3.5 million acres in the state of Utah. But for the 12
recipients, which are the universities and the school kids in the state, they’re an important entity.
But I work real well with them all. I don’t know why, but I get along real well with local people.
Now Vince (inaudible) Texas, Montana, New Mexico, which is fine. We’re all the same people.
But I get along well with them.
CP:
You got anything?
BC:
I’m good, fine. Do you have anything else you’d like to add?
GB:
Nope. This is a great place to live. We’ve got interesting times that we’re in the middle of right
now. I don’t know what’s going to happen, but it’s sure going to be a ride!
[Laughing]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
11
�The economics and a new president. I didn’t vote for him, but I support him. Hopefully he can do
the job.
BC:
Yeah.
GB:
But you have to sit back and be pragmatic. Whether it’s a forced issue or an energy project – keep
the humor. I learned a real hard lesson six years ago. You can make all the plans in the world and
formulate your future, have your agenda written in stone, and it can all change. My wife passed
away, I have a different outlook on everything, and I really don’t mind where I’m at now. But I
do look at things a little differently.
BC:
One other question I might have is, would there be any folks that you would recommend that we
might want to interview on this project?
GB:
I would go talk to Val Simmons. He’s been – or John Borg – they’ve been real advocates of
multiple access on the Logan Canyon. And they have some really good views. John is a walking
computer. He knows every rule, every aspect of the Forest Plan; he’s a great asset, great person to
have around. Val is very vocal and he knows what the people want. And between the three of us,
we did our job. I’d talk to those two.
CP:
Alright. Well we appreciate it.
BC:
Yup, thanks.
GB:
If you come with a question …
[Stop recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Garth
Barker
Page
12
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/96">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/96</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-08-22
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
Garth Barker interview, 4 February 2009, and transcription
Description
An account of the resource
Garth Barker discusses multiple-use access for the Logan Canyon meeting with politicians at Multiple Access Conservation Coalition member about land access concerns experience as a member of Search and Rescue.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Barker, Garth, 1949-
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Cole, Bradford R.
Pumphrey, Clinton R., 1984-
Subject
The topic of the resource
Barker, Garth, 1949---Interviews
Barker, Garth, 1949---Childhood and youth
Recreation--Utah--Logan Canyon
Snowmobiling--Utah--Logan Canyon
Politicians--Utah
Multiple Access Conservation Coalition (Utah)
Land use--Law and legislation--Utah--Logan Canyon
Forestry and community--Utah--Cache County
Off-road vehicle trails--Utah--Logan Canyon
Volunteer workers in search and rescue operations--Utah--Cache County
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral histories
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Green Canyon (Utah)
North Logan (Utah)
Providence Canyon (Utah)
Tony Grove (Utah)
Utah
United States
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
20th century
2000-2009
21st 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, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 2 Fd. 2
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx2fd2GarthBarker
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
4 February 2009
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2009-02-04
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/d341243978d7f1d7086309a7471e26ef.mp3
1010d040329266f228f303f415248229
http://highway89.org/files/original/d0b6f76d4fe93ebd64933ed0299cc05a.pdf
cf2c2934900274c42333de1c0b255a39
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Dave Baumgartner
Place of Interview:
Date of Interview:
Mr. Baumgartner’s home in Lewiston, Utah
5 May 2008
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Brad Cole
Brad Cole
Recording Equipment:
Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription Equipment used:
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Susan Gross, 20 July 2008
Brad Cole; Randy Williams 15 March 2011
Brief Description of Contents: The interview contains information on the childhood, education
and the career of Dave Baumgartner as a forester, the various positions held within the Forest
Service and his views on management. There are many anecdotes from his personal experiences
in managing in the Logan Canyon and Logan District of the Forest Service, including his
attitudes regarding the road expansion up Logan Canyon and his idea to include land users when
making decisions.
Reference:
BC = Brad Cole (Interviewer; Associate Dean, USU Libraries)
DB = Dave Baumgartner
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcript. All additions to transcript are noted with brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 1: A]
BC:
Hi, this is Brad Cole, from Utah State University Special Collections and Archives. It’s
Monday, May 5th, 2008, and we’re visiting today with Dave Baumgartner on our Logan
Canyon Land Use and Management Oral History Project. Dave, I’m going to start off
where I usually do and ask you when and where you were born.
DB:
I was born July 29, 1942, in Salt Lake City.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
1
�BC:
Growing up in Salt Lake City, what are your memories of that?
DB:
A lot of open, abandon farm fields. My dad had a little tiny place with a big chicken coop
in the back that he raised a lot of chickens. Then on the rest of the property he grew
pansies for sale, and little junipers for landscaping. Behind our house from there all the
way to Great Salt Lake were just a few farm buildings and such, so we roamed that
country a lot.
BC:
And who were your parents?
DB:
My dad’s name is Heber Baumgartner. My mother’s maiden name was Allen. My
grandpa came from Switzerland when he was two years in 1898, I think it was. He and
his little family are my only relatives in Salt Lake City.
BC:
Really? Interesting. And then as far as you mentioned the landscape of Salt Lake, do you
think that affected your future?
DB:
You know, ever since I was a tiny kid, I can never remember wanting to be a policeman,
fly airplanes, or a fireman. I always wanted to be a forester from as far back as I can
remember. That’s what I wanted to be.
BC:
As a family, did you spend much time in the outdoors, growing up?
DB:
My grandpa was an arborist and a horticulturist. He was the primary caretaker for
Memory Grove, which is just off the hill from the State Capital, for most of his adult life
is where he worked, there. And so he was kind of a man of the outside anyway. And so I
remember growing up – we didn’t do what I would say is a ton of camping, but we did a
lot of it. And we usually fished a little bit wherever we went. We hiked a lot in Big
Cottonwood Canyon, up around Brighton, up to the lakes that are, you know, above
Brighton there. In those days it wasn’t really busy. [Laughing] Not like it is today!
BC:
Do you have any special memories of that period at all?
DB:
You know, not really. It was a happy childhood, we had a good time. Even from our
young ages we were allowed to go out in those fields. And we used to hike from my
house all the way out to the Salt Lake Airport. They had an old airplane dump out there
and we used to fly the old World War II torpedo bomber carcasses that they had laying
around in that place! [Laughing]
Then we hunted rabbits – I mean there wasn’t anything there, we could walk all the way
to Great Salt Lake if we wanted to, but we usually ended up by the Surplus Canal, fish for
carp and shot our .22s at whatever wiggled.
My folks weren’t extremely wealthy, so we had, you know our, I remember, coal stoves
and climbing into the house to get coal to put into the coal cook stove. That’s what heated
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
2
�the house too, for a lot of years. But you know we were just typical kids. We played
football, we hiked a lot, broke our bones. Stuff like that.
BC:
You mentioned that you kind of had the goal to be a forester from a young age –
DB:
Yes.
BC:
When did you did you start pursuing that?
DB:
In high school there were classes that were optional, like botanies and zoologies, and
those kinds of things. You didn’t have to take those, but I took them all. I took all the
natural sciences that the high school offered. Which was basically those two, and
chemistry and a few things like that. I wasn’t very good with chemistry, but the other
stuff we were pretty good with.
BC:
And which high school was that?
DB:
I went to West High School in Salt Lake City.
BC:
And from there, where did you pursue your education after that?
DB:
Utah State University; graduated from there 1969.
BC:
And that was with a bachelor’s degree?
DB:
I had a bachelor’s degree in Forestry and also – it’s not a degree, but I took enough extra
classes that I also qualified as a watershed specialist or a hydrologist. I wasn’t an
engineer hydrologist, but a wildland hydrologist. When I actually got hired by the Forest
Service, I was hired as a watershed specialist, not as a forester. I spent three and a half
years on the Pike National Forest in Colorado as a watershed specialist. And then I knew
that wasn’t where my career wanted to go. I wanted to work on the districts and in the
woods, and not in the supervisor’s office. And so I spent my time there, you know,
getting acquainted with the Forest Service, but as soon as I had an opportunity to go out
to the district I took it.
So I lasted there about, a little over three years, and then I went to the Shoshone National
Forest in Wyoming. I spent in two places seven and a half years on that forest; three years
at Dubois and three and a half in Cody. And then from there we moved to the Sawtooth
in Idaho. And I actually spent seven and a half years there. And then I was the ranger
here in Logan until [19]’93, and then in ’93 I had to go to the regional office! [Laughing]
And I spent, I should put quotes around this, I spent from 1993 until year 2000, I retired
at the end of the year 2000. They were fun years in the regional office, they were
interesting years, but they were really discouraging years too as you saw the Forest
Service begin to unwind as to what it used to be. As to what it once was into what it was
becoming, and it was sad to see that change coming.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
3
�BC:
Maybe explain that a little more, like you know, what it once was and then what it—
DB:
Well, when I started with the Forest Service in 1969, through the late 60s and through the
early, well even through the 70s – and you’ll recall this – there were many people that
made and awfully lot of money writing books on how to run a successful company.
Those books were really good books. I was convinced when I read them that if I had an
opportunity to lead a unit, and I could use the characteristics that you read about in those
books, that we would be more successful than not. The Forest Service in those days was
just coming off the peak of its glory, so to speak. Those writers and people in that field of
management were selecting on an annual basis, you know, the ten top companies or
organizations in the country at that particular time, and the Forest Service, surprisingly
not, was one of them. It had a great spirit about itself; there was a great décor about the
people that worked there. It was a good job. We enjoyed being out in the woods working
with people and all those kinds of things.
I don’t know what changed, to be honest with you. We started to bring in more people
that were not necessarily forest, range kinds of folks. All the “-ologists”, the specialists
that began to come in there in the name of diversity – I wasn’t sure how to react with that,
but their attitude about work was different than the people that preceded them. There was
not as much of a tendency to work long hours. You know we averaged 9-10 hours a day
and never thought about overtime for a second. You’d leave early in the morning to go
someplace in the woods that required time to get there and it required time to get home,
so you’d get home at 8-9 at night, you know, and it was no big deal. But those employees
that started to come in, in my opinion, in that time -- they had a different ethic. I don’t
know that you could say they loved the woods -- it was a job in the field that they trained
for – but whether it was their perfect job or not, I can’t say. But it did begin to change the
Forest Service.
One of the traits of really good companies is that most of the operating money is at the
ground level, where the work’s done. And you saw a tendency in the Forest Service to
start to take more and more of their budget and put them into supervisor’s office, which
funded the specialists that all the supervisors thought they had to have. It was a time in
the mid-80s when all the forest planning stuff started to become the big emphasis and
they all thought they had to have specialists in order to write their forest plans.
What was interesting about the forest planning process, in my opinion, is that the
Congress never intended the Forest Service, when they passed that law, to get as intense
in forest planning as we got. There were times, I recall, when some of the planners
wanted us to actually document the number of times we were going to clean an outhouse,
that would be part of the forest plan to give us direction. I heard one staff officer say one
time, “The reason we’re doing that is because you rangers aren’t getting the job done!” In
other words, our campgrounds weren’t as clean as they should’ve been – and that part’s
true, but that wasn’t the way to fix it. And so our plan started to get deeper, and deeper
and deeper, and it took longer, and longer and longer to get them approved. It was
interesting to me that by the time the process got from the start until somebody approved
the plan at the end, many years had gone by and the issues had changed! And yet, we
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
4
�were operating with a plan that now wasn’t up-to-date. And you know you just saw our
effectiveness being eroded away. People were spending way too much time in the office,
doing planning, in a plan that wasn’t going to be current when it actually went out on the
street. And so, I guess, a long story short is that it was wasted energy. The issues had
changed and the plan wasn’t necessarily addressing what the current issues needed
addressing. And yet, you were theoretically bound by the old plan when you needed to be
in a different box, and the plan kept pulling you back to this box because that’s what’s
written there – but time has changed and you needed to be over this one. And the
arguments of trying to get back and forth between what’s real and what was old. I think it
was wearing people out.
Another interesting thing about that is that, and this again is my opinion, a specialist,
when they came to work for the Forest Service (an “ologist” of some sort), with the
exception of wildlife biologists (many districts had wildlife biologists, the ended up being
an issue by themselves) the specialists in the supervisor’s office had no objectives. They
were supposed to advise us in the woods from time to time. You know, we were
supposed to go ask their opinion about cause and effect of some management activity we
were involved in, and they would write an opinion. Whether we agreed with it or not
didn’t matter, we did what needed to be done on the ground. It frustrated them greatly
because some of them were more swung to the environmentalist side of things and they
saw, timber activity for example, being very anti to the good of the forest. They were
often opposed or very restrictive in their comments in how we would go about doing that
business.
As a side note, despite the fact that we’d been managing timber stands since 1905, all of a
sudden, you know in the 1980s we couldn’t do it right anymore. With the caveat that it is
true that in the 1960s there was way too much emphasis in the Forest Service and in the
political processes for harvesting timber, that’s true. And many ranger districts and
people working on their districts did some really dumb things that generated justifiable
controversy, and justifiable reaction. The solution wasn’t the right solution. The way we
went and tied up our hands so much that you couldn’t manage at all. And many of the
“ologists” contributed to that confusion because of their backgrounds and where they
came from and so forth, they would’ve been really good Park Service employees because
that’s what the Park Service does. But that wasn’t the mission of the Forest Service, by
law it wasn’t their mission. It got to the point where it was just a big argument to get
things done. The effectiveness of the organization, I think you could plot an accurate
curve that shows the Forest Service effectiveness declining as a result of those years.
To this very day I’m not convinced, well I am convinced the Forest Service is just
another government bureaucracy now, it has lost the prestige and the accuracy and the
wisdom that it once had. Now we’re managing by a book instead – forest management is
not an exact science, there has to be a lot of intuition and lot of creative thought that goes
into managing those woods. When you try to do it from a book it’s not nearly as
effective. I listen to a lot of my old compadres that are still working with the Forest
Service and I know it’s not the same, and I don’t know that they’re as happy as we once
were. It seems to be a struggle.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
5
�Even in the fire organization we used to escape to fires – what a wonderful experience
that was! Not that the forest was burning, that’s not the point; but you had one objective,
it didn’t matter what you got paid, what your salary was, what your position in the Forest
Service was – you went away to a fire and you played a role and you focused on an
objective. I might be supervising – at the time I might have been a GS9 [US Federal
General Schedule (GS) Classification System], supervising GS13s – you know, the
bosses! And I’m their boss on a fire, kind of thing. But nobody cared. That was never an
issue! You never had to get out of your chair because some GS13 walked into the room,
for example. But that does happen in some agencies, but it never happened in the fire
organization. You just went, you did your duty, you put the fire out and you went home
feeling good about it. But now they’ve got so many rules that those guys have to pay
attention to, and so many checkmarks on a form they have to put on, you know, before
they can proceed anywhere. They look at you and they say, “It’s just not fun. It’s just not
working.” There are just too many handcuffs put on people now days. Anyway.
BC:
You mentioned you were the district ranger in Logan. What exactly is a district ranger?
DB:
This is what made the Forest Service the organization it was. World class organizations,
according to the people that study this, only have seven or less line positions -- the Forest
Service had four! World class and then some: a chief, a regional forester, forest
supervisor, and a district ranger. The district ranger was the number four position in that
organizational scheme. Everyone else who worked for the Forest Service, with the
exception of the research branch, (in my day – it’s different now – but in my day) worked
for one of those four positions.
Generally speaking, at the National Headquarters there was the National Forest System
(and that’s the side I worked for), then there was a research part that you know, that was
an organization separate from the National Forest organization. Then there was a state
and private organization that dealt with the laws and what have you that dealt with the
government’s assistance to states in forestry kinds of issues. Those three basic
organizations had their own organizations. So we’ll just push those two over to the side
(the state and private and the research guys, because that’s not what I was) and I worked
for the National Forest system side of things, and there was only four people in the chain
of command. And everybody else on that side worked for one of those four people. So it
was decentralized. As a district ranger I actually had more authority than the
superintendent of Yellowstone National Park, in the context that they could not sign
environmental documents in the days I worked around the Park. They had to go to their
next level to get approval for all of this stuff. You’d ask the ranger, I could sign those
documents up to you know, any environmental analysis that was done on a district the
ranger had the authority to sign those in those days (it may have changed now today, I
haven’t kept track of it), but in those days you know. We wrote the environmental
statements and the supervisor would sign those. We had a lot of authority to do the
business and it was a very effective way to do business.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
6
�So the district ranger’s responsibility is to, the National Forest system is organized into
forests, of course -- the regions forests and districts. There are nine regions (although we
have a number ten because that’s what Alaska is but there’s a region missing in there – I
don’t think there’s a region seven – anyway, doesn’t matter). The regions then are
organized into National Forests. Region four regional office is in Ogden, we don’t need
to count them, but I think there’s about 16 or so without counting them up, National
Forests attached to that regional office: in Utah, Idaho, western Montana and Nevada.
That’s the area of the region. Then the forests are usually organized into, depending on
the forest, into four, five or six ranger districts. Each ranger district then has the
responsibility of management on – anywhere between 250,000 acres – I was on one
district where the district area was a half a million acres. The ranger has the responsibility
of the activities that take place on that district. Usually has, depending again on the
district size, Logan had three assistant positions: a clerk, an assistant clerk, and some
long-term but temporary positions. I think we had three of those. Then in the summer the
workforce could expand, depending on what kind of budget was available to 30, 40, 50,
60, 70, 80 seasonals that would come on and work during the summertime. We had the
responsibility of all of that; their welfare, you know, their work assignments, the
management planning that took place on the district. We did that. The Logan budget ran
anywhere between, 600 to $900,000.
BC:
Wow.
DB:
Depending on the year. So you’re responsible for the budget and the money, and how it’s
spent and all the physical integrity of all of that sort of thing. If somebody makes a
mistake it’s always the ranger’s fault, that sort of thing.
BC:
[Laughing] When you started in Logan, what year was that?
DB:
I came here in 1984 as the ranger.
BC:
Okay. And what was the condition of the forest when you arrived?
DB:
I followed a dear old man, by the name of MJ Roberts, who had been the ranger here at
Logan for nearly 20 years. MJ grew up in a period when the Forest Service was doing
some interesting political things that, in hind sight, was probably not the wisest thing for
us to do. So it would be easy to criticize that generation for the work that they did, but
they did a good job based on the circumstances that they [had] to deal with in those days.
The problem was what they left was hard. For example, during the 1960s and 70s,
especially in the 1960s – and this carried over into the 70s as well – Congress was not
funding the Forest Service as well as they had in the past. The Forest Service’s influence
in Congress wasn’t as strong as it had been previous to that, and some of the funds were
getting a little short. Congress had different things in mind: timber was one of them,
watershed was one of them, and recreation wasn’t one of them. So as a strategy we
decided that we wouldn’t put as much emphasis on our campgrounds either. We would
let them just go downhill a little bit, and then Congress would recognize they needed to
put more money there, and therefore they would! But they didn’t. So by 1984 when I
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
7
�came, the condition of our campgrounds was, they were in pretty bad shape. Our roads
were in pretty bad shape; our trails were in bad shape. We were just out doing things, but
we weren’t accomplishing a lot. My recreation crews, for example, I discovered – they
would go to a campground and they would paint one table, then they would drive 20
miles to another campground and paint one table! We were making no progress and we
were going basically downhill on those things. So when MJ finally retired and I had an
opportunity to come here, I actually made a promise I would not say anything for six
months, until I knew that my premonitions were accurate, and they were.
So the issues that we had, especially in Logan Canyon, was the condition of our
campgrounds and picnic grounds; the condition of our roads; the condition of our trails
were a big concern; off-road vehicle traffic. We were getting about 12 new miles of
unauthorized, new trails and roads created every year just by the off-road vehicle traffic.
They were going into places they shouldn’t be going to, we had trails starting up all the
ridges and up all the canyons that didn’t have roads in them. That was a big concern. And
then in Logan Canyon itself we had a horrendous litter problem. I mean it was almost
embarrassing to drive up the canyon sometimes and see all the messes that the general
public had to look at. It was our responsibility, theoretically, to keep things neat and
clean, and we weren’t doing a very good job with that.
During my whole time on the district, those five issues drove most of what we were
doing, with the exception of one other area that we can talk about later. The other area
involved the whole district and not just Logan Canyon. And so with a limited budget and
limited people, the great dilemma was, “how are you going to make progress in all of
those areas?” That was the great dilemma. Another issue that raised its head, during my
tenure there anyway was Logan Canyon highway. That wasn’t an issue when I first
started, but right in the middle they decided they wanted to improve the highway for
another section. After having put one phase in and then lost on the second phase, I think
is the way the history goes, the environmentalists took them to court and the court shut
the state down. They backed away from trying to improve the canyon. And then came
back while I was there with yet another proposal that got very, very controversial for
awhile. Really for some silly reasons – it didn’t have to get that way. We as government
workers sometimes don’t make the wisest decisions all the time.
So anyway, that’s what we were dealing with -- those five things. I was there for eight
and a half years and those issues didn’t change.
BC:
What role did the Forest Service play in the Logan Canyon, the road highway?
DB:
Well, probably more than we should have could have or legally could have because the
easement for the highway obviously was under the control of the state of Utah and the
Federal Highway Administration. But technically once you got outside of the right of
way, any impacts to Logan Canyon was an issue to us. We felt very strongly that we
should have some input into the plan to improve the highway.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
8
�At the beginning I found out that UDOT was going to propose some improvements to the
canyon from the newspaper – they didn’t even call us to tell us. And so they left notice of
a meeting, I went to the meeting; I listened to what they were trying to do. When they
were finished I walked up to the highway engineer who was a nice, cooperative fellow,
and I said to him – his name was Lynn Zollinger – and I said, “Lynn, you’re talking about
writing an environmental impact statement on a highway that you only propose to replace
three bridges.” (The bridge at Right Hand Fork had deteriorated to the point where they
needed to replace it; the next bridge up was too narrow; and then the big bridge at the
dugway – I mean if you try to pass a semi truck coming this way, if you remember, and
you were not too tight against the edge, mirrors could actually click past each other, it
was that tight.) And they wanted to write an environmental impact statement and I said to
them, “Why? The bridges are in place, they have to have maintenance. If that’s all you’re
proposing, why are you going to spend $500,000 and write an environmental impact
statement on something that doesn’t matter?” He says, “What do you mean?” And I said,
“You could write an environmental assessment for less than $10,000, and replace those
bridges.” And he blinked a little bit and said, “Really? I’ll even volunteer to write them
for you.”
So they went back to the Federal Highway Administration, and what an interesting
experience that was! The Federal Highway Administration, their regional office for this
area was in Salt Lake City, and they said to UDOT, “No, by golly! You said that this
program was controversial, it’s controversial and you’ve got to write an impact
statement!” So I went down there one time and I said to the engineer down there, I said,
“If all they’re going to do is replace bridges you don’t need to spend $500,000 of the
taxpayer’s money writing a document that doesn’t matter.” And the guy turned to me and
he said, “What right does a forester have telling an engineer how to do his job?”
[Laughing] And I said to him, “I’m not trying to do that, I’m just trying to save you some
time, energy and money.” He says, “No. The state said it was controversial, it is
controversial, therefore, and they’re going to write an environmental impact statement.”
So they wouldn’t back off of that position. It was their money that the state needed to do
the job, of course. So they came back and said, “We’ve got to write the impact
statement.” So I told them, and this in hindsight might have been bad advice, I said,
“Then write the environmental impact statement for the whole canyon. One project for
the next ten years, and then you’ll only have to do it once. We’ll do the bridges, you’ll do
passing lanes and other kinds of things that you might think are important and so forth,
and it will work fine.”
This is the interesting thing. (A side note on what I thought management and the public
ought to be like.) I’ll tell you a little bit later on another issue why this is important. We
knew the public was interested in what we were doing. And we knew that they were mad
at us for not listening to them. So I told my staff, “Folks, we’ve got to go out of our way
to talk to these folks and to discuss what the issues are.” So I went to the
environmentalists who were opposed to anything in Logan Canyon, and I said, “Folks,
they want to replace four bridges. They have to widen them a little bit because they’re
deteriorating and we need to do something up with the dugway, it’s just absolutely too
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
9
�narrow.” And they basically didn’t disagree with that, but they didn’t trust UDOT. And
so I said, “Okay. If I can get a member of your group to sit on a committee with the
engineers that are planning all of this and if UDOT will agree that they will not proceed
until they have an agreement in this committee, what will you do?” And they said, “Well
if we can have a say and they will listen to what our issues are, we can’t oppose; as long
as they’ll be a little bit flexible.” And so we had the solution. Except at the very first
meeting where all of these people met, UDOT had hired CH2MHill as their primary
contractor, and the CH2MHill engineer who was in charge of the project got up and said,
“We are going to make the decisions.” And I thought, “You can’t do that, we didn’t agree
to that. You’re going to lose the environmental community if you do that.” And they just
would not back off of that. What they said was, “We’ll make the decisions, then you can
review it. And if you don’t like those decisions, we can talk about it.” But they were
never willing to talk about it in the sense that we could change it.
And the environmentalists – they came to several meetings, and then the wall went up
and it was not going to be possible to coordinate and to cooperate. We were that close! I
had my fingers parted about 3/8 of an inch to having that controversy settled and to get
the bridges fixed and then we would negotiate just some passing lanes somewhere. And it
went from there to, you know, to the concept, “Well this is a highway, we have to have
highway standards. We’ve got to have eight feet outside the white line, even in the
middle part of the canyon.” That was the argument that started. We came back with
arguments like, “But in Yellowstone National Park they don’t have eight feet on the other
side of the white line. You concur that you can do other kinds of things but if you go that
way, then you’ve got to fuss with the river again.” That was my biggest concern. I’m a
fisherman.
When I went to school here at Utah State University, I can remember in one of the classes
that we went up Logan Canyon, on the old highway (before the first improvement section
was actually done – because they built that just after I graduated) they had a famous hole
they called “The Big Hole.” The road kind of looped right around it this way. And in that
hole was a 15 pound cutthroat that they’d shocked out of there one day. In those days you
could catch three or four pound rainbows and occasionally a large cutthroat and a large
brown out of the river. It was a good stream.
But when they built that second section, they began to straight-line the river. Their fill
slope went right down to the edge in one area, which I’ll illustrate an issue it caused here
in a second. But the Big Hole became a controversy in that first phase that they put in
there. People were objecting that they were going to run the river straight down the edge
of the highway and cut that meander out of the river totally. UDOT finally compromised
and said that they would protect the hole. So they built two bridges that they didn’t want
to build. The problem was they built the bridge to pass floodwater, but not in a
hydrologic-compatible way to protect that corner. What they did was they built a coverted cement box and put the bridge over it. It would allow the river to go through it
alright, but it constricted it greatly. So when you constrict water and blow it out the other
end it’s going to come out in a great philosophy. And so it came out, was able to pick up
the bed load and move it someplace. Just down stream from the Big Hole is the other
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
10
�bridge, which the fast water backs up against and slows down, and then shoots out the
other side of it. But while it slowed down it dropped that bed load right in the middle of
that Big Hole. And it’s gone. The river goes through there, but the prime habitat that was
there for that one big fish, from a 10-15 foot hole went to two feet with water running
over it. You know, the fish is gone of course.
This cut-slope issue became an issue in about the spring of 1984 when I got here, that
winter of ’83-’84 there was a lot of snow in the woods. When the water came out, it came
out hard. Well, when the river comes up it spreads out over its little floodplain and there
are no issues. We have summer homes here, here and here, scattered everywhere up and
down that river, and there was enough floodplain that flooding of those summer homes
wasn’t an issue. When that highway slope came down to the edge of the river in some
places, and the water had no place to go except off the other side -- where all the cabins
were -- we had water going through many of the cabins a foot deep through their front
rooms and all that sort of thing. Anyway, we knew those kinds of things were going to be
issues; they were issues in the past. And what they had done in the canyon caused some
of those issues. We were hoping that we would learn from the past and do better things in
the future. But the engineers that were working on that at that time – I’m telling you that
they’re good men – but they’re engineers. As a forester I can say this, because there is a
controversy between foresters and engineers on who knows best of how to do things.
Engineers are good at building things, but foresters have a little bit better sensitivity to
the land. If engineers had that same sensitivity there wouldn’t have been a controversy up
there.
So anyway, through the middle part of the canyon there was attempt to get the road wider
and wider and wider. And there’s no place to widen the road in there without massive
cuts up the side of the hill and/or straightening out the river or massive concrete bridges
that cantilever over the river so they don’t have to do any damage to the stream channel –
which they do anyway because the flow’s not the same. That project, for those kinds of
reason, just escalated and escalated and escalated until there wasn’t a whole lot of
cooperation. UDOT was doing what they would do as engineers. To the credit of some of
them though, they knew that there had to be some compromises there and they were
working a very delicate balance between the compromises and what the Federal Highway
Administration was going to require of them. I felt sorry for them like that, but they
began to make decisions in closets and then coming out and trying to justify them in
public. If you have time, I’ll tell you why that doesn’t work, and so forth.
Bottom line of the long story is that they improved Logan Canyon highway and they did
a remarkably good job doing it. Yes, they backed off of some of the things they wanted to
do, but they were able to do some of the things that the environmental community
opposed, thinking that it was bad, bad, bad. Once it was built you could see that they
really didn’t do any damage and they really did improve the highway. We have some
passing lanes where there weren’t passing lanes before on some flat country. You know it
worked out really, really well. I think the bottom line of all of it is that UDOT was able to
improve that highway just about as well as they wanted to and could’ve done. The issue
was they could have done it at the beginning, $500,000 cheaper had they just realized that
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
11
�they had a public that was concerned. If they would’ve worked just a little bit differently
with the public and listened to them a little bit, responded in a positive way, they
wouldn’t have had to spend over $1,000,000 to complete the document. The $1,000,000
would have built all three bridges. [Laughing] And would’ve done a lot to improve their
highway, and yet they put it into the paperwork, and then still had to spend the money to
do what they probably could’ve got away with anyway had they managed it just a little
bit differently.
Now I get criticized sometimes for criticizing UDOT that way. I don’t mean to sound
critical of them, but I’ve been through the experiences that they contributed in the canyon
issue. And I knew what could work and what couldn’t work. The sad thing was is they
just couldn’t or wouldn’t listen and respond well enough to allow those kinds of things to
work in their favor. So they’ve got big walls built, their thick, hard steel reinforced
concrete walls – anything they do in that canyon now they’re just not going to get any
cooperation from people that might oppose them automatically because they don’t trust
the highway engineer -- which is a shame because like I said earlier, there are some really
good people there. They don’t deserve that kind of criticism. But on the other hand, they
brought it on themselves just by being too autocratic in the way they did their business.
Logan Canyon ended up being one of the most interesting and the most difficult of all the
assignments that we had. The Forest Service isn’t clean in this either. The supervisor got
tired of UDOT engineers complaining that our district was requiring them to do too many
little things. I stood right in the middle of them and told them they weren’t going to do
this and this and this, they had to consider this. And they kept asking me what authority I
had to do this. I don’t know if I had any authority or not, I just said it. They finally put the
Forest Engineer in charge of the Logan Canyon issue and backed the district off a little
bit, which I thought was a mistake. It further built the walls a little bit thicker. Our Forest
Engineer was able to work with the highway engineers, but so could we. But it was
engineer to engineer instead of a different disciplines trying to work out, you know, a
“better vision” so to speak.
But again, the bottom line is they built what they could have built, they built what they
needed to build. They could’ve done that in the beginning had they been a little bit more
open with the public, in my opinion, and we would’ve saved the taxpayers several
hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process. I think that’s what bothers me the most. I
knew they were going to build what they were going to build. And I knew that it was
okay, what they were going to do. It didn’t need to cost so much extra money just in the
process of getting it approved, in my opinion.
BC:
You described kind of a process where you tried to get all parties at the table in the
beginning of that. Did you successfully use that same system on other, like travel plans,
and things like that?
DB:
Yes. Travel plan is probably one of the things I think the district should be the proudest
of all of their accomplishments during the [19]‘80s and early ‘90s. It came to pass in the
most interesting way. My whole career goal, for example, I wanted to be a district ranger.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
12
�I didn’t want to be a forest supervisor, I didn’t want to go to a supervisor’s office, I didn’t
want to go to the Washington office; I wanted to be a district ranger. I’m not egotistical
when I tell you this, and I’m not boasting when I tell you this either, but that’s what I
trained for. I read management books that lots of people read, and I read them several
times. I knew what it took. I knew what successful organizations did. I knew what
successful bosses did. I tried very, very hard – these aren’t my ideas, they’re other
people’s ideas – but I was impressed with them enough to think that I needed to try them.
Most changes in management styles take three or four to five years to implement. And if
you get discouraged in that timeframe and don’t get to the fifth year, they’ll throw them
out saying it was a bad idea when it really wasn’t. You just have to be able to stick to it
for that long.
One of the things that makes an organization successful is their exemplary customer
service, I mean they bend over backwards for their customers. The Forest Service
customer is the person that uses the woods: the camper, the hunter, the fisherman, the
person that drives up and down the road just enjoying the scenery. Another trait is that
the boss managed by wandering around. He knew what was going on. He didn’t sit in an
office and have people report to him and then make decisions on somebody’s spin to an
issue. He was there; he knew what he was looking at. So I spent an extraordinary amount
of time in the woods. My supervisor used to get after me, “I want you to this meeting!” “I
can’t be to this meeting, I am going over here.” And I resisted going to meetings a lot.
And/or when she called on the telephone I was never in the office. And she said, “I know
you’re out there doing your duty, but I need you!” I couldn’t do that. Our district motto
was “The highest quality money could buy.” And our mindset wasn’t there. That’s why I
told you about painting the tables. One in the campground and one in another
campground doesn’t make the campground look good.
So I knew what the crews were doing and I knew what the people in the woods were
thinking, because I went and asked them. During hunting season I would get in my
pickup truck and I’d stop at every hunting camp and I’d walk in the hunting camp.
Sometimes it was hostile. But this is the way I learned about what I’m going to explain to
you here in a second. I walked into a hunting camp one time in Temple Fork. They had
their campers parked with their rear ends out over the creek, and they were beating up the
bank (not any worse than the cows had done, but you know) they were in the wrong
place. I wanted to ask them if they would be really mad if we rocked an area 10-20 feet
off the edge of the creek so they couldn’t park quite so close. But before I ever got that
out of my mouth, the guy says, “What are you doing here?” And I said, “Well I just came
to visit and give you a garbage bag and talk about picking up litter and keeping off-road
vehicles on the roads, this sort of thing.” He said, “I want you to know you’re in hostile
territory.” I said, “Why is that?” The guy was angry, but he wasn’t mean, you know? And
he said, “Let me tell you this story. My family, extended family had been camping in
Logan Canyon for 50 years.” (This was in the late [19]80s, so it goes back 50 years from
there.) And he said, “A couple of years ago.” (Just before I got there.) “You closed our
camping place.” It was just a dispersed spot. They drove down an old road and there was
a little flat they camped on every year, three or four, five, six times a year, and then hard
during the hunting season. We were closing roads because we were getting too many of
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
13
�them, you know, unauthorized. So they moved to another location and they hadn’t been
there two months before a sign went up saying “This area is closed to camping.” They
moved to another area and we did the same thing (and this is over just a couple of years).
And they moved to another area and we did the same thing. And then they ended up here
on Temple Fork. And they said, “If you’re about to tell us that we’re going to move one
more time,” he said, “I’m going to shoot you.” [Laughing] But he was kidding! But he
was making his point. And I said, “That is really interesting.” And he told me some other
families that were having the same issues. And so I went to those families, actually went
to their houses, and I talked with them about that. And sure enough they had the same
concerns.
At that same time we were starting the travel plan process. And we had to identify all the
roads we wanted to leave open and all the roads that we were closing. We potentially had
300 miles of road roughly I think we figured out, that we were going to close. We kind of
had it in our mindset which ones they were too, because they were all the unauthorized
ATV roads. And so when we visited with them, we got the notion (I did anyway) that
they would like to have a say in this. The typical Forest Service method of travel
planning was we’d go back in the office and the district personnel would draw the roads
on the map. And we’d say, “Well leave this one open and we’ll close this one.” Then
we’d go to the public and try to justify it. They had no say in it and the first time they saw
it on the board was at the public meeting. They would look at it and of course they were
opposed; their favorite road’s being closed and nobody could tell them why.
So we did it differently. We took our map and we took every road off the district. We just
took the whole road system and took it off the map; there were no roads on the district at
all. Then we put the obvious main roads back on – the ones that we’d spent hundreds of
thousands of dollars putting in and maintaining over the years and our access to the
woods kind of roads that would be there no matter what. Then we did something that no
other district did as far as I know. We invited the public to come in over a long period of
time and we asked them to tell us which roads they would like to see back on the map -with four criteria; and the public bought off on the criteria before we even opened up the
process. Any roads you put back on can’t affect water, the streams; it can’t affect
vegetation; it can’t erode the soil; it can’t affect wildlife; and we can’t have more than 1.5
miles of road per square mile. And the public said, “Those are fair criteria.” So it was a
piece of cake. People walked in the door. The old families that said, “I’ve camped on this
spot” (and point to the map) “and drove down this little road, it goes down a rocky old
ridge to this little campsite; I would like you to open that road or leave that road open.
It’s just one road.” They didn’t care about the rest of the district, just the one road. You
went through those five criteria. If there were no issues with those five criteria we said,
“Okay.” And they would blink and some of them would say, “You’re kidding!” No! It
met the criteria, that’s what we agreed to, so we drew it on the map.
By the time eight or nine months had gone by (we left it open that long), we had the road
system on the district that most interested the people in the district. That was the
important point. I mean, 100% of the public didn’t come in – maybe only 20% came in,
but those were the ones that would cause the most issues if an issue were to be had.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
14
�Rudy Lukez – do you remember Rudy?
BC:
Um-hmm.
DB:
Rudy who was the local Sierra Club leader? Worked with us day and night on that thing.
I respected Rudy a lot, he was fair. And when we got to the end of it and said, “Rudy, this
is what it looked like.” He had no argument except for one little motorcycle track around
Logan Peak. He said, “I want you to close that,” and I said, “Rudy, why?” “Well
because--” the criteria comes to effect, it doesn’t affect any of those kinds of things. The
folks who ride a motorcycle do need a place to go. And he reluctantly said, “Well,
perhaps. But don’t be surprised if I don’t appeal your plan.” Anyway, there was a little
idle threat there. So we said, “Okay Rudy. You do what you need to do.” We published
that; put it out to the public. We never had one appeal on it, not one, not even Rudy. We
were just tickled to death! I mean, the process worked! You listen to the public, you
respond to them in ways that are positive. If you can implement some of their ideas and
kind of work with them on some of their concerns, they’ll support you. And they
supported us.
We didn’t get one appeal. Every ranger district around the Logan District: Montpelier
District, Ogden District – eight, nine, ten, 12 appeals apiece; takes months and months to
get them all resolved. Then you’ve got a travel plan that’s still controversial because
people still aren’t supporting you. They tear your signs out, they drive behind the barriers
anyway because nobody’s going to tell them what to do. We had a minor problem with
that on the ranger district here in Logan. Some of our signs did come out on a regular
basis, but we made it a priority that this is one of our important things – the travel plan
was – if it’s going to work we’ve got to enforce it fairly. So we all carried signs in our
trucks with us. We all knew which roads were supposed to be open and closed and if the
sign was missing we put one up. The first year we probably lost one a month, the same
sign every month on a road. The next year we might’ve only replaced it twice. By the
third year we weren’t replacing them at all. The public was beginning to support us. Most
of the activists in the valley were supporting us, in their club meetings and stuff they
were telling people that they needed to behave and so forth. And it was working. We
were really proud of the way that it was working.
If you were to interview Garth Barker, for example, I think he would say (maybe I’m
being too bold in saying this), but I think he would say that during that timeframe they
were comfortable and very, very pleased with what that process did for them, and were
really comfortable with it up until about maybe 1995-96 when one person on the Logan
District said, “We are going to review the decisions in the travel plan and the Forest
Service will do this process and then we’ll take it to the public.” And I can remember
Garth writing in the newspaper, or somehow I heard some background on it, “no, that’s
not we agreed to.” And the Forest Service did it anyway. And they’ve been gradually
losing the public ever since which is sad to me because it doesn’t have to happen but it is
happening. Anyway, that’s the travel plan thing.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
15
�BC:
Seems much more contentious now when you read about it in the paper.
DB:
Oh yeah. The walls are very, very deep and they’re very, very thick. Cross-country skiing
and snowmobiling are two controversial things that occurred even during that time there.
I knew it was an issue, I came from the Sawtooth NRA [National Recreational Area], and
just before I got there snow machiners and cross country skiers were having a hard time
getting along with each other. Somehow, (I don’t know who organized the meeting) they
came together and they made some agreements that worked for them. The snow machiner
needed early snow and the early snow of course is in the high country. But once it snows
up on the Sawtooths, the whole valley is full of snow and the snow machiners can go
anywhere and they agreed to back off the high country when sufficient snow was in the
low country. Then the cross country skiers (there were a lot of downhill cross country
skiers in those days there) would be able to ski off the road edges and down to the road
below and drive back up and do their thing. You know, it worked marvelously. So I knew
they could get along.
And so we already had wildlife closures in the travel plan and they weren’t controversial
they were protecting a few elk winter areas and the snow machiners knew that was
realistic and it wasn’t an issue, they could get around them without a problem.
Bunchgrass wasn’t an issue in those days because we wouldn’t let it become an issue.
The cross country skier wanted the snow machines out of Bunchgrass. But no, the cross
country skier was there before you guys were and you still can get off and out of their
way. In fact you ski up their track and you ski down their track. But they’re not going
where you’re going so we’re not going to worry too much about that right now. But the
maintenance shed area was controversial. They were not getting along very well there.
And I had both groups come into my office, not together but one at a time, and complain
about the other one. I told them, “You’re not going to make this into a controversy and
you’re going to have to get along because I’m not closing it to one way or the other, for
these reasons: the snow machiner goes up the road, up to Swan Creek and back and that
country up in there, and they basically make a track for you to get to the deep, powdered
snow on north slopes that you can ski down without – the snow machine can’t go there
because it’s too soft, they don’t like to go there. They’re going to do the south slopes.
Except for the day after a storm, the south slopes are going to crust over two or three days
in bright sunshine and it’s hard to ski south slopes on cross country skis, as the
technology was in those days. And the snow machine guys are just doing their thing.
They’re looping, looping, looping and climbing high up on the hill and having a good
time and coming back down. And both of you are using the same country but you’re not
in each other’s way. Is that not true?” Well they had to admit that. “Well we don’t like
their smell and we don’t like their noise.” Be that as it may, it’s not really an issue
because they’re not in the same place anyway. So I wouldn’t let it become an issue, and it
didn’t.
I feel bad that it is today, it’s a major issue today. And so is Bunchgrass a major issue
today. But in my opinion, the reason it is is because the Forest Service again made the
decision without talking to their public first. They tried to make a decision and then go
sell it, and that is the worst way you could ever do anything in the Forest Service. If a
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
16
�ranger makes a decision and tries to sell it to the public without any public involvement,
that’s what he’s calling public involvement – he or she. That’s not public involvement.
That’s telling people what you’re going to do and they have no input in it. If it is gets
controversial you may not carry it out, but you also won’t implement good things that
people could enjoy if it were otherwise.
BC:
I’m kind of curious; you talk a lot about the interface with the public. When you were
becoming a forester and went to school was there any education on how to do public
management? Because it seems like that’s a big part of the job now.
DB:
It’s a major part of the job and no, you know we came out of school as technically trained
foresters. We were going to go to the woods and manage timber and wildlife – if you
were a wildlife biologist – and cows and sheep and goats. But not necessarily people. If
you were a forest recreationist and had a degree in forest recreation from Utah State
University you had more of that kind of training, but you were also designing
campgrounds and people flow patterns and trail maintenance standards and stuff like that.
BC:
How about, were you here when the Utah Wilderness deal went through--?
DB:
Yes, yes I was.
BC:
And—
DB:
I came after the negotiations were mostly done and just before the law was passed.
BC:
So how did that process, was it similar kind of -- ?
DB:
Again, it’s one of those sad examples of the public and the Forest Service not being able
to talk to each other in a positive way. The boundary for Mount Naomi wilderness, for
example, is in some places is not a manageable boundary. It has too many little wiggles
in it to say that it’s wilderness here, but then the next little squiggle in it it’s not and then
it’s wilderness, and so forth. And all the little cherry stems they put up the canyons, you
know, so you can drive to a trailhead deep inside the wilderness that comes down both
sides of the cherry stem.
I was in one meeting with Tom Lyons (who represented the environmentalists at the
time) and we were talking about a boundary in Green Canyon, down by Logan. The
boundary comes down the Logan Canyon-Green Canyon ridge in a very narrow little
stem that comes west towards Logan from the main part of the forest. In places you could
almost throw a rock from the wilderness boundary to wilderness boundary. The forest
supervisor and I were meeting with them in a meeting one night. The forest supervisor
was trying to convince them that, “Let’s just draw the boundary across that little cherry
stem and not worry about it.” And Tom would not buy it for a second. He said, “No, we
agreed on ‘x’ number of acres for the wilderness. If we cut that out we lose 5,000 acres
and we’re not willing to do that.” But he said, “It’s not manageable.” And Tom said,
“You see all those trees” (picture Green Canyon, have you been in Green Canyon? So
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
17
�you know on that north slope as you drive up the canyon that you’ve got a cliff, some
trees, cliffs and trees, cliffs and trees as it goes up that north-facing slope.) Tom was
convinced that we were going to go cut those. I said, “Tom there’s not even any way we
can put a road up there, even if that were a possibility.” He said, “No, we don’t trust you.
You’re going to cut those so we’re not going to deal with you on this boundary change.”
It was no big deal, we didn’t push it beyond that meeting and congress passed it the way
the map was drawn and we’ve been dealing with it ever since.
It’s a little interesting because, in my opinion, wilderness should be wilderness. You
shouldn’t have a road in wilderness that Richmond city, for example, can drive their
pickup trucks over to get to a well-developed water system that’s inside the wilderness
boundary. To me that doesn’t seem wilderness-y. Or to have a road that goes so far up the
middle of it for, you know, for whatever reason. But that’s the way it was passed so I
guess that’s what we deal with.
I don’t know if it’s one of the first, but it’s one of the early wildernesses new in the 1980s
that did have those little extenuating uses allowed inside the boundary; mostly for
municipal water systems. Some miners had access to patented mining claims inside the
wilderness (not ours, but you know, others).
BC:
And then the other big issue that came along during that period was the STLA Lands?
DB:
Yeah, that came after I left.
BC:
After you left? Okay.
DB:
We were involved a little bit in the beginning. I took the Seth Allen (who was then the
Cache County – what do they call it?)
BC:
Commissioner?
DB:
No he wasn’t a commissioner. He was what Lynn Lemon, the executive –
BC:
The county executive, that’s right, yeah.
DB:
Yeah. Seth Allen was the county executive and we toured the country a few times talking
about those kinds of issues. But I left before the decisions were made to change them
around.
But you can ask – what I thought about them? [Laughing]
BC:
What did you think about them?
DB:
It’s very efficient to block up ownership so you don’t have the state sections inside the
National Forest. If you can eliminate those kinds of things it just makes management for
both agencies a lot easier. But the way it came to pass, you know, the political-ness of the
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
18
�thing was a concern to me because the state’s objective is to use state lands to make
money; which means that if summer homes made them more money than cows then they
would develop summer homes. Or if there was a mine, some minerals, they would be a
lot more open to managing the minerals because it generated funds for whatever fund
benefited from that activity. And being in National Forest ownership I think we had a
little bit better handle on making forests, forests and not open to golf courses and you
know, more recreation cabins and so forth.
So I was a little disappointed that something different wasn’t done around Beaver
Mountain. We weren’t ever going to allow condominiums and that kind of development
to take place up there. But with the state now in control of that stuff it can be a
possibility, I’m not saying they’re thinking like that. But it’s a possibility. We wanted to
purchase that 400 acres at the mouth of that highway that goes up to Beaver Creek. On
the south side of the highway there’s 400 acres, 440 acres I think, of private ground in
there. We wanted to pick that up really bad just to keep the urbanization of Logan
Canyon to a minimum. I believe the county ordinances won’t allow much development in
there right now, but of course they can change. I just think it would be sad to drive Logan
Canyon and all of a sudden have to drive through a community, you know. That’s my
opinion.
BC:
The other thing I wondered about – it seemed like in the early 1980s is the time period
you saw a lot more women moving into the Forest Service and U.S. Wildlife Service and
stuff. Did that happen with you and how was that change accepted or?
DB:
Well it wasn’t just women, it was women and minorities and specialists. All three of
those were kind of in the same box, so to speak. I think that’s an interesting question and
my answer is probably somewhat biased.
I believe that the forester, whether it is a man or a woman or a minority, it’s not what
they were, it’s what they are: a forester. Most of the foresters in the Forest Service, range
conservationists as well, at that time were white males. It’d been 80 years getting to that
particular point and to suggest that we automatically change the agency overnight to be
this marvelous balance was 1) in my opinion, not fair to those people who’d already spent
15, 20, 30 years working and growing and learning and were most qualified for some of
the leadership positions (not in every case, but generally speaking their backgrounds
would allow them to take the next step up the ladder, so to speak). And to be replaced by
a woman or a minority that had been in the service for five or six years didn’t ever seem
fair to me. They didn’t have the experience; they didn’t have the background and so
forth. So I had some fairly strong concerns about that.
A forest supervisor came to me one day and said, “I want you to take one of your GS3
summer positions, and I want you to fill it with a minority.” And I told the supervisor I
wouldn’t do it. He’d never been told that before, I don’t think, because the look on his
face was of quite surprise. But what I had working on the Logan District at the time were
people that had been on the district for a minimum of 10 years and many had been on for
15 years. And I wasn’t about to take that kind of an experienced person and put them out
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
19
�to pasture to tell them when they came back from whatever they were doing that they
didn’t have a summer job because I was going to put a minority in that position, I
couldn’t do it. I wouldn’t do it. But I told the supervisor, I said, “But you watch this
district and I’ll bet you within a year we have a better percentage than any other district
on this whole forest.” Because I knew the staff was working in that direction. They were
picking up people that were qualified that would help the district succeed, not meet some
quota. And yet at the end of the year we had a higher percentage of women and
minorities working on our district than any other district on the whole forest. And we
weren’t forced into it and we didn’t wave our red flags to see how great we were
(whereas some of the other rangers were getting points for all of the attention they paid to
that). We spent our time focused on the woods. And we hired people that could help us
meet those objectives. And if a good young lady or a minority of any kind were qualified
to help us do that we sought them out and we got them and we did get them. They liked
working for the district. Then our percentages were higher than anybody else’s. And you
know what? We never got one ounce of recognition for that.
BC:
Huh. [Laughing]
DB:
But we didn’t care. That’s not what we were seeking. We knew it was the right way to
go. We knew it was the right thing to do. People needed to have opportunities to grow.
They need to start somewhere, and we were willing to give them an opportunity to start,
but it was on our terms not on somebody else’s quota. But it worked. I was really proud
of the staff and the way they went about that. We had Native Americans, we had women.
It was cool.
BC:
I had a couple of questions going back to when you went to school here at Utah State
University. Who were some of your favorite professors when you were there?
DB:
I laugh because when I started forestry school, I started in 1960, and I went one year and
I went on an LDS mission and came back in 1963. In 1960 there was Doc Daniels and
Ray Moore – the two famous professors. When I came back there was still Doc Daniels
and Ray Moore, Carl Johnson (and a few other names that I could think of but I’m not)
there; a very small faculty and not very many students. And so we got to know Doc
extremely well and we got to know Ray extremely well, really well. And then you can’t
help but thinking back on those days about those two old rascals. Yeah, they were good
guys.
Doc was harder than nails. He was a hard professor. Unless you were extremely articulate
and absolutely perfect he gave very few “A”s. But he loved us and then we respected him
a great deal too. We knew he cared about us he just wanted us to perform the levels that
we sometimes couldn’t reach! [Laughing] But Ray Moore was my advisor, I think for
most of the whole time I was in school. I got “C”s out of Doc Daniels until all of the
required subjects were over and then he taught some other classes that weren’t required
and I took them anyway because they would help us in our background. And I got “A”s
in those. He said, “If you’re dumb enough to take me after three years of silviculture” he
said, “I can’t help but give you an ‘A’!” [Laughing]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
20
�So anyway, those are the two guys I remember the most. There are others but those stand
out. Both have gone now too, haven’t they?
BC:
Um-hmm. What about any influential writers or books you’ve read that stand out?
DB:
Gifford Pinchot wrote a book on the Forest Service; I’ve read that book twice. That’s
probably the most influential book I’ve read about the philosophy of the Forest Service. It
focused my mind on certain principles. But other than that, you look at our text books;
they were all (let’s see I don’t even remember the name of them now. I remember the
titles but I don’t remember who the printer was). I can tell you they were red books with
the tree symbol on the front of them and they were the technical manuals that we all used
in those days. I still have some copies out in the garage somewhere I think. But as far as
books go, you know influence goes, I was more influenced by the writers of management
systems; what makes good companies good companies and what makes good leaders
good leaders – than I was by the books we were exposed to while we were in school.
I’ll tell you one story though that’s interesting to me, that helped shape some of my
background thinking too. When I graduated, as I said earlier, I spent three years in
Colorado Springs doing watershed studies basically. The Forest Service had a lot of
watershed money in those days, and I’m glad because I got hired off that money. I
walked all over Pikes Peak for three years just doing type lines around vegetative cover
types and so forth. But when I finally got back to the district I was assigned to the Dubois
District on the Shoshone National Forest. Now I was the main timber sale administrator
and I’d never administered a timber sale before let along read a timber sale contract. And
yet I was dealing with Louisiana Pacific, 50 million board feet supply lines – 12, 20, 30
million board feet timber sales – and I had no clue what was going on there. The ranger at
the time, his name was Harold Wadley, a legend in the Forest Service. That man could
get more things done than anyone I ever knew! He convinced United States Plywood and
then Champion Paper that they weren’t going to get 30 million board feet off the Dubois
District anymore, they were going to get 1.8 million board feet and they did it without
complaint. He was a marvelous guy.
I told him one day, I said, “Harold, I have never administered a timber sale.” He said,
“Doesn’t matter, I’ll tell you what to do.” He said, “You just go up to the woods and you
take your crew stick and you measure stumps.” I said, “Measure stumps?” The contract
required a stump height of 12 inches – you can’t be any higher than that, you can be
lower. And he said, “You’d be surprised what happens.” So I went up there and I kicked
the stump and I’d put my ruler by it and I’d measure it and I’d wonder on. I had no clue
as to what I was doing. But later I discovered that the skid trail lines were now straight
and on the line they were supposed to be, the roads being built where they were marked.
The loggers were dropping things so that they could skid them out without knocking all
the other trees over. And I would come back and it would be a mess and I’d start kicking
stumps again and everything would just smooth out; a wonderful lesson. I remembered
that ever since.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
21
�But I had marked a spruce stand one day. About 30 acres worth and this old logger had
been sawing trees for probably 50 years – asked me one day to eat lunch with him and I
said, “Sure.” After a little while he said, “Would you mind if I told you something?” And
I said, “No!” He said, “I understand exactly what you did with these spruce trees, but I
can’t cut them down. And the only way to get them to fall so that the cut off tree doesn’t
fall on somebody unexpectedly is I have to go over to this next tree. I have to cut it and
drop it into that clump of trees that you marked and knock everything down, including
the good trees. And that’s not what you want.” And I said, “No, that’s not what I want.”
(Just as a little background – spruce can grow as individual trees or sometimes they’ll
grow in clumps. And if they grow in clumps, the outside trees are all wind firm but the
inside trees aren’t. So if you cut out the outside trees the inside ones all fall down or blow
over in the wind. So I marked all the inside trees to leave the wind firm ones on the
outside. But the wind firm ones on the outside held up the trees on the inside and they
wouldn’t fall down.)
So he said to me, “Can I make a suggestion?” And I said, “Sure.” And he said, “Why
don’t you just mark the whole clump, and then don’t mark the next clump, and so forth.
And then you’ll still have that scattered tree system about here. They’ll all stand up. I can
cut the trees down, we can get them out of here and we won’t do any damage.” And I
thought to myself, “What a marvelous idea!” I’d never thought of that. And so that’s
what we did and it worked out fine.
Six months later from Colorado State University the main Forest Service researcher in
Engelmann Spruce management came out with what was a brilliantly written marking
guides for Engelmann Spruce. And guess what his suggestion was for clumpy spruce?
Almost word for word with what that old man told me.
BC:
[Laughing] Maybe he talked to the same guy!
DB:
I don’t know! But I learned a great lesson from that old man. You know, there are people
around here that know a lot more than you do, even though they haven’t been to college
and you would do well to listen to them. That set my thinking about listening to the
public too, in that point in time.
BC:
Um-hmm.
DB:
One short, other example. In Logan Canyon at Rick Springs, we used to have a flush
toilet there. It was a big pain in the neck because the water system wouldn’t deliver
reliable water supply. So it was always shut down and then people were relieving
themselves in front of the doors and behind it, you know. It was just a stinky mess. And
so the engineers came back to us and said, “Well, your water system doesn’t meet state
standards and so we’re going to spend $75,000 to put a new water system in.” And I said,
“You’re going to what?!” $75,000 of the taxpayers’ money to put an inch, basically
inside diameter water supply to an outhouse that is broken down more than it functions! I
said, “I don’t think we should do that.” Well the engineers thought that was their decision
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
22
�and not mine. I told them, “No it’s not your decision, it’s the district’s decision and we
don’t necessarily think that’s what you ought to do.”
So I went up there one day to ask the public what they thought. “If we tore that toilet
out,” was the question, “what would be your response?” And the only two people in that
parking lot were two ladies laying on top of their car sunbathing, scantily clothed. The
kid with me said, “You’re not going to go up and ask them that question, are you?” I said,
“Certainly I am!” So I went up there and I knocked on the side of the door and of course
they jumped up startled and looked at me and I had my uniform on and stuff and they
said, “Uh, what did we do?” “Well you didn’t do anything; I just want to ask you a
question.” So I asked them the question. And there in all of their suntan glory said, “No,
we don’t think you ought to do that. It seems like it’s too much money for what it’s
worth.” So we asked a few other people around. Most of the local don’t use that. What it
was used mostly by were the bus companies on tour from Salt Lake, or wherever they’re
coming from, going over to Bear Lake and then on over to Yellowstone. That was just a
stop. So we didn’t ask them, but we tore it out anyway and we never heard a word and we
never spent $75,000 of the taxpayers’ money putting in a water system that probably
wouldn’t work anyway.
Anyway, so that’s kind of the way we managed the district. We went out and asked and if
somebody had a better idea than we did we would implement the idea. And it really
confused people. They didn’t think that a government agency would listen to anybody but
we tried really hard to do so.
BC:
One quick question on the fellows name Wadley? How do you spell that?
DB:
Harold Wadley was W-A-D-L-E-Y I think was the way they spelled it. Wadley.
BC:
Okay. That will help when we transcribe it.
DB:
Yeah. He was an interesting guy. He was a super patriot! Took leaves of absence and
fought in Korea and then in Vietnam. And he was wounded badly in Vietnam but it still
never slowed him down any. He couldn’t raise his (I don’t remember which arm it was),
he loved to hunt, but he couldn’t raise a gun up anymore so he shot it from the hip!
[Laughing]
BC:
And then somebody had mentioned that you were involved in trying to have some of the
summer home leases pulled, or?
DB:
Yeah. When I got here – not generally the whole bunch, but when I arrived in 1984 a
cabin at what we call Red Bridge (which is half way between Stokes’ Nature Center and
Second Dam, there was a cabin at Red Bridge). Now the kids use it – there’s a big rock
behind where the cabin was and they use it to rock climb and practice on it now. But it
was owned by a guy by the name of Chase Peterson from Tremonton. And ten years
before I got here Chase had signed an agreement that he would give up his rights to the
cabin. It was in the wrong place. You know that trail went right through his front door
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
23
�almost, that’s up there now, and the public and he were having a few problems and so
forth. He agreed to give it up. So I happen to arrive the spring that the ten years were up.
So the decision had already been made to take it out. But Chase didn’t think that the
Forest Service would go through with it. I don’t know if I was being unreasonable or not,
but I mean he agreed and so we said we were going to take it out and there was no room
to renew it. So come June or July that year he was supposed to go, he wouldn’t go. He
was supposed to go, he wouldn’t go. He went to the Regional Forestry, went to the Forest
Supervisor. Bless the hearts of those two men, they backed up the district’s decision. So
Logan City was fussing with their water line at the time and agreed to take a ‘dozer up
there and knock it over and put it in a dump truck and take it out to the dump. The day
we’d planned to do that Chase shows up and stands in front of the bulldozer. I mean he’s
an older guy!
BC:
Yeah.
DB:
So we went up there to try and negotiate the situation. Of course he’d called the
newspaper and the newspaper was there. I believe they had a picture of me standing on
the guard rail with one foot up on the guard rail and my head hung down like this and
Chase jabbering in the background. Eventually we tore it down that day and it left and so
did he, and that was the end of the controversy.
The summer home issue and the Forest Service is interesting in my opinion. Way back in
our history there was a fairly political debate as to who should be the recreation supplier
in the country: the Park Service or the Forest Service. The Secretary of Interior wanted
the National Forest for recreation and of course the Secretary of Agriculture wanted the
National Forest for the multiple uses that it was supposed to provide.
And so in order to compete with the Park Service, the Forest Service got in the recreation
business. We built campgrounds and summer homes were one of the recreational uses
that were permitted on the forest at that time. A number of National Forests across the
west especially have summer home groups, some have many of them (like we do in
Logan Canyon, you know, not top to bottom but there are several summer home groups
in there). That’s where they came from. Their fees were very minimal. They were only
recreation cabins; they couldn’t establish a residency in them, etc., etc. Although over the
years many have tried. But as government has seen in our lifetime experiences, different
ways they can make money, they’re looking at summer home groups to say, “Well, their
fees are way below market value and so we’re going to raise them up.” And every time
that comes it causes a major controversy. They go to the congressman, the congressman
come down and beat on the Forest Service, you know, it’s like rabbits. They go through
this cycle where there are a lot of them and then it’s quiet for a while and then there’s a
lot more of them. That seems to be what’s happening with the summer home group. It
gets controversial and then it cools off, then it gets controversial, but it’s almost always
over the fee or some of the tendency of the some of the permittees to want to make
certain improvements to their properties and make them a little bit more urban than they
were designed to be.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
24
�But Chase is the only one that we actually terminated. [Laughing]
BC:
How do you see the future of the Forest Service?
DB:
Oh, I wish I didn’t have to answer that question!
Again, I grew up at the tail end of its glory, in my opinion. But I’ve seen the policies in
the Forest Service become more complex and more of them, more rules, more
regulations. Not necessarily coming from congress either. I see people in positions that I
don’t think ought to be in the positions they’re in because of egos, because of power, you
know. The things that people seek high positions for sometimes. I don’t see us spending
as much time on the ground as we ought to be spending. We’re spending way too much
time in political issues, at least some of the folks are. And I don’t see a bright future for
the Forest Service. I wouldn’t be surprised in five, ten years there isn’t a Forest Service
anymore. There will be some kind of gigantic agency that manages all of the, you know
the natural resources: parks, wildlife refuges, forests, you know, BLM lands all in the
same agency. And I’m going to be one of the firsts that would say it’s not going to work
effectively for the good of the American public. I think it will be a very bureaucratic kind
of thing, like many government agencies are, and I don’t think it will serve the public like
the agencies in the past have. People can accuse me of being an old thinker, I don’t care. I
have seen too many evidences where that kind of thinking does not work.
I can give you a couple of examples if you want to take the time to listen to them.
BC:
Sure.
DB:
The average ranger district, for example, even say 1984, consisted of regular staff but it
had what we called a business management assistant. It was a well-trained, usually a
lady, that managed the business of the district. She did the hiring, she paid many of the
bills, she had access to a fund where we could take and go down to the hardware store
and buy a hammer and nails if we needed to do that kind of stuff. It was very efficient;
the store owners got paid in a timely way. She completed all the paperwork that needed
to be done; some required a forest supervisor’s signature – she’d get it all ready, send it in
and manage that process. We hired our own people on the district. We could pick the best
workers because we knew who they were. We hired a lot of farm and ranch kids because
we knew they knew how to work and they loved outside, you know, the land and so to
speak. But gradually over the years all of those responsibilities that that business
management person has changed from being able to complete the work, to just being the
pusher of the paper. In other words they can fill out the form but somebody somewhere
up the line has to approve it.
I don’t know how many years ago it was; probably eight, nine, ten years ago, for
example, the personnel business that we were all involved in at one time became a central
organization. It’s in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Try to hire a person from a person who
is doing the approval in Albuquerque, New Mexico – obviously it takes a long time. And
it does. We would hire, for example, (I don’t know if this means anything) a GS3 (basic
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
25
�clerical position). That person would blossom in that particular job to where they were
worthy of a higher pay. And at one time we could generate a higher pay to pay for their
value without any problem at all – well, a little problem – but not a major problem. Now
days, if I understand what I hear people talking about around the Forest Service that I
keep in contact with, it’s a major operation to get it done IF it comes to pass in the first
place. You have people saying, “We didn’t hire them for their brains, we hired them for
their hands! All they’re supposed to do is know how to type!” But this lady is calling
Yellowstone National Park to find out if a campground is open or if a road is open so
they don’t drive 200 miles and find that everything’s closed. She thought about that
herself. You know, people walk out of the office with smiles on their faces because they
don’t get the buck passed. “That doesn’t matter. We only hired her for her fingers. She’s
not supposed to think.” It’s that kind of stuff that drove me nuts, you know.
Last example: when I worked in the regional office, I knew I didn’t want to go to the
regional office; I really knew I didn’t want to go there. I went there anyway. I went there
because my boss wanted to have a forest planner as a district ranger and not a district
ranger in the woods. So she arranged a transfer for me to the regional office. I worked in
state and private forestry there for a long time and our boss was in Missoula [Montana]
(because they combined our two offices) and he wasn’t always in Ogden and so I would
go to meetings for him once in a while.
I went to a meeting where the regional forester’s staff – and when we called them staff
officers that meant something, but when they changed their name to “board of directors”
they lost the whole confidence of the Forest Service. But they didn’t see that. Board of
Directors; that means you’re elevating yourself above everybody else. They said, “Yeah.
We make all the decisions. You don’t do anything unless we make the decision.” I
thought weird. Anyway, I struggled with that name. We went to this meeting and they
had been talking for months about ten or so issues that were affecting the region. And at
this meeting they were going to talk about these. I thought this was interesting.
So I went to the meeting and they started to read down this list of all ten items. And,
Brad, this was really interesting. They were talking about stuff that we’d talked about 20
years before, honest! I went to meetings as an assistant ranger and as a zone manager –
which was the same thing as a ranger on the Sawtooth – where we talked about these
same issues in 1981 and 1982. The list, I put them in my drawer. And then sometime in
about the [19]‘70s we went through a program called “Choosing by Advantages” and
“Management by Objectives” and “Total Quality Management” – we went through all of
those kinds of things and developed issues and they’re exactly the same as we did in
1982! And when I saw those listed on the door, I thought, “Those look familiar to me.”
And I looked on my list and they were almost word for word to the stuff we developed in
1982 and nothing had been done about them. Nothing! And they were things that the
regional forester’s office probably ought to be working on because they had the authority
to make these changes, and yet nothing had ever happened. And I thought, “That’s
incredible.”
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
26
�And I’m sitting there listening, listening, listening and they got down to the last end and
then the guy moderating the meeting said, “Very good! We’ve all done really good work
now the meeting is over!” And before they could get up out of their chairs I raised my
hand and I said, “Wait a minute.” I said, “All of these issues are really, really cool. And
they’re really important, but when are you going to do anything about them?” The room
went dead silent. And I knew I’d said the wrong thing because I’m only a GS12 talking to
GS13s, 14s, and 15s! And then one of them said, “I don’t think we’re so bad, why we
worked really well together on this!” (They had retreats where they went away, you know
for themselves, and did all of this.) And that ended the meeting. And I actually went out
of that meeting a little sick to my stomach because I couldn’t believe that this level of
intelligence would be so naïve to think that was their original thought – it wasn’t! We
thought about that in 1981 and ’82 and you know, a few other times during the year. So I
stayed on for another couple of years before I retired, so it must’ve been in about 1998.
And you know, until that very day that I walked out of the office nothing had been done
about those ten issues -- nothing.
BC:
Hmm. Amazing.
DB:
So, to answer your question shortly: no, I think the Forest Service has changed. I feel bad
that it has. I just don’t think they’re going to be as effective as they had in the past with
the policies and the way they manage people now and all those kinds of things – I don’t
think they can get back to the way it was. It’s too political in my opinion. We’re too
much focused in on environmental documentations and documents which I don’t think
the law requires us to be that intense, but we are. I don’t see rangers in the woods a lot. I
see them at meetings, but not in the woods. I see their staff in the woods, but then the
disconnect is between quality and ideas: this person is doing their own thing, the ranger’s
going to meetings all the time. But where is the district going? I have a hard time
sometimes seeing where that is going.
What we did on the Logan District that made Logan Canyon and everything else work is,
like I told you earlier, our campgrounds were in really bad shape. So what are you going
to do with a budget that’s static to get from a really bad level of maintenance to a level
that you’re proud to invite the public to come out to see? How are you going to do that?
Well I told my staff that it wasn’t painting one table at a time in a campground! And then
I asked the question, “How are you painting the tables?” “We’re painting them with a
four inch paint brush and a gallon can of paint.” Well if you’ve painted a little bit of your
house you know that’s slow. There are faster ways to do that. So I just asked a dumb
question, “Why don’t you buy a commercial paint sprayer and spray the whole
campground at once? You could spray the whole campground in the time it takes you to
paint one table and drive 20 miles to paint the second table. In other words you can do a
whole campground in a day.” We only have 12 campgrounds. You could get all 12 of
them done in 12 days if you had the resources to do it. Well we didn’t have the resources
to do all 12 of them, but we had a little bit to do some. So they went out and bought a
$300 and some odd paint sprayer and sprayed all the campgrounds lickety split. They
started to look pretty well, we didn’t increase our budget any.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
27
�A group of people – the city forester in Salt Lake City – was planting thousands of trees
across these parks in Salt Lake City for pennies. How does he do it? He’s hiring the high
school football team. He’s paying them $500-$1,000 to plant 10,000 trees (which if you
contracted it would be close to $10,000, you know). So for $500-$1,000 he’s getting all
of this work done. What’s in it for the football team? Well they need money for pads and
for helmets and for special equipment that the school district isn’t funding them for.
Loved it! You get these big, husky kids out there digging holes fast – so why don’t we try
that?
Our campground grates, for example, they were all broken apart. We were replacing them
one at a time with metal ring fireplaces, which is a pretty good deal but we weren’t
making any progress. So why don’t we hire a football team to come and do it? So we did.
We brought Skyview’s High School football team to come in and do it. We paid them
$1,000. They replaced almost all of our campground rings in Logan Canyon in a very
short period of time. Saved us thousands of dollars and yet got our campgrounds up to
one more level for just pennies.
BC:
Um-hmm.
DB:
That worked out really well. We did it again and again. And they came with their own
supervision; they came with their busses. We didn’t have to pay for anything except for
that little fee we agreed to. They bought helmets – it worked out perfectly for them.
So how are we going to take care of the litter problem? Because that really bothered me.
The crews would go through a campground and they would pick up stuff and within a
day it looked like they’d never been there. A really sad thing for Cache Valley because I
thought people would be much more sensitive than they were. I was disappointed in that.
But how are we going to do it because we’re not going to get any more money to get any
more people to pick up garbage? Do you know the name of Don Yonker?
BC:
I know some Yonkers out in –
DB:
Gordon. You know Gordon Yonker?
BC:
Yeah.
DB:
But Don Yonker is an older man now. He owned a bunch of land up against the mountain
in North Logan, but north of Green Canyon. Don was a scouter and he came into the
office one day he was concerned a little bit, as I was, that Eagle projects were being
refused on the district right and left. And I couldn’t understand why we kept turning away
free help.
BC:
Um-hmm
DB:
“Well, we don’t have time to go out and set up the project. We don’t have time to do this
and that.” In a way that’s a legitimate – but not really – because you know, we could take
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
28
�the time if we wanted to. What were we doing that was more important? Probably
nothing. But Don walked in the office one day and he said, “I’ll help you manage that
program.” He said, “I’ll help supervise the Boy Scouts.” And so the next Boy Scout that
came in wanting an Eagle project, we said, “Yes.” And then we got more, and we got
more and we got more and pretty soon Don was managing a whole bunch of Eagle
projects. They were out doing a quarter mile of trail here, and you know, a half a mile
here; picking up here; doing all kinds of stuff. We got ourselves up one more little notch.
Actually we were having a little bit of pressure about using more volunteers on the
district, you know, because it was a political thing to do. We got points for doing that.
But we didn’t want to do it just because we got points. We needed help. So we instituted
– at the time Lady Bird Johnson had the “Take Pride in America” program – and we kind
of spun in behind that and we said to the public through different means, “We need some
help, folks, picking up in the canyons.” We got so many volunteers that we could have a
family go pick up a campground once a week, to be backed up by another family and
another family and another family; so we were actually getting things picked up really a
lot. Every trail, every road, every campground had numerous families that had signed up
to go pick up litter. And we went up another notch. I mean the forest started to look really
nice. The problem was still there, but it was getting picked up on a regular basis.
The district went back to Washington D.C. four times in a row and they won the top
honors for that category in “Take Pride in America” just because of the work of Don and
couple of his replacements and some other folks on the district that, you know, dedicated
a little time and energy to that program. It was a wonderful program. It did wonders for
the district, and here our budget’s not increased one dollar. But you know what happened
from all of that is, is that people in the forest supervisor’s office and elsewhere began to
see that Logan District knows where to spend money because we did. If we had extra trail
money we knew what trail we wanted to put it on. If we got an Eagle project we knew
where we wanted to put it, it wasn’t a guess, because we’d done some planning that way.
So they would come in, we’d say, “Sure. You’re going to go to that trail and do this
much.” And they’d go do it. And we’d just add, add, add, and the trail gets maintained
and it was perfect.
And so that’s what we did. And yet those folks began to say, “Wait a minute. They’re not
just throwing money away.” No we’re not. We know where we’re going with it. So we
got grants like $30,000 came in from this fund; and $40,000 from this and $10,000 from
this and $5,000 from this because they knew we knew where to spend it. And we did –
we spent it where we needed to spend it. And so the district took a way heavy step that
way. We figured it would take us 15 years at our existing budget in Logan Canyon and
the whole district in general to get all of our campgrounds up to a standard that we
thought was acceptable. And we almost got there in eight years because of the extra
money.
Now why do I think the Forest Service is struggling a little bit? Because that’s all
undone.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
29
�BC:
Yeah.
DB:
We’re not there anymore and we’re not making the kind of progress that was made in
those years. I’m not claiming credit for it. I got to sit back and put my feet up on the desk
and smile. But the staff guys that were doing the work were just doing a marvelous job
and it was working really well.
When I left (I better be careful how I say this). When I left, I predicted that it would be
within, oh at least as short as a year and perhaps two or three years that the district would
be almost back in the same condition it was before we started all this stuff, and I’ve pretty
well come close to that prediction. And I’m not boasting about that, you know.
All I contributed to all of this stuff that went on in the forest was I said that we had to
produce the highest money can buy and we’re not going to be functional. The fire crew
can’t have their separate vehicles and their separate tools from the range crew, from the
trail crew – we’re all part of the same district. It took about four years to get that mindset
into people’s heads. And what that did when they got there, when they finally figured out
that somebody cared about what they did, they acted together. The trail crew driving
down the road would see a crooked sign they would stop and straighten it up instead of
just drive past it saying, “That’s not my job, that’s the recreation guy’s job.” The
recreation crew, if they saw cows where they weren’t supposed to be they didn’t think,
they would tell the range folks that, “There are cows over here.” And the information
flowed around the district. If a sign was missing, if they didn’t have it in their pickup
truck, they put in there and put it up the next day. It wasn’t their job, but they were going
that way. So they started all working together, they started to coordinate together a little
bit. They authorized “fire personnel only” signs came down; locks went off the cabinets.
We all contributed to the tool supply instead of each one of the groups having to horde
their own things. It was really cool; but that all disappeared within two years after.
I kept it going; I would admit that I preached like a preacher never preached before on
that concept. Like I said, it took four to five years to get everybody agreeing that that’s
what we were going to do and working together. But without that preaching it went away
in a short period of time. I feel bad about that. I try not to get involved with the Forest
Service today because I know, number one I would be disappointed; I would get sort of
angry. I feel sorry for where they’re all at, I really, really do. But I don’t know if they’ll
ever recover from, you know from the bureaucratic box they seem to have built about
themselves.
I think we could’ve had diversity; I think we could’ve had – not only in people, but in
occupations and skills – if we would have just lead and exercised some leadership in
there. I could go forever and ever you know. I have a real passion about this.
One of the major mistakes a good company does that causes a failure in a program almost
every time, is when you get a leader that stands up there and preaches the greatness of
this new thing that you’re going to try and do and then the next day assigns it to a staff
group to implement. It will never work, I don’t care how good the idea is, in a hundred
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
30
�years it will never work! For one, the staff guy doesn’t have the authority to do
everything that needs to be done; for one it’s not his idea, it was just given to him; for
another the boss sometimes won’t give him the autonomy they need to go make it work.
And for those reasons it will not work. That’s what the Forest Service has done in many
of these things that are good ideas that we’ve tried to implement, but almost every case
they delegated it to a staff person to implement. I knew that when I came to the district
and I would not do that; I would not delegate the responsibility of creating that
management picture. I couldn’t do it because I knew it would fail; and it did when I left. I
knew it would because the other rangers – good people as they are (and they’re good
people) – had a different way they want to manage. They didn’t want to manage that way.
But they’re not making as much progress as we were making either, that’s the only boast
I’ll make.
BC:
Um-hmm. Yeah.
DB:
There are several writers (and I don’t remember all their names), but their writings are all
classically the same: you manage people this way and you do these things a certain way,
this is what good companies do and you’ll succeed. And I read their books, over and over
and over again. I tried to do that on the district. And I believe they were right. I really do.
I believe they were right; because we made progress.
BC:
I always like to end with the question, if you could go back and change anything about
your career and your life, would you?
DB:
If the conditions of the day I started with the Forest Service were true today I would do it
over without hesitation.
BC:
Um-hmm.
DB:
I still love being a forester. I still love being called a forester. I still smell pine scent on
the breeze when I think about it enough, you know. I love the woods and what it
represents. I see the woods being different than what the politicians see it. It’s not just a
money making kind of thing, but there’s a whole organism out there that requires – in our
day and age – some attention. We call it “management.” In the old days when the Indians
set fires to burn holes in timber so they could put their horses in there, or to bring the elk
and deer and bighorn sheep and that sort of thing, down into the openings (because they
really were attracted to those); the lightening things that burn for months and months in
the summertime and all that fire influence, in the West anyway, had a major influence on
what the vegetative types, mosaics and all those kinds of things developed around. And
each stage in their development benefited something else at that particular point in time.
Unlike what the environmentalists wished would happen – that we do nothing to the
woods – is not wise because the end result of all this vegetative development on its own,
without any influences turning it back one way or the other (you take fire out of the
system, if you take the bugs out of the system, and so forth), you end up with a pure stand
of some old tree that has litter on the ground this deep with very little ground vegetation
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
31
�and therefore, not much to offer for the other varieties of – the wildlife and birds and so
forth that call that home. The biomass itself might be high in vegetative types, but animal
wise and the other kinds of critters that you normally think to find there, aren’t there
because their habitat is not there. So I don’t know, for whatever wisdom you know, fire
kept things in different stages scattered about the countryside and the re-development of
the vegetative type’s history back up toward its climax – kept things in variety.
Well in 1905 when the Forest Service thought – it was even true when I graduated from
college – that fire, insects and disease were the enemy of the woods! And we had to do
whatever we could to minimize those things. If you’re talking pure timber, that’s the
concern of course, because that’s where the value of whatever your product is. But if
you’re talking about ecosystems, that’s not wise because the periodic disruption in the
community is what keeps it viable and the variety there. And so I always thought in my
scheme, the land needs to be managed and it needs to be wisely managed. People need to
use it but they can’t abuse it. You can cut some trees but you can’t cut too many of them;
you can graze some cows, but you can’t graze too many of them, and so forth. If you
were able to strike that balance in being able to manage a district like that, or even a
forest like that, that the benefits to both the landscape and to the user of the landscape
would be about as good as you could do it. If we could do that, then this job would be
very, very interesting to continue on with it. It really would.
But knowing what I know today and knowing what the Forest Service is like today –
would I do it again? I would think about that a little bit harder. I don’t know what I would
do different but I would would think about it a little bit harder. I think I would be a
specialist and get away from the politics. I am really interested in fire and spent a lot of
time in that particular box and I would easily want to become as expert as I could ever be
in the whole fire management issue. I could find some joy and happiness in doing that,
but not leading it. Again because of the politics and policies that seem to be controlling
everything in ways I wish it wouldn’t.
BC:
Um-hmm. Alright, well thank you very much Dave, for –
DB:
Did I talk too much?
BC:
No, it was great! And we could probably go on for a long time.
DB:
Yeah, I can get real passionate about management. I really, really can.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Dave Baumgartner
Page
32
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/331">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/331</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-08-22
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
Dave Baumgartner interview, 5 May 2008, and transcription
Description
An account of the resource
The interview contains information on the childhood, education and the career of Dave Baumgartner as a forester, the various positions held within the Forest Service and his views on management. There are many anecdotes from his personal experiences in managing in the Logan Canyon and Logan District of the Forest Service, including his attitudes regarding the road expansion up Logan Canyon and his idea to include land users when making decisions.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baumgartner, Dave, 1942-
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Cole, Bradford R.
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States. Forest Service
United States. Forest Service--Officials and employees
Foresters--Interviews
Baumgartner, Dave, 1942---Interviews
Baumgartner, Dave, 1942---Family
Baumgartner, Dave, 1942---Career in Forestry
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Roads--Utah--Logan Canyon--Design and construction
Roads--Environmental aspects--Utah--Logan Canyon
Recreation--Utah--Logan Canyon
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Agency : U.S.). Logan Ranger District--Public relations
Utah. Dept. of Transportation--Public relations
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Agency : U.S.). Logan Ranger District--Management
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Agency : U.S.). Logan Ranger District--Travel
Environmental protection--Utah--Logan Canyon
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Agency : U.S.). Logan Ranger District--Officials and employees
Volunteer workers in camp sites, facilities, etc.--Utah--Logan Canyon
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral history
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Salt Lake City (Utah)
Utah
Cache County (Utah)
Salt Lake County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Lewiston (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
20th century
2000-2009
21st 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 & Archives, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 2 Fd. 3
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx2fd3DaveBaumgartner
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
5 May 2008
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2008-05-05
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/e1057617494fd0bd12cb6c7b1bf6fa7e.pdf
df8ec42dbe33900de2f287b1aad386f9
PDF Text
Text
United States
"Department of
~griculture
Forest
Service
Logan
Rangel"
District
860 N. 1200 E.
Logan, UT 84321
Reply to:
Date:
1950
June 1, 1988
Tom Lyon
655 Canyon Road
Logan, UT 84321
Deal" Tom:
Thank you for your recent letter, Tom.
what your concerns are. '
It helped.
I think I see more clearly
One of the problems I have had with this issue is the fact that people have not
clearly understood what we are trying to do. I have struggled with what we
should do to better explain our position. Perhaps I am too optimistic to assume
that a.-win win situation is possible.' I think it is, but all parties of the
issue must want to work to that end. It will not work otherwise.
I do not like compromise.' In a compromise no one wins. UDOT and the Federal
Highway folks think they have compromised. ' They expect you to do the same, and
do not understand why you cannot. In my view, I think they are wrong. Because,
if people have a concern it ought to be resolved, even if it takes a long time.
Working with people is what we are to do. ' Sometimes we forget this. ' Today the
Forest Service is beginning to use mediators to help resolve problems like
this. Still, the solution could be a form of compromise assuming the mediator
is successful. The consensus is the better solution.
Changes to Logan Canyon cannot happen if there is not sound and reasonable
purpose for the change. A highway standard taken from some manual is not
sufficient reason by itself to justify change. 1 This point will always be a
problem between the Forest Service and the highway engineer.
l
Political compromise is a reality. But if we ever do that, at the expense of
the 'environment, then we have abdicated our responsibilities as natural resource
managers and public land stewards. ' The higher up the ladder a decision is made,
the more political it becomes.' It is in the best interest of all of us to make
the decision as low on the ladder as possible. 1 This is one reason why I make
the point that we need to work for a win win solution if we can, or there is no
deal. A no deal means I will make the recommendations as to what I think ought
to be done, but someone else will make the eventual decision. ,
You understand, I think, what the
although skeptically. My problem
thought. " They would like to plow
courts decide.! Sometimes this is
win win is all about. '
is, I am not sure UDOT
through the issue, and
successful, but leaves
I think you support it
is comfortable with the
if necessary, let the
bitter enemies.
l
The person who will stand up and say, "Well we must have made the right
deCision, nobody is happy with it" misses the real point here. Political
decision makers sometimes like to talk like that. ' We are better than that. '
FS-6200-28(7·82)
�~
~ompromise
is a last resort. , But all sides of this issue will force us into a
compromise situation if we cannot work towards a reasonable and proper decision.
Tom, your thoughts on va~idating decisions with solid data are good ones. ' We do
not want to draw you into a consensus without a good review of the facts. My
only hope was, because of the expense of drafting plan after plan, was to at
least philosophically agree, so the design people could draft a more accurate
plan for review.. This by no means reduces the need for careful study of the
results, nor does it lock us into any position.! It was just a starting point.
The draft of the draft EIS is not acceptable to anyone I know of at this time.
Much work remains to be done on it. ~
Sometimes, Tom, I sound like I am preaching to you. I do not mean to do that. !
But I am confused too. ' As I visit with each of you I hear one thing, but
subsequent communication is different. You mentioned the bridges.; Are they an
issue now? Rudy told me some time ago that he and one or two other examined the
bridges and agreed with the engineer's assessment. , Because of that I haven't
worried about the bridges.'
,
UDOT will not build the type of highway they recommended last. That is not
acceptable to the Forest Service. ' The committee of three, are trying to reach
consensus on what realistically ought to be done. The ideas I bounced off of
you and others were attempts to resolve the issues you mentioned. ' If they do
not, then it is back to the idea arena again. ' I think this is a point many do
not understand. ' The committee is working for us, you and me. ' Their objective
is to design the right highway. ' You ideas and my ideas are just as important as
the committees. 1
My fear is that we cannot tear down the walls and work together on this. 1 Right
now I do not have either you or the State convinced that this is possible. ' The
walls are very thick and high. You fears of a political solution are valid if
the walls stay up. '
I think we have solved the riparian and fish habitat issues. : But we have not
solved the aesthetic issue yet. ' At least not totally. ' Your concerns have been
passed on to the committee with a note from me supporting your concerns. '
The Forest plan is one of the more difficult decisions UDOT must make before
they can start work again on the EIS. ; If what they eventually propose and agree
to is outside the current direction in the Forest plan, those changes, the
environmental documentation, and decision must be addressed in this EIS.! If
that is not possible, then a separate environmental document must be prepared.'
I do not know which way this will go at this time. We are pushing for them to
do it. , You are right, the Forest plan could become a significant issue.
Keep up the good work.:
S· cerely,
District Ranger
FS·6200·28(7-82)
�~·
~
G
cc:
Steve Flint
Jack Spence
Rudy Lukez
Dick Carter
FS-6200-28(7-82)
�
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/49">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/49</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
2558578447
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
534141 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 Dave Baumgartner, October 4, 1988
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dave Baumgartner to Steve Flint regarding the role of the National Forest Scenic Byway Program proposing a complementary aesthetic experience in the canyon with improvement of campgrouds and appropriate signs. Proposes the organization of a committee to define standards.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baumgartner, David
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Natural resources conservation areas
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
1988-10-04
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 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/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_Fd9_016.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/2ddb0e445500b81142487649d5f3f629.pdf
83d7f6aa1a42fcc9ed7800e9ff7cd6f6
PDF Text
Text
February 10, 1989
Dale Bosworth
Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National Forest
125 South State St.
Salt Lake City, Utah, 84111
Dear Dale:
I regret I was unable to attend the meeting concerning the
Logan Canyon Highway Project on February 3. Unfortunately, it was
necessary for me to be out of Logan.
I have read the latest (Jan. 20th) version of the Agency Alternative for the project, and I am greatly concerned. I do not wish to anal ize it in detail here, but only to give you some general comments:
1. This is basically the high speed alternative in the preliminary
DEIS. We appear to be just about where we were over two years (and
endless amounts of time and energy) ago.
2. The middle section of the Canyon has been reduced to only 4 milesfrom Right Fork to lower Twin Bridge; we regard the middle section as
the entire distance from Right Fork to Ricks Springs. This redesignation,
with the attendent upgrading of the road to a 35 mph design (probably
50 mph signing) from Twin Bridge to Ricks Springs is unacceptable, since
the consequent environmental damage will be severe.
3. The high speed design of the upper section will result in unacceptable environmental impacts, particularly in the Beaver Creek and
Summit sections.
4. There are several safety concerns ~/ith respect to the placement
of passing lanes, especially in the Dugway and near the Limber Pine
turnout.
5. The implementation of this alternative requires 45 (!) ammendments to the Forest Plan, surely a new worlds record for any forest
plan involving a single project. The cumulative effect of this large
number of ammendments is such that a major change in The Plan will
be required - a revision, with everything that implies. Attempts to
get by with an ammendment will certainly be appealed.
6. The Agency Alternative has little detail, making analysis of
its impacts by citizens not throughly acquainted with both the area and
the previous history almost impossible. I f it appears as such in the
EIS, the EIS will be challenged as not meeting NEPA criteria.
7. The cover letter sent with the alternative, bearing the signatures of the three agency engineers, attempts to disclaim the alternative as a IIpreferred alternative. This is, to say the least, disingeneous. Any alternative that is endorsed by a Forest Service repll
�presentative is clearly destined to become the "preferred alternative."
I wish to repeat something live said in previous meetings with you: we
accepted the Forest Plan on the assumption it was to be taken seriously
by you. It states, e.g., that liThe road will not be raised to a higher
standard than existing." (Chapter 6, p. 236). Other places in the plan
are clear about maintining the scenic quality of the highway (VQO classification, e.g.). You have recently designated the highway as a "Scen ic
Byway". If the Plan had proposed the kinds of changes found in the Agency
Alternative, it certainly would have been appealed. To abandon the Plan
now, under pressure from UDOT and FHWA, is to break faith with the environmental community and reduce Forest Service credibility to a new low.
Stw.:erely,
.
/
/'
.'
,--.
/" .,
'~
__;.~;,c,/7 / . · 6'---7,vz(? 1.;7 ~CJ;"
<-
!' ~~.
Jack T. Spence
Dept. of Chemistry
Utah State University
Logan, Ut 84322
cc: Dave Baumgartner
Tom Lyon
Dick Carter UWA
Steve Flint
Bruce Pendery Bridgerland Audubon
Rudy Lukez Utah Chapter, Sierra Club
-
-
�
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/72">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/72</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
3508507634
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1833246 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 Dave Baumgartner to Tom Lyon about public concerns for Logan Canyon, June 1, 1988
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dave Baumgartner to Tom Lyon about public concerns for Logan Canyon. Designing the right highway is mentioned, also that the aesthetic issue remains unsolved.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baumgartner, David
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
United States Highway 89
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
1988-06-01
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 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/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_Fd9_017.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/1297bf5850514952c1c6d2ef72e97e99.pdf
f1e47c65c6ced6a3b3f4ef9a79ba3bef
PDF Text
Text
United States
Department of
~griculture
Forest
Service
Logan
Ranger
District
860 N. 1200 E.
Logan, UT 84321
Reply to:
Date:
1950
June 1, 1988
Tom Lyon
655 Canyon Road
Logan, UT 84321
Dear Tom:
Thank you for your recent letter, Tom.
wha t your concerns are. '
It helped.
I think I see more clearly
One of the problems I have had with this issue is the fact that people have not
clearly understood what we are trying to do. I have struggled with what we
should do to better explain our position. Perhaps I am too optimistic to assume
that a win win situation is possible. ' I think it is, but all parties of the
issue must want to work to that end. ' It will not work otherwise. '
I do not like compromise. 1 In a compromise no one wins. UDOT and the Federal
Highway folks think they have compromised.! They expect you to do the same, and
do not understand why you cannot. ' In my view, I think they are wrong. Because,
if people have a concern it ought to be resolved, even if it takes a long time.
Working with people is what we are to do. ' Sometimes we forget this. ' Today the
Forest Service is beginning to use mediators to help resolve problems like
this. Still, the solution could be a form of compromise assuming the mediator
is successful. The consensus is the better solution.
Changes to Logan Canyon cannot happen if there is not sound and reasonable
purpose for the change. A highway standard taken from some manual is not
sufficient reason by itself to justify change. 1 This point will always be a
problem between the Forest Service and the highway engineer.1
i
Political compromise is a reality. ' But if we ever do that, at the expense of
the environment, then we have abdicated our responsibilities as natural resource
managers and public land stewards.! The higher up the ladder a decision is made,
the more political it becomes.! It is in the best interest of all of us to make
the decision as low on the ladder as possible.! This is one reason why I make
the point that we need to work for a win win solution if we can, or there is no
deal. A no deal means I will make the recommendations as to what I think ought
to be done, but someone else will make the eventual decision.!
You understand, I think, what the
although skeptically.' My problem
thought. ' They would like to plow
courts decide.1 Sometimes this is
win win is all about.1
is, I am not sure UDOT
through the issue, and
successful, but leaves
I think you support it
is comfortable with the
if necessary, let the
bitter enemies.!
The person who will stand up and say, "Well we must have made the right
decision, nobody is happy with it" misses the real point here. Political
decision makers sometimes like to talk like that.1 We are better than that. '
FS-6200-28(7 -82)
�~
~ompromise
is a last resort.! But all sides of this issue will force us into a
compromise situation if we cannot work towards a reasonable and proper decision.!
Tom, your thoughts on validating decisions with solid data are good ones.1 We do
not want to draw you into a consensus without a good review of the facts. ' My
only hope was, because of the expense of drafting plan after plan, was to at
least philosophically agree, so the design people could draft a more accurate
plan for review.' This by no means reduces the need for careful study of the
results, nor does it lock us into any position.1 It was just a starting point.
The draft of the draft EIS is not acceptable to anyone I know of at this time. '
Much work remains to be done on it.!
Sometimes, Tom, I sound like I am preaching to you. ' I do not mean to do that. !
But I am confused too. ' As I visit with each of you I hear one thing, but
subsequent communication is different. ' You mentioned the bridges.! Are they an
issue now? Rudy told me some time ago that he and one or two other examined the
bridges and agreed with the engineer's assessment. ! Because of that I haven't
worried about the bridges.!
UDOT will not build the type of highway they recommended last. ' That is not
acceptable to the Forest Service.! The committee of three, are trying to reach
consensus on what realistically ought to be done.' The ideas I bounced off of
you and others were attempts to resolve the issues you mentioned. ' If they do
not, then it is back to the idea arena again.! I think this is a point many do
not understand. ! The committee is working for us, you and me.1 Their objective
is to design the right highway.! You ideas and my ideas are just as important as
the committees.'
My fear is that we cannot tear down the walls and work together on this. ' Right
now I do not have either you or the State convinced that this is possible.' The
walls are very thick and high.1 You fears of a political solution are valid if
the walls stay up.!
I think we have solved the riparian and fish habitat issues. ' But we have not
solved the aesthetic issue yet. 1 At least not totally. ' Your concerns have been
passed on to the committee with a note from me supporting your concerns. ,
The Forest plan is one of the more difficult decisions UDOT must make before
they can start work again on the EIS.! If what they eventually propose and agree
to is outside the current direction in the Forest plan, those changes, the
environmental documentation, and decision must be addressed in this EIS. I If
that is not possible, then a separate environmental document must be prepared.1
I do not know which way this will go at this time. We are pushing for them to
do it. ' You are right, the Forest plan could become a significant issue.
Keep up the good work.!
M;;J$~~
BAUMGARTNE~;tt
DAVE
District
Range;~
.
FS-6200-28(7 -82)
�FS-6200 -28(7 -82)
�
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/93">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/93</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
1618082257
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1737509 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 Dave Baumgartner to Tom Lyon, June 1, 1988
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dave Baumgartner to Tom Lyon discussing the possibility of compromise on the changes for Logan Canyon.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baumgartner, David
Subject
The topic of the resource
Department of Transportation--Utah
Logan Canyon (Utah)
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
1988-06-01
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 200 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_4.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/5a4debd35673be86bac9ac2e709b8761.pdf
26ba5aac3f851a7e5f94f58d39e0b7e5
PDF Text
Text
'.
(~::, : ',--,='-~L"""'~~__<-- ' ' - ' '
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
.
re requested, and can be provided below .
Name
----~~~~~~~~~~~~---------------------
/
SLC87/26
�THE WORLD'S LA'RGEST CHAIN OF MOTELS, HOTELS AND RESORTS IFOR RESERVATIONS DIAL TOLL FREE (800) 528-1234
(
BEST WESTERN CREST MOTEL
243 NORTH 4th STREET
MONTPELIER, IDAHO 83254
TELEPHONE (208) 8471782
~l~Ct::-JVED
IJ n -r\ 1 5 1q(86~
,_ lJ
...
" .; H2iVI HILL / SLC
October 3, 1986
Valley Engineering
168 North 100 East
Logan, Utah 84321
To Whom It May Concern:
u.s.
(
(
Highway 89 through Logan Canyon serves as a vital economic
link for the Bear Lake Valley.
The canyon is a beautiful place,
however, I feel that with good common sense and concern for the
environment, greatly needed improvements such as bridge replacement,
pavement widening and passing lanes or turn-outs can be constructed.
I also urge CH 2 M Hill to conduct public me eting s on this project
in the Bear Lake Valley.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
Sincere~~ ,
-~/
~p
/
�?-00#//tAAZ~~Af4J k.ey
/
(J
1'P¥. 1/iJD~,It
.!
At?#6'
C'Alu.
/~.k ~g¥>
pZ~$ ~.&-.Yr ~~~
~,L- ~&JtP4A//,~;-; (;;Z)C/~/ ~~ .. M~~) ~~
~r?- ~e ~5~s' -I#c- tfV~f d/~~~A&~
7Z7 .AI v /.&-P r9 P?& ~~4f3c/~6- ~r-~ (0 e&A/
j#£- 2~~:fJ ~~S6~ g~·O~~~~
~/S/~O
77vt:J 0:e-~6-6Z#L- ~6'~s ::
/) #R?/-&-~£:-:s - Q~ Rk/U t'/R4fie/ ;&4?/L-5
/
/?:(/#t::-C-L? ~0'j7L!fe(7 #ft6- ./P~~~~~~
$,d/#66J1 ~/?~4gij J7z? AJ4~ ~)
~tCJ~~ ,O/PA:Aclcu(ypaJ ~~~ &9~~~
/7;6?~~~, ;r#-~?dL--fi- )7h/~
&/~~k- P~6'(}J~ y-?/ ~ ~6#?/'~g.O
t!v///bA/$O ~Po~4~6 #~ J~~
/0
/,6££ /.J>4~00g /Dij ?#P',{J(:f'/il$P#~cJ
/£l~/tJ~~
r /t:JcJ $~A/y J~rCJ~ C£/6U/r~
-
J:y~:C>q/
2)Ut/~//~~s
m4'P/ .e3/?/~e) /J J72Jo
~r t/&!~?UU..r ~
e:rpt&c/Al-~
----
/# n/J' J/P$..6- ~A-/l-
~f hk79'e4JP/lc~~., / 6t7&rp-~/e?~.81 tA!J~~
rW/#£;bl/¢?~6) 7Z~J~ t?/ v-/ &/<YCJ C::c-//-'~
~e.ac V.8-7~?' ~P'~ rr~4P;zt 6£..//-A~/
flbV TPJ
$2L:- {//'f,/ rCJ~ tt:J~ ~/Jr- ~,6~
J?##~~bZP.Ef.P..F d9-~ <9~~~~(O4-' J
i
--
-
--- .
--
1
---- ---_ .t"
.
_ _ _ __ __ _
-
---.
--- _.- j
-----~- I
-
I
I
/f/.d-~06/~P-~ ~$ d]e/Y-V-Z;
-
#b?
6¢M? C/1)ZU/6 V2¥A~ J70 ,<:~~~
~/!:; ~pg~ -1fJfi- ~ ~ ~ ~p- --__
~h 4b',(?/)77~A/ tIII',P!--P7P'~ ./&t1~p- _ _
__
#//heI7~#L- //~"d//<i-
#.,u~~b?~
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
I
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
/
SLC87/26
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
t\~~~~~~~'~~~~
~\l~"-L-
I
(
(
SLC87/26
C~ ~~
~---lL- ~ ~
,
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
/
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
12\(',\4. c...o \2 tJ~ Un\), 1M. (SS (OM C\1:01 «1M \1rcJ \a."}..J ~U?-1j JJ~~
Name
Comments:
th;:\U W1 w tLhMt\~2 11?t\.£rl<:' )iJCf[,C -6.0E rc\,·
~ e~± \0 _"1 ~V;', !1-£GI \hl'£ CAU '1 0 l~ K-ob/-...J
I
----- , \
t~
f
--,,'---'=:.-..--,---,,"'",--,-",.!---'-"-'-"'--"--'--"''-L'-'~+----'-V-~----'--''-'''''''-+''--'-'-'--'--'-'-..J...L.;o''''--'-_-L''-''--'-''--''-'-.l.DGJ,.~''''::::''''->'
~ (' '-'. ~ \ l
'(" /) ) ( . (,:J\" L",J
t -: : :....\.,,)..1) ~- b \W (1, J (
:.
-;
=fbr\Qlc;t
)
I
SLC87/26
V i
A
\j
f'Caw
=t iC)
t
F-i7vJ\u.
\?)~..I / \~V,-(?
\ S.
VXJ -
�us
89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
(
I
/
("
(
q~r
.0;'-- ¥~ d
/
�f40V 1 01986
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Phyllis Smart - Montpelier, Idaho
Name
Comments:
83254
Unsafe driving conditions on Logan Canyon road are due to:
(1) narrow bridges, sharp curves,
narrow road and little shoulder.
(2) when long lines of cars, trucks, trailers etc. exist, there always
seem to be one or two who take chances in passing.
Not only does
this endanger lives but also causes mental stress to drivers and
passengers.
(3) narrow winding roads through the canyon makes it almost impossible to
try to avoid an accident by moving to another lane of traffic or to
the shoulder area.
Deer and cattle on the road could be more easily
avoided if there was another lane of traffic or more shoulder room.
(
(
~,
(there would be less dented fenders & broken head lights).
Also
accidents due to winter conditions (vehicle sliding etc.) would
.
be
less if another lane was available.
If one has an appointment etc. during the summer, at least one half hour
more time is needed due to slow traffic (sight seers, heavy loads, trailers,
tourists all travel at a slower speed than the posted speed limit.
Drivers
who are not familar with the road or canyon driving tend to drive much
slower and use their brakes quickly upon coming to a curve).
Many Montpelier drivers use the road to Preston vs Logan canyon road due
to the unsafe conditions listed above.
Mileage wise there is very little
difference.
I commend the Highway Department for their "being on the job"
(
during winter conditions as they do a good job in keeping the road passable.
SLC87/26
Some tourists who have stopped at the place I work do not like that road
and if you mention the beauty of the canyon, river etc. they have failed
to notice it as they were so busy with just driving the canyon road!
Beauty cannot be enjoyed under stress.
Logan Canyon Road causes stress !!!!
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name
Comments:
I
(
jvuY{. SIA.-<-~ ~;,. 12--\ cY 5 \> \i/1Vv"1&
r. s .
~\;
~\b ~;
S\'11JeD
Lb l-J G
l~tl L~1?G
U'.2!Z.b~0l2 1JAs.
hi ") \,I-!&2M{ S
(
-
'No Vu/ c-G{ ~
v!
Y..f..-'l!:N
t ~L
v
RR
\u v,
rnss, . .?,"( C?v
1I~~..Q
o..<?:to
kit ((
LNk of
OJ
i
she·corR ~
b
dttJ
ctJt 2
~ ll'v~" lk'0 ,
3 lPwt
~~i
�( '
(
(
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name
I~
Comments:
<- ('/
(
I . ) / L C ".)
i
/
1 /
.';-.~
.
(
(
(
J
�(
�(
T~~-p~-c~"V\A/)
l~ ({~
fu c~(~ ~c~ b...(J~
~
~-p 1",<)
t-·k~(
k<-.J(
':717 C ~
~)
h-Cf-fJ «
L( A~
.Q..",~-\.
.
II
/-c"I\/\
{o-W
~t h-v-/llc .~
~c/Vl---?, ~ )
-"1-P ~ ( /",
(
p.~-r !-e
(J
LL'
'''V\.~/l ~f
J]-e.
C'--A"
n1
&c~
~'-0J1 J
i-~ (0--:7
/~f
_Jjj
c'-
f~ C CC"':: ( ,d I'<LC(J
(kd ., ~j/J /v~~"--t (-,:,
Lr-Lc; c~~, c~ ~'-A~r~ /~~
./L~-",,,--t
/'VV"--'---'-./J....--1
!-o
/1-
'-f.J .--1?-f!
0-1Ir{J cl (-C2
M
c-? /
Sr-~'~~
~ ?Q~' !~~
37-1 L)
ICL; Aj
L '1 "-"'') c, T
NO\/1
.-'-
' 7 1Q02
{
h)U,-,
CH2M H:tL / SLL
?lt3 2 !
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name
Dl V I Slo Yl tYF t'7P.rti L~l2S f ~r5:S~. J /
--.::~:::.:(Z:...;;:fl=/~(j.L..-..J..P.....:If::.-L..T......
7f.L.:.6~R..Io.£.-=kl....L) _ _=S....;.::>--=E=Il~S=-..L.I-L-/..;::;·O=()...:...-....~c...c/...looQ~£:Ti~...L.tlL.-,,_ 'L0C; {IN
I
f
Conunents:
l!
'
t
i ·h "
I
';
7k g
LC:T a a go ~ ,
1...- <-(
-,
t-r fr (.'
('
lz) C .:.....
Th r
i
'~lUrC G tl -&
c
+-1 v
t iC
Izc.a s
3
t lJ/(13:v/,
" 0'7 121 (=,1'1
V'<?
?' 0'
/Y'
(,'ry-lc-\ /e f
(
b~ 7
D('C'(/ ( c/E'c(
e oc e
t" E' h ( c / r::...)
L-U , f tc
~'r ~cj-ek"'-
{fl
o
j
b ~h'l v1r( I f
lf c:tyc:f's
yeA
he ir;;( 0f
.
•
Ir'l k
0 ,--/ / (>/'-'-
/
,
i ) C! lu
c!e:
,J
'j
.CK<
2
l'
C, ')
b
liu?
11;17
.)
<-;: C\(' .
~:
7
in.
.7
e J:p~-;:>q
tev--
h k- "E-k V
1
s Lit'
sf '-:-',,(
S0 UL</r(
I
<2..! fi c q
tl
~C
v
(
·f(o ,-, ' s
Y
(d h (?
Lx
Ot? (?de ,,{ -1-0
c
r
(
d~ k{, O'll (I
.;
Q
;-r
0
-j/vt£ '\ c
�-' .:'/; ~r" ~'1.·
;: V
...
--.., ..r...
!
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
(
...
.J ' .. , ....-.
.....
.
~_
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name
C,YBi
C1
\
\'
\)DmOvS..
l),~ '6q it>
I m~D'f\wn)O:c Yo
~
Comments:
e:...
\.\\c.(hl.t)~
re&iA>D~
o\o~
U
yY\a~oc
·±b1Z tsQ(QY
W1,J I ~~
l,p. k<,< \) '" l.,~ .
:r::;;,i 1\2(=1'1,1 ~
) ~ ,\OIA< hold, 0.-"> 'cW...,y~\?vJo\.c... VYieel.N)s
t>---S>
?uSS ; b l&-
v
i 'N
+t,.q
~
LA\s. o f \ t l A <
\
<., -
•
(
SLC87/26
.
~
:'
:'...,J'
.
~
.
�September 20, 1986
Mr. Allen Harrison
Bear Lake Regional Commission
Executive Director
Fish Haven, Idaho 83267
Friend Allen:
We read the articles in the News Examiner about the Logan Canyon
road.
We travel the road once or twice a week in the summer
months to take care of the 40 acres in Fish Haven and down to Ogden
to take care of our home there.
The traffic is real heavy most of the time and at times it is very
dangerous
to drive in mornings and evenings, when the sun is in
your eyes.
We would appreciate having the road widened and improved not only
for our selves but family, friends and others
who travel Highway
89.
We appreciate your interest, concern and energy in trying to get
improvements made on roads and the Bear Lake area.
As you know Highway 89 extends from Canada to Mexico and we thank
you for the effort you put forth to get improvements made.
l;,rl ~ =~1jJ;;;:/ ·
G~/rDorJ.s
ec
Stock
Your neighbors over the hill in
Fish Haven Canyon
�f
November 12, 1986
Mr. Clifford R. Forsgren, P.E.
NOV 1 ? 198B
CH2M Hill, Consulting Engineers
P. o. Box 2218
Salt Lake City, utah 84101
Re: Highway u.s. 89 - Logan Canyon Study
Dear Mr. Forsgren:
I've just read the November, 1986 Summary Fact Sheet concerning
the referenced project study. One statenent in particular causes
ne considerable alarm.
On the last page, paragraph three states, "During the tour, it
was suggested by some present that the Canyon should be treated
as a recreational corridor (a destination) rather than as a
transp::>rtation link (a conduit for traffic). Recreational use
of the corridor should be given priority over transp::>rtation use
whenever a decision involving trade-offs is to be made in the
study. "
(
(
No one disputes the recreational value of Logan Canyon. People
skiing, camping, picnicing, haul ing f irev.DOd., etc. go to the
canyon for a specific purpose. I use the canyon for these
activities myself. But to categorically give priority to
recreational use over transp::>rtation needs borders on the
absurd, in my opinion.
A native of Bear Lake County, and still owning property there, I
strongly protest the idea of recreational priority. Perhaps
residents of cache and Box Elder Counties consider the canyon a
destination rrore than a transp::>rtation link, but residents of
, other areas rrost certainly do not. I submit that rrost weekend
traffic from OJden, Salt Lake, and Provo in the sumrrertine ends
up in Bear Lake, not in Logan Canyon.
Ask the people in Bear Lake and Rich Counties and beyond, even
into Wyoming, how many stop in the canyon as opp::>sed to those who
use the route for access to Logan, OJden, or Salt Lake. I assure
you, that canyon exists as a vital link connecting them to these
other areas. I repeat, to consider other priorities ahead of
transp::>rtation demonstrates seriously faulty thinking. Certainly
only a fanatical environnentalist who would have us all backpacking through the canyon could seriously suggest such a thing.
(
let's be reasonable, Mr. Forsgren. Certainly recreation has its
place and deserves consideration, but not at the expense of those
who depend on that highway for transportation. I was born in
lDgan. As a youth, I traveled through the canyon for lTUSic
lessons, medical care, shopping, etc. alnnst ~kly. Now I drive
it dozens of times each year for business and pleasure. Sometines
�2
I stop for recreational purposes, too. But I believe those people
on the other side of the mountain deserve better than to stand in
jeopardy because of special interests groups whose access to the
~rld is provided by a six-lane freeway and see lA>gan Canyon only
in tenus f their
limited, selfish needs.
/
st\rel ,
Y:en~1j1;ent
107 East Ma.in
Hyrum, utah 84319
cc:
(
(
Gale larson, Valley Engineering, Inc.
�US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Thorras C. Jensen, 1750 Foothill Drive, lDgan, UT
Name
84321
Comments: I have lived and operat.ed my business in lDgan for the past
10 years.
One of the prime reasons for selecting lDgan was the natural
beauty and adjacent wilderness areas.
However, I feel that there needs to be a reasonable and balanced
approach to the natural beauty and wilderness in regards to highway
design and rraint.enance and
1)
SafctV' -
ilCC2SS
through these areas.
The nurrerous accidents in the Logan Canyon area
testify to the need for proper passing and slow lanes.
I
have personally witnessed or experienced rrany "near-misses"
as a result of blind corners, ice build-up from cross drainage
(
in late spring, narrow bridges, and limited passing lanes
(
causing backups and "daredevil passes."
2)
Access Route:
Logan Canyon is not only a scenic drive, it is
the rrajor artery to lDgan from Rich County.
The highway must
be travelled in dangerous conditions by service and delivery
agents, professional services, truck traffic, temple visitors,
tourists, and shopping excursions for the citizens of Rich
County.
Travel in the canyon becomes a very serious considera-
tion in winter and spring due to very hazardous conditions, and
summer due to slow moving R.V. traffi<;:.
Commerce is drastically
hampered.
No one is askingfolr a super-highway, or for cOl11fl'ercial develOJ?l!Ent that
(
(
\'.QuId seriously reduce the natural attractiveness of the canyon. It is
SLC87/26
of questionalYle value however, if the canyon highway is left in its
current dangerous condition.
If this artery of cOl11fl'erce and tourism
�US 89 - lDgan Canyon Study
/
Thomas C. Jensen
Page '!Wo
becomes increasingly choked, it will cost both lives and livlihood.
(
(
(
(
�HYDE PARK CITY CORPORATION
P O. BOX 489
HYDE PARK, UTAH 84318
-{ECEfVEC
NOV 241986
November 21, 1986
CH2M HILL / SlC
Mr. Stanton S. Nuffer
CH2M Hi 11
Associated Plaza, Suite 500
349 South 200 East
PO Box 2218
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Dear Mr. Nuffer:
He as the Hyde Park City Council feel additional construction in
Logan canyon will ultimately benefit not only Cache County residents,
but also Rich County residents. We also feel that if it is done in
an orderly fashion, it wouldn't adversely affect the environment in
Logan canyon.
(
(
We would like to see improvements done in this part of the State to
enhance tourism and possibly generate additional revenues for our
community.
Sincerely,
Hyde Park City Council
Leslie A. Ball s
Da vi d t·1. Cheney
Marilyn P. Grunig
Michael T. Kirby
John A. Rich
~-/-~~
Robert J . Ball s
t~ayor
RJB/jh
(
•
�
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/53">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/53</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
4011851985
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
25984481 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
Comments on the improvements of Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Comments from local leaders and residents of Cache, Bear Lake, and Rich counties arguing for both minimal improvements to the canyon road claiming it as a destination, and maximum improvement to increase traffic flow and reduce accidents by adding lanes to existing road.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bean, Richard
Pope, Lewis
Floyd, Craig
Allen, Karla
Brown, Ken
Stringham, Brian
Smart, Phyllis
Jensen, Thomas
Balls, Robert
Harrison, Alan
Collins, Kathlyn
Pendery, Bruce
Pettigrew, Craig
Thomas, Craig
Stock, Glen
Stock, Doris
Jensen, D. Brent
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Roads--Design and construction
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
1986-10-03
1986-10-16
1986-11-10
1986-11-03
1986-11-17
1986-09-20
1986-11-12
1986-11-21
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Utah
United States
Cache County (Utah)
Rich County (Utah)
Bear Lake (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 28 Folder 7
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
MSS148VIIIB28_Fd7_Page_1.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/7d874e636e2620dbeeb0becb21303f1f.pdf
f5100b4bcee730b714f7172a8a04e062
PDF Text
Text
CITIZENS
FOR THE
PROTECTION
OF
LOGAN
CANYON
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon is a citizens' group of
volunteers
and
non-profit
organizations
working
toward
longterm
protection of Logan Canyon's scenic beauty, fish and wildlife habitat,
recreational opportunities and naturalness.
The Jardine Juniper is CPLC's symbol.
Located high above Wood Camp
recreation area,
this
ancient but beautiful tree represents Logan
Canyon's recr~ational diversity and unsurpassed scenery.
CPLC's proposal for Logan Canyon
o
The protection of Logan Canyon's scenic beauty, fish and wildlife
habitat, rare plants, recreational sites and naturalness must be a prime
concern.
o
An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for CI I\y
significant
road
modification
proposals
to
protect
Canyon's
Logan
natural surroundings from haphazard road modifications.
o
Travel speeds between Right Hand Fork and Rick's Spring should
r e mn in as currently posted.
This area is very scenic and too s e nsitiv e
t. 0
IH I 1"111 I tan y
B 1 g n l f 1 C II n t
r 0 ,I d w LI Y III 0 d 1 f 1 c II t j () II!:> •
o
Bridges which cannot meet structural safety requirements should b e
r e placed when possible.
These bridges should be two lanes wid e olll y .
Hi \lOl' al teratlons to bridge llpprollche~ wOlll d ho acc cq . t:llhl u .
l
o
Turning lanes at Tony Grov e Recreation Area Lind lleavet'
Area may be constructed to facilitate turning traffic.
~10UI\t Ll II\
Sk i
o
Parking areas should be built near Temple Fork Road and Cottonwood
Cnnyon (near Logan Cave) to improve traffic flow and saf e ty.
o
Additional warning signs should be placed along the highway
motorists about bicycle traffic, pulloffs and pedestrian travel .
o
The road
wi ll improve
J.Of, 1I11 Canyon.
t e llillg
should be resurfaced and restriped where required.
This
through traffic travel and nighttime saf et y throughout:
o
No climbing (passing) lane I:lhould b e buill lIL tllu I>lIl.:,Wlly (lll : L Wl-"11
Lowel' and Upper twin bridges) _
A c 1 i III h j n g III Ill! W 0 u 1 d a t I: l : C t
it
V l- r y
sCl!nic area by requiring major cut and fill op e ratiolls with unsigh t ly
r et aining walls.
o
No road modifications should alter th e Logan Riv e r's wat e l' COlll' se
A l ter at ions could
since the river is a major recreational r e sour c e.
destroy important streambanks.
o
No new roads or major changes to the existing road shoultl be
con s t r u c ted fro In the Bear La k e S 1I111 mit t o t h c B e ar L iI k ( ! 0 V (! ... 1 0 0 k _
Til i ~;
hl" , ItW ily section is in LI very popular lind sel"lIll: r l! C r l : ;tt lOll :11 · l' : I .
o
Congress should designate Logan Canyon Highw a y O!:> Uta h's
f ir s t:
National Scenic Highway_
This designation would recognize Logan Can y o n
as a scenic and recreational jewel similar to units in our Nation a l P n r k
System.
o
Logan River above Third Dam should be considered
r u r National
Recreational River designation under the Wild and Sc e nic River s Ac t .
This federal designation will protect the river's quality for a ll f utur e
g e nerations.
�
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/82">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/82</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
2648911877
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1321422 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 Dale Bosworth to Daniel Dake, May 28,1987
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dale Bosworth to Daniel Dake, May 28,1987 discussing how the EIS must comply with the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Bosworth states that the Forest Service supports an objective analysis of Logan Canyon but is unwilling to make a final decision without completed analysis and adequate public involvement.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bosworth, Dale
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Utah
United States Highway 89
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
1987-05-28
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII 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/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_Fd9_014.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/ccd2389a2527e88f11a25cf3398d74ad.pdf
b9b5bde4ad5ca966daa516248f78af5d
PDF Text
Text
rne ~, s
..
.a:=~~!!~ ~ 4~.s East 400 South B-4:)
·on
alt Lake City. UT 841 11/(80 1 )
~59- 1 ?37
April 24, 1987
Mr . Dale Bosworth
Forest Supervisor
Wasatch-Cache National Forest
Salt LaKe City, ' Utah 84138
Dear Dale:
Considerable concern has recently b e en expressed about the
Logan Canyon highway issues. DicK P i ne ha~ expr~ssed strong
and positive concern arid support to both Geo r ge Nickas and
me at preventing a widening g a p as 'this issue progresses. We
have, indeed, experien~ed this concern a~ well and 1 ik r ly
harbor simil iar fears a £ t o the leJel of acrimony which ·may
dev.lop over Logan C ~ny ~ n. Up on i suggestion f r om Georgs
NicKas, DicK Pi~. ~ a ~ set up a me et i ng with the p~ i ncipal
envir' onmental or' g ,~ I '. i .;~.1.ti ,ons and i nd i viduals, you and your
staff to discuss t hi s issue.
In anticipation c,f suc. h a meet i ng l 'et me outl ine O'Jr
concerns. Rathe r th &n d iscussing the impacts to th~ canyon
environment from major road development, whi ~ are s +ron 0 1) '
documented, I want to re .\ ay to yo our c o ncer' ns wi t t.'';'' I")rt;st
Service involvement j n t ~ e issue.
We see the forest plan a i. guidance on Logan Canyon. Thus we
se~ th. Forest Service nn ~ a ~ a neut al parti~ipant but as
an advocate of the publi : s ' .f nterest _ . ~ ~xpressed in the
Logan Canyon Managemen t A\i... . a ~'i tandar d 's flo nd gu i de 1 i nes •.., i t~'l i n
the forest pl an. As a re s u 1 t u f the : I te n·t of the
~an agerne n t ar eo a,
its de s c r ip -\: .: on "'rn d ma rl a geme n t stan dar-ds ,
-here is no ..doubt. that onl y mi no r i d; s t ur- ba nces a:::.soc i ated
. w r th the Logan C~. nyon hi ghW fi Y. ca n be imp 1 emen t ~~ d . Th i s firm
u nderstand i ng of the forest \ p·l a n "'J a ~, fu 1 1 sup fJ or t ed by
conservationists and undersiood i n the a bove c u ntext. And it
has been consis t ently relayed in t hat ma n ner b y th @ Forest
Servic •• Only recently have we h eard different not l ons and
that is rather disturbi~g.
.I
It is within the context of the intent of t he f~re s t plan
that a franK discussion would be beneficial . I suspect it
would be helpful with I . esp~ct to a number o i issues a ~ well.
.
».
Thanks very
rdially,
. '.(*'/~I.tr'
i." r' . ,:.
t : I
::1.
mu ~ h .
�
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/160">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/160</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
3951184436
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1300747 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 Dale Bosworth to Daniel Dake, May 28, 1987
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dale Bosworth to Daniel Dake explaining the position of the Forest Service position concerning the Logan Canyon project.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bosworth, Dale
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
United States. Department of Agriculture
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-05-28
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_17.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/20ed8043a21f1ca4f2fb1f80780ee0b1.pdf
9a3ab79b19297e3ed816b1e1e6f27e2b
PDF Text
Text
About this collection:
By Thad Box
Logan Canyon runs east from the lush Cache Valley, which supported Shoshone families for
hundreds of years. Beavers raised their broods in the streams and marshes. The first Europeans,
mountain men and fur traders, gave rivers and canyons French names. Mormon pioneers
established farms and towns in the valley, cut mountain forests for lumber and railroad ties,
developed dairies and beef herds in the canyon. Landless, migratory sheepmen brought flocks
from afar. By the late 1800s, the land in canyons and mountains was barren. Sheep herds could
be counted from Logan by the clouds of dust they raised. Logan River and its tributaries were
polluted by silt and debris.
Utah Agricultural College was established in 1888 as Utah's land grant school. The Cache
National Forest was created in 1902 at the request of local citizens who feared mudslides from
denuded lands. These local citizens wanted the landscape rehabilitated. For the next 100 years
scientists, engineers and land managers conducted research, applied what was learned and rebuilt
the abused land. In so doing, hundreds of scientists, scholars, land managers and local citizens
helped reclaim the areas in and around Logan Canyon into a special place of beauty. They
gradually rebuilt its productivity. Hundreds of thousands of people come through the canyon
each year. The canyon has become more than a beautiful mountain canyon; it is a part of people's
lives and an icon of their culture.
Some of the earliest work at Utah Agricultural College and the Utah Agricultural Experiment
Station was stabilizing land to prevent landslides and improving overgrazed and overcut
mountains. Curricula were developed in the emerging fields of forestry, ecology, range
management, watershed management and environmental engineering. Managers were trained in
Utah, but worked worldwide. Academic units in the College of Natural Resources and the water
program developed reputations for land care. Their research was applied all over the world.
In an effort to document these efforts, Special Collections and Archives in the Merrill-Cazier
Library have the personal and professional papers of many of the scientists and land managers
who helped rebuild Logan Canyon. More are being added. These collections form a valuable
reference for anyone interested in land management and policy. These include papers from
pioneer academics such as Laurence Stoddart and Arthur Smith, forest ecologist Lincoln Ellison
and forest manager William Hurst.
Beginning in 2008, Utah State University’s Special Collections & Archives, the Mountain West
Center for Regional Studies and the College of Natural Resources Department of Environment
and Society collaborated to collect the oral histories of key land use managers and users. Trained
interviewers from The Logan Canyon Land Use Management Project gathered oral histories of
people who have worked in or enjoyed the Canyon during the last century. In these interviews,
available in audio and transcript form, people talk about what Logan Canyon meant to them. The
stories of ranchers, recreationists, scientists, activists, scholars, foresters and sheepherders add
cultural depth to the work of scientists, engineers and academics. This growing collection of oral
histories and personal papers from those who have worked in Logan Canyon is fast becoming a
major resource for others interested in rehabilitation, land management and policy. These oral
recollections form a basis for understanding policy in one area. Principles from them can be
applied to broader land areas.
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/318">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/318</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-10-16
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
About this collection
Description
An account of the resource
One page essay discussing the importance of Logan Canyon to area residents through its many uses and the benefits of collecting oral histories, photographs, and other historic materials that document those interactions.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Box, Thadis W.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)--History
Land use--Utah--Logan Canyon
Land use--Law and legislation--Utah--Logan Canyon
Range Management--Utah--Logan Canyon--Research
Reclamation of land--Utah--Logan Canyon--Research
Utah Agricultural College--History
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Essays
Color photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache Valley (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
2010-2019
21st century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
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
ThadBoxEssay
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2011
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1905-07-03
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/05b88504c9c03db470feef28dd545e39.jpg
27be7936b4f986885ad00994c8ce1387
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/126">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/126</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a hike in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (2 of 3)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on a hike probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Hiking--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 1:07
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640107
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/cc0c313a66214416a8bae9d02638acc0.jpg
0c2516709fc40ccb6359790f82f040a7
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/134">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/134</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a winter hike in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (2 of 2)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on a winter hike probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Hiking--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 12:04
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03641204
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/18904e7920aca9fa7d5be520ac5a23df.jpg
a1c0dce13539cf15cb7e2008b728f008
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/143">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/143</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a hike in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (3 of 3)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 hiking probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in).
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Hiking--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 43:08
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03644308
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/29878fb36048905fb37911a8f4cca67c.jpg
70dae15054fc8e993b9d3ffde348fe64
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/146">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/146</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Members of Logan Scout Troop 5 standing on a trestle bridge in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Logan Canyon (Utah)--Photographs
Trestles--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 13:04
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03641304
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/c8df65d222bb1f512390f8fde3ecf88e.jpg
0112e0e6b2974e63fad4abb9e84a273f
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/168">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/168</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a sleigh ride in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (1 of 2)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on a sleigh ride probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Sleighing--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 5:02
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640502
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/f973b78257755da16e2569310a7188bc.jpg
d3677ee0fd8c31d9c0f9a3ac0dfc4dcb
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/176">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/176</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 herding cattle in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 herding cattle probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Cattle herding--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 04:01
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640401
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/f284aef4fda600f105f8a41c9929079b.jpg
f533a17f95c8b087e89549df8d55a9b3
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/181">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/181</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 horseback riding in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on horses probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Horsemanship--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Trail riding--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 3:06
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640306
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/f48188a1d2969b2788307f76cc253a07.jpg
708316466393aaaf25d1f6cdc7defcad
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/185">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/185</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Two members of Logan Scout Troop 5 with rattlesnakes found while hiking in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Two members of Logan Scout Troop 5 with rattlesnakes found while hiking in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Hiking--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Rattlesnakes--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 35:02
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03643502
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/9c8af598d33a3c10604ef44e43eeedbf.jpg
35f0c23f98c2af0aab752486f5a7b20f
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/186">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/186</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Members of Logan Scout Troop 5 camping in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 camping probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Camping--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 3:07
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640307
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/f9f6a010d6a7043ceebf0ef0aa002810.jpg
e17646a40d833145ebf22563f88ea835
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/189">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/189</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a hike in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (1 of 3)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on a hike probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Hiking--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 1:04
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640104
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/407c9457bc1cd1cdc4f600592fff7108.jpg
f28b6efb09a5b2ae45085e9485a88bb9
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/222">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/222</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Unidentified member of Logan Scout Troop 5 waist deep in snow up Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915-1925
Description
An account of the resource
Unidentified member of Logan Scout Troop 5 waist deep in snow up Logan Canyon, Utah. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 35:03
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03643503
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/6c63175ee5fd6c6cfa7dfb630f3152a3.jpg
3b190674d6b9119496a66117c995f0e3
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/228">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/228</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a sleigh ride in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (2 of 2)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on a sleigh ride probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Sleighing--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 5:01
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640501
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/8e027f00f22ccd2abb3da31069c5ffbf.jpg
276e1a951da184083b56730247305df9
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/239">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/239</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 saluting the American Flag at their campsite up Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 saluting the American Flag at their campsite probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Camping--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 3:05
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03640305
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/9b521a4dde946f8ee3fc6f2eadd05061.jpg
204727186f9ee7813c64314d1195f978
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/248">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/248</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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 Scout Troop 5 on a winter hike in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925 (1 of 2)
Description
An account of the resource
Logan Scout Troop 5 on a winter hike probably in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (2.5 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Hiking--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 12:05
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03641205
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/7e09d8ed20589c218e3d1ac3c691f265.jpg
0780517b29d718fa806c3b296594d10b
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/255">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/255</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Canal in Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Canal in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (3 x 4.5 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Canals--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 44:03
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P036414403
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/d2a55cf2429ed5382701273930a48902.jpg
7af131fe1df93bc0e60accd3573237e4
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/262">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/262</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Members of Logan Scout Troop 5 sitting on a large log on a wagon up Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1915 and 1925
Description
An account of the resource
Members of Logan Scout Troop 5 sitting on a large log on a wagon up Logan Canyon, Utah. Black and white (2.5 x 4 in.)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Log transportation--Utah--Logan Canyon--Photographs
Boy Scouts of America. Troop 5 (Logan, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 40:02
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P03644002
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/4a0fa7a7420070da98af1739b08cbd16.mp3
443c2570e68967956a1ce14ce66b22cb
http://highway89.org/files/original/ae75b2113eb2fd69050bc275f6da44a7.pdf
8dcce733ab4a29305a892320625d6701
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Scott Bushman
Place of Interview: Logan Ranger District Office, mouth of Logan Canyon
Date of Interview:
April 23, 2008
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Darren Edwards; Brad Cole
Brad Cole
Recording Equipment:
Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription Equipment used:
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Susan Gross
Scott Bushman, April 2009; Randy Williams, 17
March 2011
Brief Description of Contents: The interview contains information on the career of Scott
Bushman for the Forest Service. He was involved heavily in fire suppression and the Logan Hot
Shot crew. He also discusses how he first got involved in Logan Canyon as a youth in the Youth
Conservation Corps. He also gives a history of the Forest Service in this area and their
involvement, along with Utah Agricultural College (now Utah State University) in teaching
forestry.
Reference:
DE = Darren Edwards (Interviewer; USU graduate student)
BC = Brad Cole (Interviewer; Associate Dean, USU Libraries)
SB = Scott Bushman
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcript. Many of Mr. Bushman’s edits, including more
information on the topic, are noted in brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 1: A]
DE:
I am Darren Edwards. I am here with Scott Bushman and Brad Cole. It’s April 23, 2008
at 2:15 [pm]. I guess just to get started, Scott what’s your full name?
SB:
Jon Scott Bushman, spelled “J-O-N”.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
1
�DE:
And when and where were you born?
SB:
I was born in Salt Lake City, Utah in 1953.
DE:
So have you lived in Utah your whole life?
SB:
Pretty much. I’ve lived all over the world, but pretty much this has always been my home
address for tax purposes so yep, yeah pretty much.
DE:
Could you give us a little bit more about just your personal history. Why did you travel?
Where are some of the places that you went to?
SB:
Well, I think like a lot of young people back in the late [19]‘60s and ‘70s, I was doing a
lot of hitchhiking and things like that, and I was in college. I remember hitchhiking quite
a bit around the western United States and I even hitchhiked to Alaska. Several times I
dropped out of school for a quarter and traveled, found odd jobs along the way and saw
new places. And I ended up, oh, I spent a lot of time in Central America and Alaska;
Europe and in the west here. I think a lot of that had to with – you know in my family, we
always did a lot of camping – that was kind of a family tradition. We spent a lot of time
in the outdoors. And I think it all kind of crosses over. When I was eighteen years old, I
was in high school; I applied for a job with the U.S. Forest Service for the summer. I
didn’t think I’d get it but I did. So I went to work in 1972 for the Salt Lake Ranger
District on the Wasatch National Forest and the YCC Program [Youth Conservation
Corps at Alta, Utah. The YCC was a youth work program that began during the Nixon
Administration.]
BC:
What types of things did the YCC do at that time?
SB:
Well, the YCC kids – I think there were 48 of us that lived at Alta – and our job was
basically to do “slave labor” project crews; we did trail work, we built campgrounds, we
hauled rocks, we did a little bit of thinning and pruning, but just a lot of different project
works. And it was a great job. We fell in line with the old CCC tradition – that is the old
Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) from the 1930s. It was a residential camp located at
Alta so you went to the Forest Service office on Monday morning, [the camp staff picked
you up and they drove you up to Alta. On Friday afternoon they dropped you off back at
the District Office in Salt Lake.] If you had a car you could get home or your parents
would come and pick you up or we would usually just carpool with our buddies and get
dropped off at home for the weekend. Some of us would just turn around and go hiking,
or go back up in the mountains and go camping. I did that for a few years and that’s how
I really got involved with the US Forest Service.
Logan was a real special place. In 1973 the Wasatch and the old Cache National Forests
combined and it became the Wasatch-Cache. And what the Wasatch wanted to do was
make sure that the Cache felt like they were a part of this new forest because all of the
old Cache Districts on the Utah side went to the Wasatch-Cache. [So the entire Alta
YCC camp was sent to Logan. We felt that being sent to Logan was a reward for our
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
2
�hard work], you know. We were detailed up to Logan for a week or so to do project work
on the Logan Ranger District. We were assigned to work up Left Hand Fork, where we
built a new Range fence in Herd Hollow. That’s where I first met the old District Ranger,
M.J. Roberts and his staff. And after that, coming to Logan for a week, in the YCC
program was the big prize. Everybody loved it up here. For the crew that worked the
hardest and did the best things and had the fewest accidents, their reward was that they
got to come up and spend a week in Logan camping out and doing project work on the
district here. So it was a great opportunity. And that’s how I first got introduced to the
Logan Ranger District – I think I was 19 years old. I remember I got my picture on front
page of the Herald Journal. I cut that out and it’s somewhere around here in the archives.
It was a lot of fun.
My earliest memories of Logan Canyon go back to probably the 1950s when we used to
always take our vacations up at Bear Lake. We would always come through Logan
because my dad had business here in Logan. He was a salesman, worked with the
department stores. So we would come here and he would work for a few hours, work on
his accounts, and then we would go up to Bear Lake and [spend a week at Gus Rich’s
Lake Shore Lodge. I don’t know if you remember Gus’s. It was sold and torn down in the
early 1970s. And that’s how we got to know Logan Canyon.]
DE:
So what are your hobbies and recreational pursuits now as an adult?
SB:
Well, I’m getting kind of a little old for what I used to do. I used to do a lot of hiking, a
lot of mountain climbing – I’ve always enjoyed that. I used to ride horses a lot and I still
travel a little bit but you get older you know, I don’t do the climbing I used to do. I keep a
sailboat up at Bear Lake and I spend a good portion of the summer up there sailing when
I can get off work and we don’t have any fires. [I still hike, camp and cross country ski
with my wife and kids when I get an opportunity. And I still do some horseback riding
here at work if I need check out a burn unit or fuels project.]
DE:
What is your title as a profession; what do you do for your profession?
SB:
Right now I’m the District Fire Management Officer. So my job is to run the fire program
– that means pre-suppression and to put out all the fires on the Logan Ranger District
which includes you know, everything from Idaho down to I guess down to Mantua and of
course the Wellsville Mountains. So I basically manage the fire program up here;
supervise the fire engine and the suppression crews. And I used to be the Hot Shot
superintendent for 20 years and I finally gave that up last summer and took this job (that
kept me away from Logan and from home quite a bit). Before that I was the Assistant
Engine Foreman on the District. I worked for Neff Hardman. Neff had worked here for
since probably – I think he started in the 1930s, went to World War II, came back and
then he got a full-time job after the war; he passed away a few years ago. But Neff was
my boss when I came here. [Before I worked for Neff in Fire I worked on the Young
Adult Conservation Corps.] It was another one of these Department of Labor programs in
it hired young people. We hired a lot of kids from Logan, from USU – mostly spouses
whose husbands were finishing up degrees and they paid them minimum wage and they
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
3
�worked – it was a one-year appointment. And that’s what I came up here to do was work
for that program when I got out of college. I couldn’t find a job as a school teacher but
they offered me one up here. At that time I was [living in Kamas and working as the
Mirror Lake Wilderness Ranger. I applied for several Forest Service jobs that fall and
received 3 job offers. Logan was one of my job offers and I always loved the area so
accepted the Logan offer. With the new job, I moved to Logan in the fall of 1978 and
became a full-time resident.]
BC:
You mentioned the YACC –
SB:
Yeah.
BC:
You talked about hiring a lot of spouses – so mainly a lot of female workers it sounds
like?
SB:
Yeah, we had a lot of women on the crew and it was kind of interesting because it was a
time when the rest of the agency was looking at diversity and bringing women on to the
program and in Logan the complaint was that we had too many women. The old district
ranger was real concerned. There were a lot of really funny jokes about the old ranger,
M.J. Roberts. He was real old school and kind of uncomfortable with women doing
physical work. He would try to restrict them – he was afraid they would hurt themselves.
And the truth of the matter was a lot of these women were just as tough, or tougher, than
a lot of the guys. [Because many of women were a little older and more mature they
tended to be the squad bosses and work leaders. It was an interesting time. We had a lot
of fun and did a lot of great work projects for the District.]
Just kind of going back one of the memories we did we used to plant a lot of trees. Back
in the [19]‘60s and ‘70s the [District did a lot of timber clear cutting projects. A couple
of years after the logging project we would go in and do reforestation: plant trees. We
would have these huge tree planting camps. In preparation for spring planting we had to
cache our seedlings in the area in January. We would go into the Sinks, borrow one of the
Thiokol cats from Beaver Mountain and] then we would bury them under about 20 feet of
snow. As soon as the planting sights were clear we would dig tunnels in the snow caches,
find our trees and then we would set up our tree camps. We would put up all these big
tents, and usually it was in the snow. It was just terrible getting up there, but we would
live up there and we would plant 40-80,000 trees in a couple of weeks. We would haul
our own food up and the guys that did most of the work were the YACC [crew members.
We camped out and worked 10-12 hours a day and just stayed right on sight.]
There are a lot of stories about those times. These are like young, crazy college kids and
they made a little city up there. They built a hot shower, and we’re still wondering how
they did that – so they could shower at night. And I remember they even, up in the trees
they set up a wet bar [laughing], you know which was kind of illegal, but they did it
anyway they’d stick it up there and keep it out at camp. It was a lot of fun, but oh they
worked. It was just real hard work. You’d have to get up early to get your trees ready
and then you’d have to wrap them the night before. I can remember wrapping trees at 10
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
4
�o’clock at night in a blizzard, when it was 15 to 10 degrees outside your tent and you’re
trying to get these things ready to go for the morning. So it was always interesting up
there.
BC:
Explain that a little bit more – you’re re-seeding, re-planting clear-cuts?
SB:
Yeah –
BC:
And the whole process of wrapping the trees and what exactly?
SB:
Well what you do – you get bare-root trees and the bare-root trees have to be frozen.
What we would do is in the fall (this is another great project we used to do) we would go
up in the canyon and we would climb or cut down cone-bearing trees. And we would
grab all of the cones we could – there would be bags and bags of them – and then we
would drive them up to [Boise, Idaho where our Tree nursery is located. The people at
the nursery would take the] cones and they would open them up, plant the seeds and then,
in a couple of years they would harvest them, wrap them in big boxes and we would send
someone to pick up the trees. [That way we knew we had seedlings indigenous to the
area. These were the seedlings we had in our cache. We would take those boxes and they
would be dormant, basically frozen. That’s why we buried them in the snow. Once we
got the trees to our camp the night before we planted them we’d open a box of trees,
measure the roots and clip them with scissors.] I think they had to be like 12 inches, you
know, depending on what they would say. So you would clip those off and then you
would individually lay them out in rows of 50, wrap them in burlap and soak that in water
and vermiculite. After they were soaked you would put it in your planting bag and just
leave it overnight. In the morning as the crews went out then they each would be given a
bag and then we would line up and they would have somebody that would go ahead with
a tool called a McCloud and they would scrape down through the grass about a 16 by 16
inch square of bare soil and then we had the next guy come by with the chainsaw with a
drill auger attached to it on the power head. They would drill a hole about 12 to 14 inches
deep; and the next guy would come along and put a tree in the hole and plant it. And
that’s what you did.
I can go up today and I can see the ones I planted back in [19]’79 and they’re doing really
well. It’s kind of fun to go up there. We did a lot up in Log Canyon Hollow area. Some of
those trees are probably 20 to 30 feet high now. We planted all through the Sinks area.
There are a lot of trees up there; they’ve been doing that for years. There’s one stand that
the Boy Scouts planted in the [19]‘30s, just out of Right Hand Fork, that are still just
barely hanging on, but they planted Ponderosa Pine which isn’t indigenous to this area so
they never really took off. It’s up in Willow Creek. It’s just kind of funny. They had a
nursery at Tony Grove and I guess, back in the Conservation Era, one of their
experiments to introduce Ponderosa Pine to the Bear River Range. There are actually two
or three coniferous trees up there that are doing pretty well, but the big experiment kind
of failed. They’re still alive but they’re barely ten feet tall! [Laughing] So, just an
interesting side line.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
5
�DE:
So if you could change anything about the career that you’re in now, what would it be?
SB:
Oh, it’s been a good career. I think probably I would have moved around a little bit more.
I spent quite a few years working on the Logan Ranger District and then they had a
reduction in work force and so I was let go: I lost my job up here. That was back in the
early [19]‘80s. And then I went back to school at Utah State University in Forestry for a
couple of years and was able to get my civil service Forestry requirements met and then I
left the area. I got another Forest Service job in Salt Lake for a year or so. I came back to
Logan in 1984 and worked as a seasonal for a few years. I think I probably would have
done better just to keep moving. I came back to the area because I liked it and then I was
offered an opportunity for another appointment with the Hot Shot crew. So my idea was
to take that appointment and then move on but I just kind of got – I got married, I had
kids, you know, we bought a place and so. We just ended up staying for probably longer
than we should have, but that’s why.
DE:
What was that – the Hot Shots crew?
SB:
Hot Shot crew is a fire crew: a 20 person hand crew, a line crew. The Logan Hotshot
Crew was established (there’s a real wild history about that) in 1988. Do you want some
background on that because –
DE:
Would love some background, yeah.
SB:
Well, you know when they first established the National Forest Reserve in Logan in 1903
they hired a local barber to be the first reserve supervisor, the first ranger – John Squires.
And I think that was pretty typical throughout the west. There seemed to be two schools
in the U.S. Forest Service back then. There were the eastern educated foresters from the
European tradition, sort of like Gifford Pinchot and his crowd; and then there were the
western forest rangers that were basically cowboys and ex-buffalo hunters and you name
it – just these guys that loved the mountains. So what they wanted to do was take what
they had in the west and teach them Forestry methods. Logan had the State Agricultural
College here and Forest Service begin teaching summer forestry course here in 1907.
When Ranger Squires resigned as the Forest Supervisor they brought somebody from
back east to be the [new Supervisor, William Weld Clark] – he was a Forester and he
began to teach summer courses up here at Utah State in surveying and forestry
techniques. Unfortunately he died – he had an accident getting on his horse at Card Guard
Station. He fell on his saddle horn while he was mounting the horse [it] created an
internal hemorrhage. I think it was back in 1907-1908, right around there. So they
brought Squires back in to fill in until they could find somebody new.
In the meantime there was a recognized need for Forestry education for these guys. So
back in the late 1920s a guy named Lyle Watts who was the Deputy Chief of the Forest
Service came to Logan and established the Utah State University department of Forestry,
the Natural Resources department. He later became Chief of the Forest Service. In the
1920s as Watts was putting the new Forestry Department together he wanted to bring the
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
6
�working western foresters to Utah State and train them in Forest science and
management. [Watts felt very strongly that students needed] to have a summer program –
you know it wasn’t all winter and classroom studying. And so he started the USU
Forestry Camp up in Logan Canyon and that’s where that all came from. The problem
was that a lot of these guys were married people and they couldn’t afford to take the
summer off. They needed to work. And so Watts and the Department made an agreement
with the Cache National Forest to pick these guys up [after Summer Camp and give them
a job for the rest of the summer field season. Logan use to be the old Cache National
Forest Supervisor’s Office and it seemed to be a good arrangement for both parties. And
so every year the District Ranger would go up to Summer Camp and recruit 10 or 15] or
how many guys they could get and offer the students jobs here. Most of the jobs were
working in fire. They had a little fire crew. Anyway, over the years I think probably by
the 1960s it was pretty well-established that the Logan District would host a fire crew
every summer. And they even had patches that said “USU Fire Crew” on them and
“Wasatch-Cache National Forest.” Guys like – who was Gerald Ford’s son?
BC:
Oh, Jack Ford?
SB:
Yeah, he was on that – Jack was on that crew and Mike Jenkins was on that crew. Mike is
now a Forestry professor at USU. It is kind of interesting but within the Forest Service
community you’ll meet a lot people that worked on the crew back in the [19]‘60s and
70s. Once in a while and old crew member will come in and talk to me about it and want
to know how the crew is. Well, the crew was a pretty big thing for the Logan District and
when they combined the National Forest, when the Cache and the Wasatch joined
together they kept it going until the late‘70s. In 1980 the Intermountain Region decided
they wanted to establish a Hot Shot Crew on the Wasatch. So they took the money they’d
been giving to the USU Forestry Fire Crew and they established a National Hot Shot
Crew. They moved the crew to Kamas. The Wasatch Hotshots existed for three years but
they didn’t do too well. They had some, I guess they had some real problems with the
staff there and the community. [The crew members were pretty unhappy with the way the
program was run and complained to the Forest Supervisor. After three years the Forest
Supervisors, Chan St. John, decided the Forest was not going to host the crew anymore.
And so they gave the money back and that kind of fixed the problem that way.]
A couple of years later Dave Baumgartner, who was the new Logan District Ranger – he
came down from the Sawtooth – he really wanted to have the old crew back and so he
made a proposal to bring a new Shot Crew to Logan. The Region was still trying to place
a Hotshot crew in the Region. Placing a new crew in Logan seemed to make sense
because we had this tradition of the old USU Forestry Fire Crew. We still had all the old
equipment, you know, all the tools and stuff and the packs. The Forest Supervisor at the
time was Dale Bosworth. Do you know Dale? He was the Chief of the Forest Service
until last year and he finally retired. Dale thought it was a great idea so he got the
Regional Office to pony-up with the money. Dave established the crew but he couldn’t
find anybody to run it because it was a new crew. So he asked me to run it just to get it
started up with the idea that he could get me an appointment, you know if it became a
permanent thing. That is where the Hot Shot crew came. It kind of started with Lyle
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
7
�Watts back in the 1920s [and you know it’s still here today. We still hire a lot of students
but now we have people from all over the country on the crew. We have also hosted
firefighters from Russia and Brazil. These are Wildland fire professionals that have
detailed with the crew to observe and learn American fire suppression methods and
organizational structure.]
BC:
What are some of the memorable fires that happened in this region that you’ve worked
on?
SB:
Oh, we’ve had some wonderful fires here. [Laughing] I think the first fire I ever worked
on in the Logan Ranger District was when I came up in 1973 on that range fence detail.
We had a fire up in Charlie’s Hollow up in Left Hand Fork. I can remember that because
we were rousted out of our tents and told to get down there and we’ve got to put this fire
out. We were all 18, 17, 16 years old. We loaded up in our carry-alls and drove down
there. The District crew just about had it out, but they let us mop up for about 30-40
minutes. The deal was that they had probably about 20 rattlesnakes crawling around the
fires edge where we were mopping up. This place was just lousy with rattlesnakes that
the fire had chased out. I can remember the Range Con (Conservation Officer) Stan
Miller, he was going around with a shovel whacking them and collecting the rattles!
[Laughing] I can remember the kind of scolding Stan for being so unfriendly to the
wildlife. But he was afraid someone was going to get bitten by them. Years later, when I
got my permanent job in Logan, Stan and I became good friends. Anyway, that was up in
Charlie’s Hollow.
We’ve had a lot of really interesting fires in Logan. And I hate to say some of them have
been just really fun. The way fires start around here is they are either man caused, like
kids playing with matches or hunters in the fall. But during the summer most of them are
caused by lightening strikes. In the 1970s and 1980s when we would get a “lighting bust”
on the District, typically you’ll get five or six starts right at the same time. That was
always fun for us guys; sometimes. We used to keep a heli-port down at the Logan
warehouse at the other side of town and when we got those afternoon lighting storms, it
seemed like it was always Friday night and you always had something better to do, you
know. You had a date or there was a movie or something like that. But Neff used to run
over and lock the gate and wouldn’t let us leave. He’d say, “You got to get your fire stuff
on because we got new starts and the helicopter is coming.” And so he would kind of
kidnap us I guess. But the helicopter would come, land; he’d give us a briefing, tell us
where we were going, divide us up into groups of two or three man squads; and then we
would jump in the helicopter and they would drop us off on these ridge tops all along the
front there. We got to spend the night there banging on these fires. [We would have to
stay on the mountain until they were out, usually by morning. The next morning we
would wait until the sun got up and then we would have our breakfast which was just
some kind of army ration, make some coffee and then right around 10 or 11 o’clock,
when we felt good about the fire, we could hike out and they would let us go home and
get some sleep. And those were a lot of fun.]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
8
�I think some of the biggest fires I’ve been on – well, I remember the year 1988. I
remember that year because that’s when we had Yellowstone burn.
BC:
Um-hmm.
SB:
And that was the first year that we had the Hot Shot crew here on the district and we
spent all summer in Yellowstone. And then when we got back everybody was so tired.
We got back in mid-September and we were ready to just – oh, that’s it – and about two
days later we had the White Pine fire, up in White Pine canyon. I was the initial attack IC
on that. I hiked up from Tony Lake and when I made it to the ridge above White Pine I
reported it at about 200 acres. It wasn’t that big but it was almost dark and fire look a lot
bigger at night than they really are. The dispatcher thought I was kidding so I repeated it
and he started ordering crews and helicopters. It was the biggest fire he’d ever seen in the
high timber. I’m not sure what it ended up, but it was the biggest fire I’d ever seen on the
Logan Ranger District. It burned most of White Pine basin. [We got it pretty much under
control by the next afternoon and turned it over to the State. The next day the fire blew up
again and the State Forester, Craig Pettigrew took it over as the IC. The fire was actually
on Utah State sections and not on the National Forest. By the time it was over we had
crews from all over the country working on it. We had a crew from Pennsylvania that
was assigned to the fire and they were kind of high maintenance. They were mad because
they thought they were going to Yellowstone, but Yellowstone had received snowed and
it was pretty well finished. So we got them and they turned into a problem crew.] But we
had some crews from South Carolina, some crews from the Carolinas that were a lot of
fun to work with. Good fire, a lot of pictures, a lot of good memories on that one.
We also had one up Spawn Creek that year. I think it was in October and it was just about
140 acres, again bitter cold I remember. That was a hunting fire, but I can remember the
thing being so dry that all you had to do was, you know look at a tree and it would go on
fire. I mean it was just bone dry up there. The fires we were getting were mostly hunter
fires. People would just do a warming fire and they would think they were out but they
would walk away and you know, they just start to smolder and two or three days later,
you know they were off to the races. Those were fun, fires but it made for a very long
season. I was glad to see the snow come.
I think probably as far as the media goes we’ve had several fires around Beaver
Mountain; one in [19]’89 and then one in the early ‘90s where the fire fighters got to ride
the chair lift up to the top of Beaver Mountain because that’s where the fires were. That
was kind of fun for them. It’s hard to keep track of all the fires. Fires on the Wellsvilles
have always been a painful experience. Our joke is “you’ve never really worked on the
Logan Ranger District unless you’ve carried a bladder bag up the Wellsvilles at two in
the morning through that brush trying to smell smoke out.” [Laughing] You know, that
was kind of your ritual of passage I guess, you had to climb the Wellsvilles. They don’t
tend to get very big, but it is so steep and hard to get up there with very few trails. Now
that it’s a wilderness area we look at them real carefully. If there’s not a lot of potential
we usually just monitor them or put in them in a Fire Use Status because they don’t tend
to move much or threaten anything. They don’t get big; they kind of just smolder around
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
9
�for a day or two and then go out. So it’s not really worth spending the time and money to
go after them.
DE:
So how big were the bladder bags you carried?
SB:
[Bladder Bags? They’re “back pack pumps” and sometimes we call them “fedcos”
because that is the manufactures name. There are a lot of different terms for them]; some
of them aren’t very polite. They carry five gallons of water, so they’re about 45 pounds
because water weighs 11 pounds a gallon so. And that’s on top of your fire gear, which is
another 20 pounds and your tool and all the stuff you carry. So usually you really earn
your cookies when you climb up the Wellsvilles with that kind of weight on you.
BC:
I guess!
[Laughing]
SB:
And the fires are never near the trail! [Laughing] You’ve always got to bushwhack up
side of the mountain and usually it was in the dark. But good fun.
BC:
Have you seen the same – I know living in the southwest for a while a lot of the fire
problems down there were they thought caused by over-foresting and the thicket growth
that came in. Do you have the similar kinds of fire issues developing in this area of the
world?
SB:
Yeah, well specifically in Logan Canyon. I would say that’s a problem throughout the
U.S. now because of the fire control. Where you really see it is like in the large timber
stands in Idaho and Oregon and the northwest. California, because it is so heavily
vegetated and has a huge urban interface component. We live in an area which has a lot
of fire tolerance. What that means is a lot of the fuels are meant to burn. And as they
would say over at Utah State, “It’s not a matter of “if”, but “when.” But our fires haven’t
been the large, catastrophic fires that we’ve seen up north. A large fire around here would
be 100 acres. I think that may change. [Last summer we had a lot of new starts down on
the foothills, but once they got into the timber the fuels thinned out, and the fire behavior
would drop off. It was just kind of the consistency of the fuel type and patterns. Where
they weren’t consistent and continuous fire wasn’t able to carry. We saw this along the
7,000 foot level all summer long.]
As a student I can remember hiking up Cottonwood with Ron Lanner (he was one of my
professors) and drilling trees and looking at the ring patterns, you know to try and
establish a fire history. I think the Logan Canyon does have a history of fire. It is pretty
hard to find a stand of Doug Fir that doesn’t have some kind of a fire scar on the larger
trees. And just because we haven’t had a lot of fires in the last 100 years, well we have,
the pioneers recorded some, but I think it’s just a matter of time, you know. We’ll see
what this drought does; maybe not this year. [It’s been pretty wet out there this summer.]
BC:
Yeah!
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
10
�SB:
When Albert Potter came through the canyon in 1902 he writes in his diary about a fire
up there by Stump Hollow (right across the street from where Beaver Mountain is) where
they had done some logging up there. Apparently some herders had decided that they
didn’t like the brush and so they were going to burn it off to just to get rid of it so the
cows could have more feed, and the sheep (because this was a major grazing area back
then). He writes the thing went all the way into Idaho and then some, you know
[laughing]. So it got away from them! I guess you could probably still find fire scars up
there.
DE:
So are you – kind of shifting gears I guess – are you a member of a religious community?
And if so, how has that affected your land use beliefs?
SB:
[Laughing] Well being from Utah, half my family were LDS, the other half are Seventh
Day Adventist and I’m kind of right in the middle. I don’t know if that really is kind of
good question for me, you know. My grandfather grew up in Arizona and he can
remember when he couldn’t go out and play because Geronimo was on the war path. He
was back in Arizona in the late 1880s and early 1890s. His Grandfather was part of a
colonizing mission down there. And they just had a real, I think, connection to wide-open
spaces.
My Grandfather was an interesting guy. He fought in World War I; he always believed,
you know, that the best President United States ever had was Teddy Roosevelt. He was a
Roosevelt Republican [and a conservationist. I think that idea of conservation, you know,
was a Republican thing. That was a long time ago, you don’t hear the word
“conservation” from the Republicans anymore, but those were different times. My
Grandfather ] was devout LDS but he seemed to think that the land somehow was part of
his destiny. There was an “LDS Manifest Destiny” that seemed tied to the land and he
used to say that he was here for a purpose and that was because the land would make the
people. Everybody says well, “we made this land.” He always said it was the opposite –
“the land made us and that’s why we’re here.” He really loved the wide open spaces and
he loved to travel; he loved to camp. That’s just the way he was. So I don’t know – They
say everything skips a generation? My dad, he kind of did that, skip a generation. He was
more of a, you know, a tie and suit guy. Dad was a businessman. He liked to camp but
not as much as my grandfather did. Dad never hunted; my Grandpa used to like to hunt
sometimes but he preferred to travel with the family and visit places he knew in his
youth. As for me, I think I was just kind of born into it, but I don’t know if you call a
religious ethic, maybe more of a cultural tie.
BC:
You mention that about the conservation movement, changing parties or disappearing.
Do you have any thoughts on why that’s changed like that?
SB:
Well, yeah I do, but I don’t know if I should say them! [I enjoy reading about Gifford
Pinchot and Theodore Roosevelt. They were powerful men and this was a powerful
history with a powerful ethic.] And then I hear the [Bush] Administration decides they’re
going to sell National Forest lands to private investors to help pay for the war in Iraq and,
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
11
�well you know. It’s just a real struggle. But it seems to me that in natural resource
management these days the real stimulus and motivation come from the other side of the
isle, you know. And the Administration seems to have other priorities; conservation is not
one of them; reclamation is not one of them. I think the budgets reflect that, but I think it
speaks for itself.
DE:
So you’ve covered a lot of the Logan area and had a lot of connection with different parts
of it. Is there one part of Logan Canyon that’s more special to you that you have special
memories connected to more than other areas?
SB:
Yeah, there’s a couple. My favorite area is the Mount Naomi area. White Pine Canyon
area is real special. [When I first came to the Logan District on my detail in [19]73 we
were able to finish our project a day early so we had a free day before we had to return to
Salt Lake. A few of us kids wanted to go camp, I think rather than just stay in the
campground. So the Ranger recommended – he drew us a little picture and said, “Try
White Pine Canyon. Go to this lake, Tony Lake and find the trailhead and just walk and
then you’ll see it.”] And that’s what we did. We got over to White Pine Lake and I can
remember there was a group of Boy Scouts in there. And they had a chainsaw, a sailboat
and they were shooting .22s. We hiked down to the lake and confronted them and were
threatened by the Scout Master. He told us to leave them alone and that he was a personal
friend of the Ranger. And so we left and we spent the night and camped down over the
hill out of gunshot range from these guys. But we thought it was strange. They brought a
Jeep up there to haul this sailboat, and it was a little sunfish type of thing. I thought it was
a real strange introduction to the Logan Ranger District and White Pine. But I loved
White Pine Canyon, Boy Scouts aside. I’ve got just a lot of good memories of the area.
We used to take the fire crew up there and we would train, we would go overnight and
we would train doing initial attacks in the dark; wild times.
I think another one of my favorite places is High Creek over Doubletop. There was a time
when I [used to do a lot of horseback riding as a boy. When I started working Fire on the
District, in the late fall, after fire season when things slowed down, the old fire control
officer – Neff Hardman – used to let me take a pack string and go work the trails in the
high country.] I can remember one fall packing up over High Creek Canyon North Fork
into Idaho and then trying to go around Doubletop and work my way along the ridge to
Tony Lake. It was always a disaster. It kind of got to be a joke around the District, about
me getting lost in the mountains. And I can remember trying to bring a horse around
Doubletop – I think the horse was pushing snow up to his chest, [and I think he started to
roll and we almost went off a cliff there. To get off the mountain I had to lead him down
Hells Kitchen. I remember the horse sliding down the snow fields sitting on its tail and
using his front legs trying to slow himself down. They had an early snow fall that year
but I couldn’t see it from the valley. I didn’t think there would be that much snow up
there.] But High Creek Canyon, both the north and south fork are just special. If I was
going to recommend a good, beautiful place to anybody it would just be that trail along
Doubletop and then on top of Steam Mill over to the White Pine area. You just don’t see
country like that around here. It’s all alpine, gorgeous, a lot of wildlife, you know,
especially if you get out at in the evening or early morning. If you’ve got a horse, and are
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
12
�in the area you can always see something – usually an elk or a moose or something. It’s
neat country.
BC:
I got to warn you a little bit, I’m just worried about that microphone.
SB:
Oh!
DE:
That’s good; I didn’t even catch that, yeah.
So with all you’ve done – you’ve been involved a lot of different ways with Logan
Canyon – how have you contributed to the changes in the land use policies?
SB:
Well I don’t think I really have. As the primary fire staff officer on the District much of
my job is to administer policies, not to create policy. Policy decisions and direction
usually come from a higher source and we tend to do the groundwork, the fieldwork. We
make recommendations, but usually the decisions are made at a higher level. For
example, when we begin to establish the Travel Plan on the District we had direction
from Washington but we were the ones that actually developed and wrote it. [We did the
mapping, hosted the public meetings and worked out the nuts and bolts of the thing. Of
course we only made recommendations. The Forest Supervisor had to approve the plan.
The idea of restricting motorized use on the Logan Ranger District seemed was
revolutionary at the time. What it meant was that times were changing. It was driven by
the huge increase in things like ATVs and motorcycles. They had became really popular
but the damage they caused had become unacceptable.]
BC:
What year would that have been?
SB:
Oh 1970s, I guess. I mean I had never seen an ATV until they started popping these
things out, I [guess in Japan. And by the late1970s they were everywhere. At first I
thought it was kind of a neat thing; I think originally it was an off-highway vehicle or
whatever. And they were designed to just go on the dirt roads -- kind of a safe alternative
to two-wheel motorcycles. That really changed things, you know. By the 1980s it looked
like something had to be done and so the Washington office ordered us to implement a
“Travel Management Plan.” Washington and the Region gave us some parameters but the
Forests did most of the work. It fell to the Districts to go] ahead and begin a road survey.
So we surveyed all the roads on the District and then make decisions on what roads
should remain open, what roads should remain closed. We were given some criteria – but
they were real simple ones. The Ranger would ask us was how old are the roads and are
the roads creating resource damage. And so we kind of went on that. The Division of
State Wildlife had some other criteria they wanted to throw into the mix too. Those
criteria were related to Wildlife needs and were probably a lot more restrictive to
Motorized use than the ones we used. This was because they were dealing with a lot of
decimation of the elk herds and declining populations. [You know, we were losing all the
calving grounds; they were being overrun by folks on Snowmobiles and ATVs in the
spring during the calving. So the State Wildlife people wanted to see more roadless areas
or what they termed “refuge” areas.]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
13
�My job – and this was the greatest job in the world, this was so cool – I was tasked with
mapping every road on the District. They gave me a motorcycle (a little Honda 90) and
they gave me maps and said, “You get out there.” Me and two others seasonal employees
; a woman named Darcy Becenti and Tony Cowan from the timber crew spent all fall
riding every dirt road, motorized trail, 2 track and dispersed camping site and mapping
them. We had all the District quads and we basically surveyed all of the existing roads on
the Logan Ranger District. Then we [took the maps that we’d made and we sat down and
discussed each and every one of them with Dave [Baumgartner], the Ranger, and his
staff. We made recommendations on what we should leave open and what we should
close.]
I thought many of the roads, as far as our policy went, were very reasonable and viable. I
remember arguing, “We should probably just leave those open because they’re not
hurting anything and they’re not causing any resource damage and they’re providing
access.” We were pretty generous with wanting to leave most of the existing roads open.
Other roads that were [obviously kids trying to get someplace they shouldn’t and, or
where there was real erosion concerns, we pushed to close those. Once we have the road
closed we started to do reconstruction/rehab on those areas. And it’s been a constant war
ever since; there’s been violence, vandalism and there have been threats. It’s an
amazingly emotional issue. I think it just wears people out.]
BC:
Would this have been part of the Rare II [Wilderness Roadless Area Review and
Evaluation] process, or was it a different process?
SB:
Well it was part of it. The Rare I and Rare II were Roadless Area surveys in the mid to
late 1970s. This happened prior to the Travel Plan from what I can remember. I worked
on both of them and, as I remember it was just to identify roadless areas that might have
wilderness qualities for future designation. It was a process mandated by Congress.
During the Rare I survey, I was living in Kamas [Utah] and I wasn’t that involved in it. I
was the Wilderness Ranger up on the Highline trail. But when we did Rare II, I was
working in Logan and I remember being detailed down to the Supervisor’s Office in Salt
Lake and working on the maps and the planning process. Everyone worked a lot on it. It
was huge – reading and documenting public comments mapping veg. types, wildlife
habitats, recreation use, land ownership and land use. We did it all.
BC:
Was that kind of the beginning of the real public comment period, do you think?
SB:
I don’t think so. I think there’s always been a process for public comments – I think it’s
per law. But I think NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act], when the NEPA process
was incorporated into the Forest Service the public comment process was more
formalized. And that’s been kind of interesting. I think we had NEPA for years and I
wasn’t even aware of it. I was always the guy that would build the trails or put out [the
fires. I’m just a forest technician and all the big decisions are managed at a higher level,
through Congressional Law or Administration Directives in Washington.] We just kind of
implemented the direction that the Forest Supervisor determined were appropriate. He
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
14
�says to close a road, we’d go get a ‘dozer and we’d go close it. If we were told to open it
up we would get a dozer and open it up.
BC:
That somehow segue into – how did the Mount Naomi wilderness and Wellsville
wilderness come about? Do you remember that process?
SB:
Yeah, I was there! Gosh, when was that? I can remember that Ranger M.J. at the time
was absolutely convinced that we needed a motorized trail to the top of the Wellsville
cone for his motorcycles. I think I came to the Logan Ranger District about the time this
was becoming a controversial issue back in [19]’78. I remember hiking up to the
Wellsville cone with the trail crew foreman, Tom Esplin and actually surveyed and
flagging out a possible trail. And then the Mount Naomi/Wellsville wilderness proposal
completely shut that down and I think M.J. was pretty angry about that. Eventually we
did build a trail up there but it was for non-motorized of course, and it was just across the
cone. It allowed horse traffic to get around the cone safely. But the Wilderness Bill, I can
remember when they had the congressionals here at the USU Forestry Camp. They had
Jim Hansen and a US Senator from Colorado, I can’t remember his name, but he ran for
President-
BC:
Oh, Gary Hart?
SB:
Yeah, Gary Hart. They did a fly-by in a helicopter of the proposed wilderness area and
then landed at the Forestry Camp. We all drove up and listened to them talk. Gary Hart
was very impressive; Jim Hansen was not; I think he fell asleep, he just seem
disinterested. That was my impression of Hansen. The Wilderness proposal was fairly
controversial and a lot of local people opposed it. It was a real battle and a compromise. I
think a lot of people – there were a lot of forces that just didn’t want to see wilderness,
not only in Utah but especially in Cache Valley. They just felt like there were too many
conflicts and limitations. [I believe all the private and state holdings up in Franklin Basin
were not included in the Wilderness Bill because there were people in the Cache County
Commission that wanted to see development up there.] At the time Beaver Mountain was
on National Forest land and it was under permit. I remember the Forest and the permittee,
Ted Seeholzer, for management reasons, had wanted to keep Beaver Mountain a small
day-use only type of ski area. As I recall, the conservation coming out of the Cache
County Council was something like, “we’re loosing money because we’re not putting in
condos” and “we need to develop up there and be an over-night, year round, destination
resort.” They were determined that Franklin Basin, since it was all privately owned – or a
lot of it was privately owned and State owned – that would be a good place to build a
second Aspen or something. And so we had that conversation going on. I think a lot of
that kind of thinking was why Congress and the Forest Service didn’t push the wilderness
area past the ridgeline, you know, onto the east of the Mount Naomi ridgeline. A lot of it
is just ownership.
It was interesting that these private and State sections in Franklin Basin were eventually
include into the National Forest system through the land exchange for the Olympics. At
that time there was talk about the possibility of extending the wilderness boundary into
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
15
�the other side. [This was during the Forest Plan revision and the Forest was give direction
to propose 5,000 acres to the National Wilderness System. But there was quite a bit of
public and local political opposition to it, mostly from the motorized access community.
So we lost the opportunity and the Forest purposed additional lands for wilderness
designation over in the High Uinta Mountains, but not in here.] There’s a lot of political
resistance to it. You know with the roadless area and then the Forest Plan; it’s been fairly
controversial.
BC:
The public hearings, do you remember that were held here for the early [19]‘80s, the
Utah wilderness – was there much support in the valley, along with the opposition?
SB:
I think back in the ‘80s and the early ‘70s, just personal observations, you know, I’m not
sure how accurate they were but I think in the 1970s Logan was a small, predominantly
agricultural, college town, and it was a party town. I think Cache Valley had half the
population it does now. I remember that the politics seemed to be a lot more moderate,
agriculture oriented, and that was a good mix. And I think in the ‘80s that kind of
changed as I saw more and more developers sit on the County Council and less farmers
and politics becoming more right winged to extreme. The dynamic of the area seemed to
change. I think with the growth, urban development and the decline of agriculture
attitudes are much more materialistic. It seemed like we have become much more growth
oriented, and much less, you know, concerned with the quality of life or the protection of
our resources. Cache Valley has become a lot more polarized. I noticed that with the
snowmobile/cross country ski issue over the last couple of years. I’m thinking back to the
‘70s with the cross-country ski races and how well everyone seemed to get along. We
used to have the Temple Flat cross-country ski race, do you remember that?
BC:
Um-hmm.
SB:
Yeah and just how different things were then. If you tried to do that now there would be a
lot of organized resistance to it I can remember one of my jobs in the winter was that I
would go up once a week – and this is a great job too – and I would ski all through the
Sinks area and I would put poles on all the sink holes out there. Because snowmobilers
had just started to use that day-use and it was becoming pretty popular and we had some
bad accidents. The snowmobiles in the sinks would be moving pretty fast and sometimes
they would drive into a sink hole and they would disappear. I think we had a fellow that
broke his back and so the Ranger wanted us to put safety flag around the sink holes, so
we did. We did that for about two years and then somebody said that well if we did that
then we would assume liability, so we had to pull them out. But you know, I saw the use
really change in the Sinks. It went from predominantly a family sledding, cross-country
ski type of use, to pretty much snowmobile use only. And then of course with the trail
grooming from Hardware Ranch to the Idaho boarder by the Utah State Department of
Recreation, snowmobiling as become even more and more popular. It is now drawing
people from all over the State and the country, thanks to special interest groups and
advertising. So it’s a growing activity. But it hasn’t always been that way. This hasn’t
always been the “premier” snowmobile capital of the world, to quote a local booster. To
me it seems very recent of that type of use.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
16
�DE:
When did you first start to notice the shift when snowmobiles became really big?
SB:
[Laughing] When I was told we would no longer be able to prune the trail for the Cross
Country Ski race. The reason I was given was, “We’re not going to do it anymore
because of user conflict.” [Also, there was some problems with the keg of beer the
organizers provided at the end of the race. The Cache County Council had passed an
ordinance prohibiting kegs in the County. And I think (I can’t remember when the last
race was), but I thought that was sad. It was another one of these fun Forest Service jobs
that seem to keep disappearing. I looked forward to the two days you got to ski with the
course with your pruners and chop out all the dead fall so the skiers could get through. I
think the last race was probably in the – early [19]‘80s?]
BC:
Early ‘80s, yeah because it was when I was in school I think.
SB:
Yeah!
BC:
They finished off –
SB:
Yeah and then it just seemed like everyone had a snowmobile and that’s all you saw in
the upper Logan Canyon area. I remember one spring when I was helping Mike Jenkins
with his Fire Class– Mike Jenkins used to teach a forestry class on fire at USU. Because
he used to help me with my fire training for the Hot Shot Crew I would have some of my
fire folks go over and help him with his training. When he did his field day for his red car
fire class I would supply him with tools and instructors.
I can remember one year we were working up at Tony Grove doing some line
construction, there was quite a bit of snow on the ground, it must have been mid-May and
we had an issue with some of the snowmobilers that were unloading and going up Louis
M. Turner canyon to access the Tony Lake area. The canyon was closed to snowmobiles
but apparently it was the only way they could get to the Lake as the snow had all melted
on the Tony road. The Travel plan was new and most people didn’t take it seriously. I
had to stop class and go over and tell them they couldn’t take their machines up the
canyon. It was posted but the just rode around it. I called the office on the radio and was
told that it was illegal and I that I needed to stop them. [It was pretty tense and they were
not happy. They explained their side of the issue and the whole deal seemed like a big
misunderstanding. It wasn’t violent, but there was a lot of hostility there. And I didn’t
realize that snowmobiling was such a big thing, you know. [Laughing] When the snow
melted, you just moved on, but apparently not.] So I think that must have been in the late
‘80s – ’89, maybe ’88. But I noticed there was a lot more of a combative atmosphere
then, a lot more passion than in the 1970s. You know, as you get more use, you get more
restrictions and then you know it’s just kind of the way things are. You just tend to – if
you work for the Forest Service, you’re in the middle. You try to just kind of work the
middle, you know, and make a decision for the resource.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
17
�DE:
So you talked about a lot of ways that political changes and society changed and things to
influence the land-use policies. Can you think of any ways that the land-use policies have
influenced change themselves?
SB:
I’m thinking: Land-use policies that influenced change? Well, in the fire world, Smoky
the Bear could be… and “prevent forest fires” may be policies that have changed or at
least forced change. Such as the fire suppression doctrine in the 1940s and ‘50s to the fire
prevention message – is that kind of what you’re looking at, or? Fire Suppression to Fire
Management?
DE:
That, or just any of the things in society that maybe you notice a problem you create a
land-use policy and then the problem goes away, or you know with the snowmobilers and
cross-country skiers. Have there been any ways that the social structure has been changed
or has it adapted in any way to a new land use policy?
SB:
Well in the social structure I think what we’re seeing is more polarization which is
unfortunate, [particularly in recreation. There’s more divisiveness out there. And pretty
much what we’ve found is that segregation seems to work the best; which I hate to say it.
For example, because of user conflicts with the snowmobile/cross-country ski people,
just you know, segregating the extremist. Particularly with the cross-country ski
community because in their world the presence of heavy snowmobile use, well it kind of
detracts from their experience. If you ever ski you know that the snow compaction, the
noise, the smell; it’s just not the kind of experience you are looking] for. On the other
hand, skiers really don’t seem to impact the quality of snowmobiling that much. With the
cross-country skiers using the snowmobile tracks, I mean the snowmobiles may have to
slow down a little bit, but I can’t see a big impact. Personally, I ski whenever I can, and
snowmobiles in the area really don’t bother me too much. I can see segregation in some
areas because of just the huge numbers. Forty or fifty years ago it was pretty much
everybody being courteous and that sort of thing, you know, recreated together. I think
with many motorized users there’s a different value system and what constitutes a good
experience. I’m not saying one’s right and one’s wrong, but there is sort of that different
level experience that people demand or what they want to have for themselves. Some
need solitude, unbroken powder, some need speed and some want a party atmosphere.
So user conflicts would certainly be a big issue.
Fire is one. But I think growth and development, you know, nationally and locally trumps
everything. One issue on the Logan Ranger District is Logan Canyon. That’s always been
a huge issue: how much development do you want up there? The old ranger MJ was
passionate that Logan Canyon would not be turned into a utility corridor. And he fought
anybody, tooth and nail [laughing] to make sure that that didn’t happen. And then he
retired. The next Ranger that came in thought that some utility improvements would be
appropriate, you know. I think the big issue for us was really that the power line over to
Beaver Mountain and what that might curtail. Once you had power there then other
things could follow and I know that was a pretty passionate issue on the District and it
was debated long and hard in the district staff meetings. And it was eventually felt that
that was a reasonable concession, you know, for the ski resort. A lot of people felt like
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
18
�that was going to be the beginning of an urban canyon boom. Once you got power in the
[canyon, development and sprawl would follow. That was because much of the land in
the upper canyon was under State and Private ownership.]
The land exchange was pretty big. Back in I think it was the [19]‘80s we did an
exchange. The state was looking for money trying to turn the state trust lands into
something that they could develop revenues to support the State public education system.
One alternative that they came up with was trade those state in-holdings on public lands
like National Parks, National Forests or any federal public lands and then trade them for
sub-surface mineral, gas and oil leases. The thought was these gas and oil leases would
generate huge amount of income to the schools. Everyone thought that this was a pretty
good deal. And this was the proposal that was what was negotiated out, but when it came
to the Logan Ranger District things changed. The Logan District was one of the few
Districts on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest that had large amounts of State sections
of land inside its borders.
[And so an exchange between the Forest Service and the State that seemed like a natural
thing that would benefit everyone.] But the political climate at the time was very pro
growth and that again, the County wanted to get something out of it, which was economic
development in Logan Canyon. [As we were told at a staff briefing, they (the Cache
County Council) went to Congress and complained that the exchange didn’t benefit the
County and that they would oppose it. The council did not want to turn Franklin Basin
over to the Forest Service because that would limit the kind of development that they
wanted to see. So there was some pretty sharp political maneuvering and the State was
given the sections around and including Beaver Mountain Ski area. These lands that
normally would have been administered but the State Department of Forestry were given
to the School and Institutional State Land Administration. The idea was that the State
could sell the lands to private investors and, or they could expand the resort and create
more of a tax revenue. So that’s why Beaver Mountain is under SITLA.]
BC:
Right, yeah, the state, yeah.
SB:
And there were some very, very passionate, and I can remember, emotional arguments.
That was when Dave Baumgartner was here [District Ranger]. And Dave would probably
be the one to tell you about that. But that was huge. We just felt like things just changed
you know. I felt like that really brought the canyon into kind of a threatened and
endangered status with that land transfer. I don’t know, it depends on what you want to
see up there.
BC:
Well, you know just from the fire perspective has there been an increase as residency has
increased up there has that caused different issues for fire?
SB:
Yeah, that’s another huge issue. It’s a national issue. That’s what we call the wildlandurban interface or the term we say is “WUI.” I know, I had to look it up too! [Laughing]
But in terms of the future I think nationally that is such a big issue, it accounts for billions
of dollars in fire suppression cost every year defending structures, mostly homes on or
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
19
�adjacent to public lands because of all the in-holdings. There’s California, of course,
every year and last year in this Region we had the Sun Valley fires around Ketchum,
Idaho and around McCall, Idaho on the Payette. There’s a lot of private money, you
know, invested in those communities and a lot of beautiful summer homes up there that
were threatened. And it’s quite expensive to protect these developments. There is an
expectation from the public that their tax dollars will pay for protection. With regards to
Fire strategies our first priority has always been Public and firefighter safety and to
protect private property. But it’s the desire to protect these resorts, summer homes and
small towns that kind of drives the cost up and we are not trained to deal with structure
fires so there is a real safety issue here.
BC:
Has that always been the case?
SB:
Pretty much, yeah. It’s just that we’ve never had the amount of development on private
property in the interface that we’ve had now, you know. And it’s not just the private
property; it’s like putting 3-4 million dollar log cabins in the middle of a forest that is
going to burn sooner or later.
BC:
Right.
SB:
So there’s a huge expense in protecting those homes. As far as our area goes I think
we’re seeing, in my opinion, the biggest threat potential is going to be Rich County.
[With all the development going on, not only Garden City, but everything to the south of
Garden City we are gong to see some real problems.] And it looks like sooner or later,
one way or another, all that ground from the Idaho border all the way down to Round
Valley and Meadowville is going to be urban interface, second home type things. Most of
the big land owners, the ranchers have already sold or are looking to sale. They’re
adjacent right to the National Forest. So I think in the future there’s going to be a huge
responsibility. For the Forest Service of course, you know these are not National Forest
lands, but they are adjacent to public lands and we do have cooperative agreements with
state and private and so we are involved. Most of those fires, what we’re seeing now are
fires that start on private land and then run into the National Forest. That is what
happened here in Cache Valley all last summer. And then once they cut across that line
then it’s our problem and we go into a fire suppression mode. We’ll implement what we
call a shared resource and unified command organizational structure with the State and
local cooperators. I think the fire guys in Cache County and Rich County are great to
work with. From my experience, they’re some of the best in the business. I think the one
fun thing about all this is that it gives me a chance to work with those guys. They’re just
really great guys to deal with. They’re all about protecting houses you know, and we’re
about protecting trees. And so we kind of, we’ll do the trees, they’ll do the houses. But
they’re a lot of good energy when we get together on these local fires.
DE:
You said earlier that you’re not so involved in making the policy, just kind of they make
the policy and tell you what to go and do. Has there ever been a specific issue – you
know, a big one or small one – that you felt extra passionate about and so you tried to
influence then, the policy? Whether it was writing a letter or talking to somebody?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
20
�SB:
All the time – I have files full of letters that I’ve kept over the years! And I always try to
throw my two cents in. There’s been some really interesting policies. I think, boy, land
exchanges you know have been one. You know these are all internal discussions that we
tend to have. I remember one of the big policies we had was on bolting in Logan Canyon.
DE:
Bolting for rock climbing?
SB:
Yeah, this is rock climbing. And as a climber, I was against it. I was not just against it, I
was passionately against it. And that’s because I started working for the Forest Service in
Little Cottonwood Canyon. My first duty station was Alta, Utah. I kind of grew up at
Alta. I started skiing at Alta when I was six years old. Lived up there for years and I used
to climb all that granite since I was in high school. But that really changed. By the mid
1970s rock climbing became so popular in the canyon that it became kind of a
commercial zoo where they had vendors down there at the base of all these rocks, selling
equipment. There was no parking. There were just so many issues. There were no
restrooms there. And it was tough; sometimes you’d have to wait for two or three hours
just to do a climb if you wanted to wait in line. And I think there was a group going to
Utah State that thought that was a good think and they wanted to see the same thing
happen up here.
And so what we found out was one summer they had put up 200 bolt routes. Not only in
Logan Canyon but also in the Mount Naomi wilderness using electronic grinders and
stuff like that. And therefore once that got out, phone calls were made and then the debate
came. They came in and we had some interesting discussions; we had some nice tours.
There was the issue of the primrose up in Logan Canyon which is a rare and endangered
species and we felt at the time that was one thing we could hang our hats on to try and
reduce the level of that, at least limit the area. But I was pretty vocal on that. And I think
I used to – I would kind of email the Ranger with comments and personal opinions.
I think [I] drove the Rec. Forester, Chip Sibbernsen, crazy with my comments to the
bolters. He was in charge developing the climbing and bolting policy for the District. He
was such a nice guy and always trying to see both sides. Anyway, he took me with a
grain of salt. I guess I made him laugh. You know, they should have fired me, but I kept
it “in-house” and with things like that you have to. But I was pretty passionate. I thought
it was littering and what I was afraid of was that they would start to turn Logan Canyon
into a parking lot: vendors, and kind of a climbing destination playground. And this is
exactly what they wanted to do. I remember the discussion was that this was world-class
climbing and that people from all over the world wanted to come here and climb in
Logan Canyon around China Row. They said they were already actively promoting the
area with climbing magazine articles, guide books and that kind of stuff. Yeah, ask Scott
Datwyler about that. [I remember Scott was running Trailhead Sports which was the local
rock climbing supply store and he was kind of in that group too, or at least some of the
people in the climber group worked for him.] I think they finally gave up and moved on.
Their plan to make Logan Canyon a world rock climbing center didn’t happen. As far as I
know the bolting has really slowed down and they’ve kind of limited the bolting to
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
21
�certain areas. They’ve closed off a lot of areas because of the primrose. So that was one
area that was oh, I got pretty involved in.
The other was the hardening of the Tony Grove picnic area up there. They wanted to
bring in asphalt pads and harden some of the sights and put a big trail around it. And I
was against that. [Laughing] I thought they should never lay asphalt near Tony and we
had a long battle about that. [Chip and the Forest Engineers wanted to harden the area to
accommodate more users and eventually turn the lake into a “Fee Demo” area.] It made
sense but a lot of us wanted to limit use and reduce impacts that way. I don’t like the idea
of charging money to use public lands.
The other one was Tony Grove guard station. We were looking into turning that into a
historical center and then putting the snowmobile parking lot out there. Some of us were
really against that one because we were afraid with the snowmobile parking lot adjacent
to the historic guard station we may see some vandalism and some damage. As it turns
out we’ve never had a problem at all, but you know, I remember that was a big battle, a
big discussion. There were plans to turn the [Tony compound] into an interpretive center
where they would have a full time host. The host would dressed up in period costumes,
do a little gardening and do interpretive programs for visiting tourist. In the past it’s
always been a working guard station and we liked it that way. We kept our horses there
and did a lot of work out of there every summer. We would run our trail crews, our pack
streams out of the station, when we’re working the Tony Lake or Mt. Naomi high
country. I don’t think they do anymore because everybody drives cars now, but we used
to ride a lot and we would work our crews out of there and we didn’t want to lose that.
What other battles have we fought? Boy, trails; keeping trails open, closing trails. I’ve
always been on the side that we need to keep the trails open. I think the Rec. people have
been on the side that we can keep them open, but if we can’t maintain them you know,
maybe it’s time to let some of lesser used trails go. So they’ve kind of shut down some of
my favorite trails, or stopped doing maintenance. They just don’t have the money to do it
anymore. So that’s an issue.
Road issues are always there. I think one of the most difficult issues I remember dealing
with was the reconstruction of the road and bridges in Logan Canyon back in the 1990s.
Another hot issue is the constant battle with the public over road maintenance. Boy, it is
difficult to get folks to understand that the money and the time and the effort we’ve spent
on trying to keep the backcountry roads clear and up to a good standard. I mean, the
public constantly complain about road conditions. You could spend a million dollars on
them and everyone is happy. Then it’ll rain and then the hunting season starts and then
the high school kids are up there with their four-wheel drives and put ruts in them, you
know and the roads are worse than ever. It just seems like it’s a loosing battle – and then
we don’t have the money to go back and fix them again for three years. We do everything
kind of a three year rotation, so that’s always been a big battle.
DE:
So who would you say were some of your most influential teachers, both in your field
and just in your interactions with the canyon; either formal or informal?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
22
�SB:
Well, I think Neff Hardman. He was the GDA (the General District Assistant), bachelor
farmer from Mendon. Neff had worked here, grew up in Mendon; he died in the house he
was born in. And Neff, he just loved the Forest Service; he loved the country around
here. He was a great teacher and had a great work ethics and a great land ethic. He was
kind of a legend too. I mean, I knew about this guy years before I ever met him, you
know, just rumors down south in Salt Lake about Neff. M.J. Roberts was an interesting
guy, interesting Ranger. I think he had some good qualities but a lot of people thought he
was a little bit heavy handed and like to micro manage. Some of the people that worked
on the District when I started were really good people but Neff seemed to hold everything
together. I really, really appreciated his influence on the District. Another person I met
when I came to Logan was Ann Shimp.
BC:
I’ve heard – didn’t she write the guide book with Scott?
BS:
Yeah, Ann was here when I first came. Then there was Sabina Kremp that ran the YCC
program, and Mike Jenkins over at USU, he was kind of an old Forest Service Logan
boy. As far as the canyons go, you know, there are a lot of fascinating people that sort of
haunt them. Some of the old herders that you run into are really interesting. I really don’t
remember all their names. Some were local but a lot came from all over world, from
Europe, Mexico and South America. I can remember the names of some of the owners.
They may or may not be worth remembering but the guys that work for them and have
been up in the canyons for years, they’re good people to know. They know the country,
and they just have kind of interesting sense about them. You meet so many interesting
people up there.
I meet old Forest Rangers now and then, old Forest Service guys that wonder around and
make sure things are still being run properly. I don’t write their names down, but I
should. They’ll come up and they’ll talk your ear off if you let them. And that’s good.
Ted Seeholzer, who owns and runs Beaver Mountain, has been up there forever. Ted’s
boy used to work for me and I think he’s kind of managing the place now. His name is
Travis. He was on the Logan Hot Shot crew back in 1996. Anyway, Ted’s always been
an interesting character in Logan Canyon and he’s had some real influence on some
important issues. I think anyone that likes to ski in Cache Valley doesn’t want to risk
getting on the bad side of Ted.
DE:
What was their last name again?
SB:
Ted Seeholzer? Ted Seeholzer
DE:
Seeholzer.
SB:
Yeah, and Ted’s been up there forever. I can’t say forever, but from before my time.
BC:
Did you ever know Doc Daniels?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
23
�SB:
Very well. Yep, my first experience with Doc was seeing him running around in a
meadow on the School Forest in the sinks. He was on one of his study plots chasing a
porcupine around with a baseball bat trying to whack it on the head. [Doc hated
porcupines because they ate his tree seedlings.] When I came to USU as a student, Doc
was semi-retired but I knew him through the work he was doing with the Forest Service
and Utah State University when I worked on the District. But I knew of Doc long before I
came to Logan. When I started working for the Forest Service back in the early [19]‘70s
a lot of the guys that I worked with were Utah State University Forestry students and they
use to talk about Doc all the time. Back then you couldn’t be a Forestry Graduate at USU
unless you could get passed Doc, you know, in his silviculture class. Silviculture class
would kind of make you or break you and Doc was sort of the terror of the Forestry
department. And I knew Doc through Cache County Historical Society. He loved Cache
Valley History and would go to the meetings. A few years ago I was asked to give a
presentation on the history of the Logan Ranger District and the Cache National Forest. I
didn’t know it but Doc was in the audience and every time I missed something or got
something wrong Doc would shout out and correct me. I was getting kind of mad but
when they turned on the light Doc waved and everyone laughed. Doc always came to the
meetings to correct us and make sure we got it right! Yeah, we know Doc. We’ll miss
him. Dick Shaw just passed away too, this last month –
BC:
Yeah, I heard that.
SB:
And Dr. Shaw was my old Botany professor when I was a student. He used to kick
around quite a bit up in Logan Canyon. He use to tease us Forestry Students because we
to take his botany class. He thought we only cared about trees and he liked wildflowers.
He told us once, “If you guys can’t/couldn’t cut it down with a chain saw you didn’t want
anything to do with it.” I have a lot of good memories of my old forestry professors at
USU – Carl Johnson was one of my professors and the Extension Forester from Utah
State. He wrote the books on native Utah plants and sort of pioneered conservation
education in the elementary schools. Carl just did all kinds of good things for the
department and the community. He liked his students and it was always fun in his class. I
remember spending hours going on Carl’s field trips. They were always fun and not to
demanding. Going up the canyon with him was interesting but he loved to talk and
sometimes it got a little long. So there are a lot of people in the canyons that you meet…
you run into and come to know. A lot of the folks that I knew have passed on. When I
first came here there was a gentleman that worked for us who could remember logging
back in the 1910s and ‘20s when he was a boy with his dad, from Wellsville. His name
was Albert Johnson and Albert remembered [coming over Callie Canyon in a wagon and
bringing the lumber down the canyon to the sawmill in Logan. Now a lot of them are
gone; but I enjoyed knowing them and hearing their stories.]
DE:
What are some of the books or writings, if there are any that have influenced your
feelings about land-use management and policy?
SB:
Oh, well you know I think from early on there are some great books out there. But if I
was to give you one book you know – I’ve got thousands of books at home. Gifford
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
24
�Pinchot’s Breaking New Ground; it’s a great read. I’ve got some good books on the self
– oh, what do I have? There’s a bunch of books over there.
BC:
What strikes you most importantly about Pinchot’s book?
SB:
What I like about Pinchot was his energy and his passion. He just has a passion for
conservation and service, I mean beyond anything I see today. The early 1900s was a
very formative time in the country’s history, and it was a progressive time and it was an
exciting time. There were new ideas, people with energy and high ideals and resource
conservation was a new kind of “cause” – brand new. They were just walking into
something for the first time, starting from the ground up. And if you read it, you know,
you feel that excitement and purpose. I read about Pinchot and Roosevelt a long time ago
in High School and college. I really thought Breaking New Ground was a powerful
book. I read a lot of books; I think you know now my background and training is not all
in Forestry. I’m a trained historian, not a forester.
BC:
Your initial degree was in history then?
SB:
Yeah. And Geography; I had a double major. And so I used to read a lot of crazy history
books when I was a kid. History and adventure were my first love. I always enjoyed early
American history, adventures, mountainmen, frontiersman type things. I think I was
reading those frontier [adventure books from the second grade on; I think most kids my
age did. Our heroes were Davy Crockett and Daniel Boone. And I think the heroes these
days are like the Power Rangers, or –]
BC:
Yeah! [Laughing]
SB:
It’s just kind of a different generation. I don’t know – outer space, cyber cops or
something like that.
BC:
Utah State went through a period where they hosted a lot of writer workshops with fairly
prominent writers that came in working canyon. Were you ever involved in that at all?
SB:
No, but Ted Kindred was. I think you’re going to interview Ted.
BC:
Yeah, right.
SB:
Yeah, Ted – that dirty dog [Laughing], he used host a dinner for the Western Writers
Conference at his summer home in Logan Canyon for the writers. Ted loves interesting
people and good conversation.
BC:
Um-hmm.
SB:
You know, Ted had a summer home up at the mouth of Beirdneau Canyon. Ted and I
were really good friends; we both collect books. And I’ve got a lot of signed, first
editions. And every time I think I’ve got something really neat, Ted has it, plus five more.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
25
�BC:
[Laughing]
SB:
But he used to go up and he would always find out which writers were coming to his
dinner and he would go buy their books. And then during the course of the night he
would get the books out and have the authors them sign them. And I think his funniest
one was Edward Abbey; I guess he’s got some good stories about Abbey.
BC:
Yeah.
SB:
He’ll be a good one. I was never involved. That must have been before my time.
BC:
I was thinking – it seemed like Tom Lyon was involved and stuff.
SB:
Yeah. I remember Tom. Tom’s boy actually worked for me.
BC:
He passed away?
SB:
Yeah, in the avalanche in Logan Dry Canyon. Max Lyon. He’d worked for the YCC and
he worked for me in the YACC program. He was a good kid. One thing I remember
being really pleased about when I first came here was that District had the YCC program.
We had a great camp, we had great leaders, and it was fun to get to meet the kids from
Cache Valley. I remember Paul Box – Thad’s boy – was in it. They had a lot of USU
professors’ kids in the camp. We also had the “born and bread” kids, you know, the
farmers, the ranchers, the locals. And it was just a great mix, and what a great opportunity
to kind of integrate a whole generation to public land use and conservation. [Ronald
Reagan – it was one of the programs he axed, you know, when he became president. All
those national conservation and public work programs went away.] But I thought it was a
great program. That’s how I started in the Forest Service. I was in high school, it was the
early [19]‘70s Earth Day movement, you know, and “the Environment is going to be the
new frontier” type of thing. As for the YCC’ers, I keep track of some of the kids. I hear
things about Paul once in a while from his dad, and some of the other ones; I’ve done
better with some of the leaders.
DE:
Are there any other particular stories you’d like to share that we haven’t probed at you
with questions yet?
SB:
On Logan Canyon? Well, a lot of time up there wondering around, you know. I can think
of a lot of thunderstorms where you’re caught up on Mount Naomi and ducking for
cover, and you know, all of those good things. When I first came here I did a lot of
climbing in the canyon – no bolts.
DE:
Traditional?
SB:
Yeah, well, just chalks and so that was a good thing. It’s been an interesting kind of
career. As far as work goes I think some of the more interesting projects we’ve done have
been the wildlife habitat improvement with our juniper cuts up in the canyon here. We
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
26
�used to do those and it wasn’t so much that we did them, it was the crazy ways that we
used to try and get our poles off the cliffs and down here to the highway. Back then we
would pick them up throw them off a cliff, pick them up at the side of the road and load
them on a trailer. We would take them down to the boneyard which is across the street
from Zanavoo; then we would soak them in creosote and that would be our fence post.
We did that for years. That was always a fun job; it was dangerous job and I’m just
amazed we didn’t get someone hurt, you know, working when it was four below zero
we’d be up there with our chainsaws, climbing cliffs and trying to do little things. It was
fun.
BC:
[Laughing]
SB:
Oh, gosh, a lot of burning in the fall. That used to be one of our fun projects; we’d burn
slash piles in the early winter. Just as we’d get a couple feet of snow on the ground we
would go in and burn. And we had some pretty interesting times there. You know when
Ranger Dave came he was excited about burning, he wanted to do spring burns and I
think I can remember we were real worried about these things getting away from us, but
he encouraged us. He wanted to try and get all the slash cleaned up. And Dave was very
progressive in his thinking. He was thinking wildland fire use and reduction in fuels way
before it became in vogue. I can remember the problem we had was that we work until
about 10 o’clock at night or midnight, and then we would pull out and drive down the
canyon to the warehouse. The idea was that the night air would cool them off and the
piles would go out. I think we were chasing burn piles around in August – it was really a
bad idea because some of the big piles never went out. But it was kind of fun coming out
of the Sinks about midnight; it was interesting not only for the animals you saw out on
the road, but for the sneaky timber thieves who were up there stealing lumber at two in
the morning! [Laughing] And so that was kind of fun – come up and there would be three
guys loading up fire wood at midnight and we would have to stop and have a
conversation with them. But yeah, that was fun.
DE:
I guess my last question – what should Logan Canyon, the Logan Ranger District, look
like if it’s a healthy system?
SB:
Well, I think if it’s a healthy system, I think you would want to see a stabilization of
growth, public use and the maintenance of conditions. When I say maintenance of
conditions, I think the last hundred years you’ve seen a tremendous improvement in
range and timber, than what was there say, 100 years ago – 1908. The photographs bare
that out. But the user conflicts seem to be on the rise. Land management is becoming a
social issue and a political issue… and societies’ priorities are changing. Today, when
there is a conflict between conservation and resource protection and politics, more often
than not, politics wins and the land looses.
BC:
Right, yeah.
SB:
You know we had a huge controversy with grazing issues in Logan Canyon a few years
ago: cows and sheep in the watershed. We still do but the truth is; things look pretty darn
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
27
�good up there. You go up there, you walk the ground and you look at it and it’s not in bad
shape. I don’t think livestock grazing is a real threat as long as we use good management.
I think the greatest threat to resource quality in Logan Canyon is a lot of new
development and I’m talking the urban-interface again. And I think that could happen.
And I think that’s going to have a huge impact on not only people that use the canyon for
reception but on water quality, wildlife fire protection and scenic quality. It’s just not the
urban sprawl and the numbers of people It’s also all the paraphernalia they bring with
them. I think that you could see something real similar to what you’re seeing on the
Angeles or Cleveland in southern California today. You’re going to have too many
people and interest fighting over land use and management priorities. I’m not sure I
would trust all motives to have the best interest of the Forest and the public at heart. I
think it is [important try and maintain the environmental integrity of the canyon and
protect wildlife habitat and the quality of the water. If we want to do that then we have to
make some hard choices, and use is going to be more and more restrictive. And I hate to
see that, but I think that’s probably where we’re heading. You just have more people
wanting more access and having great demands on the land.]
DE:
Brad, do you have any more questions?
BC:
No, I think I’m okay right now.
SB:
Was this of any value to you, or?
BC:
Yeah, it was interesting.
DE:
This is very interesting, yes.
BC:
Great, yeah.
DE:
Well, thank you very much for your time today.
SB:
You’re welcome.
DE:
Again, this is for the Oral History of Logan Canyon Land-Use and Policies Project. And
Darren Edwards, Brad Cole and Scott Bushman. Thank you.
SB:
Thank you.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Scott
Bushman
Page
28
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/93">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/93</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-11-12
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
Scott Bushman interview, 23 April 2008, and transcription
Description
An account of the resource
The interview contains information on the career of Scott Bushman for the Forest Service. He was involved heavily in fire suppression and the Logan Hot Shot crew. He also discusses how he first got involved in Logan Canyon as a youth in the Youth Conservation Corps. He also gives a history of the Forest Service in this area and their involvement, along with Utah Agricultural College (now Utah State University) in teaching forestry.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bushman, Jon Scott, 1953-
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Cole, Bradford R.
Edwards, Darren
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bushman, Jon Scott, 1953---Interviews
Bushman, Jon Scott, 1953--Career in Forestry
Forests schools and education--Utah--Logan--History
United States. Forest Service
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Agency : U.S.). Logan Ranger District
Logan Interagency Hotshot Crew (Utah)
Hitchhiking--West (U.S.)
Youth Conservation Corps (Utah)
Vacations--Bear Lake (Utah and Idaho)
Forest fires--Utah--Logan Canyon--Prevention and control
Young Adult Conservation Corps (Utah)
Tree planting--Utah--Logan Canyon--Anecdotes
Utah State University. Forestry Field Station Camp
Forest fire fighters--Utah--Logan Canyon
Forest fire fighters--Training of--Utah--Logan Canyon
USU Forestry Fire Crew (Logan, Utah)
Forest fires--Utah--Wellsville Mountain Wilderness--Prevention and control
Utah State University--Faculty
Wildland-urban interface--Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest
Forests and forestry--Multiple use--Law and legislation
Wildlife conservation--Utah--Logan Canyon
Land use mapping--Utah--Logan Canyon
Land use--Law and legislation--Utah
Utah--Politics and government
United States. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Land use--Utah--Logan Canyon--Planning--Citizen participation
United States. Wilderness Act
Rock climbing--Law and legislation--Utah
Pinchot, Gifford, 1865-1946. Breaking New Ground
Baumgartner, Dave
Roberts, M.J.
Range management--Utah--Logan Canyon
Utah. School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral histories
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Alta (Utah)
Logan (Utah)
Bear Lake (Utah and Idaho)
Bear Lake County (Idaho)
Rich County (Utah)
Herd Hollow (Utah)
Tony Grove (Utah)
Beaver Mountain (Utah)
Cache National Forest (Utah and Idaho)
Yellowstone National Park
Wellsville Mountain Wilderness (Utah)
Mount Naomi Wilderness (Utah)
White Pine Canyon (Utah)
High Creek Canyon (Utah)
Doubletop Mountain (Utah)
United States
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
20th century
21st 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 & Archives, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 2 Fd. 6
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx2fd6ScottBushman
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
23 April 2008
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2008-04-23
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/683aee359c947c5c245fd895b301f5db.jpg
7de65c69b37d9ae4ca871ed67b3d4e58
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Modified by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Colorspace
RGB or Grayscale, for example
RGB
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011
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>https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/index.php</a>
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/319">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/319</a>
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 National Scenic Byway - U.S. Hwy. 89
Description
An account of the resource
Modified map of U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon, Utah, from Logan, Utah, to Bear Lake, Utah, and Idaho. Taken from Cache Valley Visitors Bureau's pamphlet entitled "Guide to Logan Canyon: national scenic byway."
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Cache Valley Visitor's Bureau
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)--Maps
United States Highway 89--Maps
Scenic byways--Utah--Logan Canyon--Maps
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Tourist maps
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2011
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
2000-2009
21st 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
Rights Holder
A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource.
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives
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 Cache Valley Visitors Bureau, (435) 755-1890 or 1-800-882-4433
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
LoganCanyonMap
Highway 89; Maps;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/993bcca0830449a0c737649a3f49ab5b.tiff
e60067b8b7feb22d15c0651e10a088a2
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/319">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/319</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Modified by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-09
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 National Scenic Byway - U.S. Hwy. 89
Description
An account of the resource
Modified map of U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon, Utah, from Logan, Utah, to Bear Lake, Utah and Idaho. Taken from Cache Valley Visitors Bureau's pamphlet entitled "Guide to Logan Canyon : national scenic byway."
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Cache Valley Visitors Bureau
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)--Maps
United States Highway 89--Maps
Scenic byways--Utah--Logan Canyon--Maps
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Tourist maps
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
2010-2019
21st century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
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 Cache Valley Visitors Bureau, (435) 755-1890 or 1-800-882-4433
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
LoganCanyonMap
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2011
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1905-07-03
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/393a72645c8068acdba226c02b9eebc1.pdf
26b6b4b758d1fa9059efb00e8202fc3a
PDF Text
Text
,
-
..~. .' ...:. .~,,",
, _: _ :_ 1
_
i
..~-
=:~~!!~
5
ci
«J'~'
erness
.n
455 East 400 South BAO/Salt Lake City , UT 841 I 1
/(80 I ) 35 9-1 ? 37
Ap r' i 1 24, 1 987
Mr. Dale Bosworth
Forest Superv'i sor'
Wasatch-Cache NC'.t i ~,~ (~1 FDres t
Salt LaKe City, Ut a h : 84 138
Dear Dale:
Co f!~. j d CE' r a b 1 e C 0 f :: :: ~ f' r'! f- ;. :-_ f' E' r.: €I n t 1 y b e ~ f'! e x pre ~. s ed a,b 0 u t t, !~ eo
. sLogan Canyon highway .i ssues. Oi cK Pi ne has ex"ressed strong'
and posi t i ve concern and support to both George Ni c~:a.';, ar:d
me at preven t i ng a w i.den l,ng gap a~, th i s ) ssue progre~; '$ ~ s, W ~
have, indeed, experi~nced this concern & ~ wel l and 1 i~~ly ·
harbor simil iar fears as -to the level - of - acrimony wh i ch ma y
de-v.1op over Logan Cany-on -~-:- Up_ n a sug ~ ~ _st i on fr'om GeorgEo
N i c Kas, 0 i c K Pin e has set :J p ,1, me e tin . .
'oJ i t h
the p r inc i pal
environmental organizatioi'iS ,~-n d indi v:d a] s , you and your'
staff to discuss this iss ~ e.
I n anticipation of such a meeting l - ~ t me outl ine our
Rather - than discussing t ~e impacts to ~ h e can y on
-~ nv i r'onmen t from !'7,aj or road deve ~ Oi) F':en t, hih i ch a r- e strongl y
documen ted, I wan t to re 1 ay to Y~) ~J (·ur concern ':' w-j th Forest
Service involvemen t in the issue.
c~ncerns.
We see the forest plan as guidance o n Log an Canyon. Thus we
see the Forest Service not as a neutral partici p ant but as
an advocate of the publics' inter~s ts as expres ~ ed ~ n the
Logan Canyon Managemen \ Ar~a standa rds and guide l i e s within
the forest plan. As a result of the intent of the
management area, its d ~ scriptio n ~n d management standa~ds,
the r E' i s no _do u b t t hat u ii l " IT! i n ~X' ~ dis t u r b a n C e '5 a ss 0 c i do t e:; d
i
with the Logan Cany o n h i ghw~y . c a~ b e implemented. This firm
understandfng 6f th e fo r est \ plan wa ~ fully supported by
conservationists ~ h d un d er s tood i n the above con t e xt. And it
has been consis t e~tly relayed ! n that manner by the Forest
Servic •• Only recentl y have we heard different notions a nd
that is rather dis t urbing.
It is within the context of the i ~ tent 0f th ~ forest ~ la n
that a franK discuss i on ~.AJoU 1 d be :~f enef i f" j a 1. I suspe c '.~ i -::
w0 u 1 d be h eo 1 p f u 1 -wit h r ~ s p e c t t 0 a n u mb ,t' r' 0 f i ~- s U t? S a s V . ',,:. 1 'I
ThanKs very much.
•
�
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/101">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/101</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
3003218927
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
702003 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 mentioning concerns about the widening of Logan Canyon and wishes to set up a meeting to discuss these issues.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Carter, Dick
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Utah Wilderness Association
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)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 29 Folder 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/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
MSS148VIIIB29_Fd6_Item 12.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/bb81cba5916bf4321798eba80bada4f9.pdf
dfd9bb9abbe9ab269085bbe0653cd4f7
PDF Text
Text
LC
Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Canyon
17 J1.me, 1987
Mr. Wes Wilson
USEPA, Region
999 18th St
Denver-,-
et, Suite 1300
orado 80202-2413
Dear Mr. Wilson,
I am writing to express my concerns with the draft EIS currently
being prepared for the Logan Canyon highway project (US 89) through
the Wasatch-Cache Wational Forest east of Logan, Utah. This draft is
being prepared by CH2MHILL for release this summer. My hope is that
the EPA will be able to intervene in the process so that an '
inadequate, biased document is not released to the public. I realize
that this is an extraordinary reques.t, but I feel the si tuation
warrents attention.
Several environmental groups and a number of un~iliated citizens
are working together as Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon.
We are attempting to make aure the draft EIS is an acceptable document
when it is released. As CPIC member Rudy Lukez has already contacted
you with a number of our concerns, I will emphasize problems in the
most recent drafts which we have reveived. It 15 only a few days ago
that we got our first look at the impacts and mitigation sections
of most of' thes€ chapters, yet CH2MHILL expects the Interdisciplinary
Study Team to have completely reviewed them by Monday, 22 June.
Despi te the fact. that no discussion has taken place on the great
majority of the impact assessment part of the document, a summary
chapter of' the different alternatives has already been written. This
chapter is clearly biased in favor of the intensive development
alternatives. It scareely acknowledges any environmental impacts, even
though some are reviewed in other chapters.
Clearly there will be major impacts. In several alternatives, over
7,000 feet of retaining wall is proposed f 'o r a 4.5 mile stretch of
road. Most riparian vegetation will be destroyed where these retaining
walls are place:d at the edge of the Logan River. While the Terrestrial
Resources chapter admits some of the impacts would be obvious for
decades, the summary chapter ignores this information. In addition to
these retaining walls, a. continuous cut int.o the hillside would be
necessary to accomodate the wider road. Despite the fact the 'NasatchCache Forest Plan calls for the visual "retention" of natural
characteristics in the canyon, the summary chapter ignores' this con:flict.
p.o. box 3580 logan, ut 84321
�2.
During the- public input period it was c l ear that there was strong
support for a "spot improvement" al te rnat ive. It wa s recommended
that each proposed modification be examined on the basis of need,
con~ribution to safety, and environmental impact. Increasing speed
(which is a ll that the more extreme action alternatives would do)
is not considered important by most people, although it seems to be
about the only thing that the Federal Highway Administration represen~tiv
is interested in. CH2MHILL has slighted this alternative. Their spot
improvement altemative replaces virtually every bri@ge and culvert,
straightens nearly every curve, and places a climbing lane in one of
the most difficult sections of the canyon. Impacts are obvious but
once again neglected.
Thia process has been continued despite our repeated mention that
the Forest Pl~~ permits only limited change. to the canyon highway.
The plan is very specific on this, particularly where the Forest
Service responds to the public input from the draft version. At the
interdisciplinary study team meetings, we have quoted from the plan,
yet CH2MHr'".bL has consistently igno:ted this,.
There are a number of other unanswered questions: in the present
draf't . Disposal of rubble from the many proposed cuts has scarcely
been addressed; the few available locations (abandoned gravel pits
and old roadbeds) will only handle a fract.ion of the material
genetiated by the more extreme action alternatives. Erosion from the
resulting cut slopes has not been addressed in the necessary sitespecific manner.
While I could continue with examples, I think this illustrated the
problems with the present draft. If they adhere to their present
timetable of a summer release of the draft EIS, it is doubtful that
~e necessary revisions will be done. Some sections require complete
rewriting. We would like to see the public receive a fair and
accurate document. This is why we are requesting your assistance.
We worry that after $620,000.00 is spent on this study, there will
be a feeling that it is necessary to proceed regardless of the
quality of the document.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
. ~~Lt~LtStephan D. Flint
Home: 752-9102
Work: 750-2474 or
752-2242
Copies: Bridgerland Audubon
Cache Group Sierra Club
Utah Wilderness Aseociation y!
Hill Helm
�
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/112">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/112</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
2075496649
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1017891 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 Desmond Anderson, February 8, 1989
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dick Carter to Desmond Anderson defending Utah Wilderness Association's role in maintaining the exisiting quality of Logan Canyon.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Carter, Dick
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Utah Wilderness Authority
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1989-02-08
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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 Series III Box 6_014
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_14.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/a214eeb3fe8da8da6f011ef4564e3299.pdf
91beae2dfab4c217bcf28d077d40cc3a
PDF Text
Text
..
.,
1 ,,~ -
~"
•
.' ~
I
~
~~nited
States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest
Service
Wasatch-Cache
National
Forest
8230 Federal Building
125 South State Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84138
Reply to:
1950
Date: May 28, 1987
Mr. Daniel Dake
Division Administrator,
Federal Highway Administration
PO Box 11563
Salt Lake City, Utah 84147
Dear Mr. Dake:
Within the past month there has been a considerable amount of discussion
concerning several subjects related to the environmental analysis being prepared
for the proposed Logan Canyon Highway project. This letter documents the
Forest Service position concerning those subjects.
As we both agreed at our April 1, meeting, it is very desirable for us to concur
on a preferred alternative. However, the Wasatch-Cache National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan, which is a document required by law, provides
direction which must be followed until it is amended or revised. This does not
mean that the environmental analysis process for Logan Canyon Highway should not
address alternatives outside the standards and guides of the Forest Plan. We
must remember, however that if the alternative selected in this process does not
comply with Forest Plan direction, the Forest Plan will have to be amended prior
to Forest Service concurrence with the decision. If the preferred alternative
requires a Forest Plan amendment, we will expect this current environmental
analysis process to provide the appropriate analysis and NEPA documentation to
support that amendment.
Regional Forester, Stan Tixier is the responsible official for the Forest
Service and will approve the Decision Notice or Record of Decision. However, as
Forest Supervisor of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest I will be responsible for
insuring that the NEPA process and documentation is adequate to support the
Forest Service decision. I also have responsibility for recommending Forest
Plan amendments or revisions to' the Regional Forester. If the final decision
requires an amendment to the Forest Plan, the Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact Statement under preparation must contain documentation of
the analysis necessary to make that recommendation. If it doesn't, the Forest
Service will have to take the time at a later date to conduct a separate
analysis and prepare the appropriate NEPA documents. We sincerely hope that one
document will be adequate.
At an April ·30 meeting, Rudy Lukez and other concerned citizens expressed some
confusion as to the role and position the Forest Service is taking on the ID
team which is conducting the environmental analysis for the Logan Canyon Highway
project. The following should help clarify that situation. Fred LaBar, Clark
FS·S200·28(1·S2 )
�Ostergaard, and Don Duff (Don replaced Mark Shaw) are members of the ID team
from the Forest Service. Fred LaBar is the official Forest Service spokesperson
on the team and also obtains information from Forest Service technical people
for the ID team. Clark Ostergaard and Don Duff are working members of the ID
team, they provide technical information but are not the official Forest Service
spokesperson. Fred is responsible for insuring that all alternatives are
equally treated and consequences and issues are addressed. During the
development of the EIS, Fred may call upon Logan District staff as well as staff
from the Forest Supervisor's Office such as the Forest Engineer. These people
are a resource through Fred to the Logan Canyon ID team.
The Forest Service supports an objective analysis of the Logan Canyon highway
issue. The NEPA process provides necessary analysis and data whereby good
decisions can be made. Therefore, we will not make a decision nor determine our
position until the analysis is completed including adequate public involvement.
Sincerely,
· )tt4/1~
DALE BOSWORTH
FOREST SUPERVISOR
cc UDOT
Clark 0
Don D
Rudy Lukez
- Iom-F-l-inn-
_~ / i t:
1-- ;. ~
j::._
J
T
Dave Baumgartner
Regional Office
.
~'\
-- ,
I
y:-
---'"
1
r
,-I
1 "'
i
I
')
"
/L-~7 ~ '
-
•
I
/
-'
/
'-"
, /
j
•
)
0"
..: . -:I
!
If
1\
I
/
1
FS.S200-28(7 -82)
~
�
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/128">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/128</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
2860084452
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
897680 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 Dave Baumgartner, May 27, 1988
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Dick Carter to Dave Baumgartner, expressign concern over the maintaining the existing values of Logan Canyon and coming to a reasonable solution for all agencies involved.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Carter, Dick
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Logan Canyon Study
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Utah Wilderness Association
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1988-05-27
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_15.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/fdfdcd6adf7f36a2e9205361ffb82882.pdf
d42231376f93baac56bc0501b4903008
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON U.S. HIGHWAY 89
AQUATIC RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Prepared for
Utah Department of Transportation
Prepared by
CH2M HILL
Salt Lake City, Utah
March 1987
�CONTENTS
Introduction
Methods
Existing Conditions
Aquatic Habitat
Fisheries Biology
Impacts
Middle Canyon
Upper Canyon
Rich County
.:W· :n=
Mitigation
Middle Canyon
Upper Canyon
Rich County
.::'
References
.::'
"~ ::::
.::
..
...
.::;;;::::::::.
TABLES
': :::::::::::::.
1
Mean
Mouth
River at the
2
Water
Mouth
River at the
~It·
~~
Data for the Logan
3
River and Ife:aver./ Cteek
o;"" ;;i"~'ent
4
Comparison
Optimum Habitat for
Regional Trout Streams
5
Logan River Gamefish Life History Periodicity
Data
6
Logan River Angling Data
7
Estimated Past, Present, and Future Expenditures
by Anglers on the Logan River
BOT538/027
ii
�INTRODUCTION
This technical memorandum describes existing conditions,
potential impacts, and possible mitigation measures for aquatic
resources affected by proposed improvements to the Logan
Canyon Road between Logan and Garden City, Utah.
Logan Can-
yon is located ln the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in north
central Utah.
An important component of this scenic canyon
is the Logan River, which originates in southeastern Idaho
and flows south through Logan Canyon to
~; t: ~:;t~:~nfluence
wi th
~~~~~~~~:;~~~;~~~~~~::~~~~P;~:~~::,~,;~~~~;~rf~!!:;:;~~:;~;;;
tions, and realigning the
ro~a:;::::;::::::::~he:; : p~.:6:p:osed modifications
mile~ii\.d;;t:: :~;~: i: : L~:~~:~ River (Right Hand
creek-:: : Co.Df~1~ :~~i{~;~r):: : : :~~d about 3.2 miles of
could affect about 15. 4
Fork to the Beaver
cutoff
Figure 1.
BOT538/025
1
yes
�,...
~,..----~--=-=======~.,....,.--
III1
.DOUBL E TOP
9,872
Sfee~
:E
o
:>
z
<t
a:
o
:E
W w
1- . :E
m...J
UCl) CX)<t
CI)
~ .
-C)
I-
Z
«_
:J..J
~
o c..
~I
IU
~w
a:« ~~
w CI) :> a:
°0
>CI)
_ W
z:>
00
a: U i~
_Za: <ta:
~~
CI)«:J u~
0 Z I.... _
CI) <t<t
=,"
.~O
LA. ..J
:~j~~~..V·~;~M T GOG
~1"'··~· ~$..
'In:ll\~~,,·
<tz
«~ I~
U'/c9
'"
>-U
w
,,=>
a: g~
9,700
·~:\';MT. MAGOG
;,W:::~
9,756
"-
31
31
~
TOny Grove
)
\
~e
..
~
~,,\/~
1
TONY GROVE
RANGER SCHOOL
CACHE~
~\~ ~
o
-"70 0' es
g
,~
.----- .
TEMPLE PK.
" ~"v.~. '4>
l~ ,\\I"~:"\.
I
31
~:::f
9 1 0-:)9
Co
~.. ""C:
~/" J~I~~i'
PARALLEL
NORTH
6
6
MUD FLAT G,S . I
~
®
t
<::>
I ~
~ ' -"
/9~.,.
_
1--
r
r
I
~
LODGE
CAMP_
GROUND
~.
~AY~~
%NATIONAL~
~~~;~
o
M
u..
to
....
N
en
�METHODS
Aquatic resources present in the proposed project area were
described and assessed based on a review of pertinent scientific literature, interviews with fish and wildlife agency
personnel and other knowledgeable persons, and a site visit.
Much of the Logan River and Beaver Creek aquatic resource
data are more than 15 years old.
However, this was not a
problem in describing existing conditions
s~~~e
the project
C. ~ti~b;~ Road was widened
1952 (Dunham, 1963).
Data presenteqit~~;1h~;; ;~ 9::9-thered within
adj acent to project area boundarie: § ;:~ ~i;:~;: :' NU~'~ ;1;;:6fi~ $. fisheries
area has changed little since the Logan
in
or
studies conducted downstream of
T~!~;~~/;~;~;~i ; were""" tf6:t
referenced
in this assessment since they were·"" w~'l'i.i:/~utside the project
are a .
""""'\",,,:::,,::),
Potential impacts
determined based
on the nature and
for the three
Rich County),
public
prQ.]:e 'e ;t ;:. ·:~;t3~·t~i.on~::;':;';(Middle
: tf:~fu:: : i' s, ; ~ri; iE~~~ ;i;~!d concerns
scoPin~;~ ~i ~ir9.ces~il~ ;l and
enh; ~;~d~~ent
identified during the
from comments provided by the
Interdisciplina·i;y.;;~;: .;S ~t.,Jl~Y:/Team.
mi tigation and
Canyon, Upper Canyon,
Where possible, conceptual
measures have been identified
that would minimize or offset potential project impacts associated with the various improvement alternatives.
BOT538/025
3
�EXISTING CONDITIONS
AQUATIC HABITAT
DISCHARGE
The Logan River and Beaver ' Creek watersheds are located in
the Bear River Mountains, primarily at elevations above
5,000 feet.
Their annual discharges and flQ!wi:: periodicities
., $: h: ~~~ack and snowTheir peak discharges typicallY :i~:;'~:dti~::'i ~ip. the spring,
base flow condi tions can occu~:/~:~~: ing ':'£h,;"'itil,ate summer,
are strongly influenced by variations in
melt.
while
durilffi5f:: :;~ih~:/~iinter '~ : : : :~'nder
d
:::dm::: ::::::. flow for the i ':;~:~;;:i;;:;~~;:/:t the mouth of
when the snowpack is low, or
Logan Canyon is about
24,O::; :;e :1J.bidi:,·:if:~~:{ : : p~r
extremely
second (cfs), while
f,;t: b:~ : : : ~; t. =:Ibp. od1t ;\S35 cfs (Kappesser, 1983).
dischar~~~f:'; ;t~O~!::; tb.:.~: !~;!ii b'gan River at the mouth of
are.: : :p;:t:~; s :~,'~:t:~.J; ;t~ ,j..n "~:~ble 1. These values provide
it reaches bankfull
Mean monthly
Logan Canyon
:::::P:~::~::~,:~,:~~~;g~i~'::~:::::::~:;o:::::::~:::n :;:~:~~::e
a third-order
stre'~ht:::::~hat has a moderately steep gradient
(1.9 percent average grade).
It is rated a Class II - High
Priority waterway on the Utah Department of Wildlife Resources'
(UDWR) Unique Streams List.
The Logan River has not been
proposed or determined to be a wild and scenic river.
4
�Table 1
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS (cfs) FOR THE LOGAN RIVER
AT THE MOUTH OF LOGAN CANYON
(Gage 10109000)
Water
Year
---
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
170
148
67
134
100
131
96
197
247
228
165
158
126
75
126
107
123
96
175
213
211
156
141
113
77
97
110
89
157
186
182
125
125
105
72
103
101
104
84
141
159
161
123
120
97
75
96
99
99
98
131
147
143
205
128
94
127
104
106
100
256
109
309
187
289
146
535
676
131
131
823
579
541
"d::~29
678 "::/~:::}1'30
308/" :~( 362
255
86
395
191
345
155
170
73
181
136
176
105
260
337
333
170
316
140
65
153
106
153
90
209
246
253
169
267
Mean
153
142
126
205
168
Source:
III
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~"",;:~~'~ i'i " ~:}~:' ~ ~~
~n , : ;,:~:;"':,!5, ::':~,~: :,:i!'~H
759
381
U.S. Geological
:::i:::~:~~~:~:,~:;,:;:;ii~~!~~~:~,~?i;:~::::~::::~:::~::s::::::gh
along the
prd':d';~d p;;~j:~~c~:::i: "reach
~: ~inl:thlf:","/i ~" ,n~ Right Hand
availab~!~~h:: ":f~:~ " any of these
Fork, Rick I
data are
are Beaver Creek, Temple
S
Fork.
No specific flow
tributaries.
WATER QUALITY
Data for the Logan River (see Table 2)
indicate that it is a
cold water system (maximum temperatures less than 20°C) with
good to excellent water quali ty.
Overall, the river has
excellent dissolved oxygen concentrations (6.9 to 9.8 mg/L) ,
low turbidity and suspended solids levels, and relatively
low nutrient levels.
Results of a bedload transport study
conducted by Kappesser in 1983 indicate that suspended sediment levels and turbidities can be expected to increase at
5
�Table 2
WATER QUALITY DATA FOR THE LOGAN RIVER
AT THE MOUTH OF LOGAN CANYON
Sample Data
Parameter
10/1/BO
12/2/80
3/31/81
Temperature (OC)
2.0
7.5
9.4
4.8
0.7
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
9.0
~i il"~ ~ : ; \",:.
6.9
9.B
Specific Conductivity (umhos/cm)
310
345
pH (units)
8.2
Total Suspended Solids (mg/L)
Total Cations (mg/L)
Total Alkalinity as CaC0
Turbidi ty (.NTU)
3
192
146
204
16~!i/:
66
0.05
14~::,::;'i:;;:"·· .:\:. 144
156
0.5
6.2
206
166
13.6
4.0
8.7
8.7
8.1
5
0.05
69
0.06
56
0.05
1.5
174
148
188
158
3.0
9,/l:::::.
172
179
184
:)'
.::F
TDS @ 1BOoC (mg/L)
8.1
55
0.02
(mg/L)
3
(mg/L)
8.2
9.8
270
363
5
... -.,
72
Total Phosphorous (mg/L)
Total Hardness as CaC0
5
325
8/4/81
8.7
8.4
3.0
6/2/81
0.5
2 .0
':::.
.
·:\;;"<:;[7:..1
196
162
...
T.O.C. (mg/L)
C.O.D. (mg/L)
Total Anions (mg/L)
1.0
1.8
...
3.2
20
15
15
15
143
100
11B
107
Nitrate as N (mg/L)
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.21
Nitrite as N (mg/L)
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
SOURCE:
1~:.2?,;/":;,: ~~~i:i::;':;': ': ;} 1~: .15
o•05 .:;,;:'.
0 . 05
Utah Department of Health, Bureau of Water Pollution Control, Salt Lake City, Utah.
BOT538/028
2. 7
0 . 05
1.0
15
107
0.25
0.05
412
9.0
12/2/81
210
B.3
�flow
~ates
greater than 240 cfs_
The only water quality
param: ter 'that could potentially present a problem to aquatic
e
life
~n
the Logan River is pH.
prote~tion
1986) :.
Acceptable pH levels for the
of freshwater life range from 6.5 to 9.0 (EPA,
There are two instances in the available data (Table 2)
where, Logan River pH levels reached or exceeded the upper
limit:
9.3 on May 8, 1980, and 9.0 on August 4, 1981.
No water quality data are available for Beaver Creek.
the geology and land use practices in the
B~~yer
However,
Creek water-
shed are similar to the rest of the Logan.:iiii~;~V:i~r basin.
fore, Beaver Creek's water quali ty is
e
1
:::A::: :::D :A:: Logan River .
0
pt'~bi ~; ly.
": :" :!;': .: '.: ,'i.:'~;." ,:. '
There-
similar to
""""""';::":,::,;'"
:::::"::;:::::::::.
:~~~i :~o:: :::a:~:o:::n~::~,:~'~~~,~,~~:~;;~~':'e::~::d a::l ::ea::ail-
qe:~;t:~;e.," ~~l! , :th:~y ;i; ;p.ISO consume vegetable
matter (seeds, algae ;ii::;",Ji tp':: ~;i (~:: : :: :.;,: Te,~fi ~strial invertebrates (grasshoppers, ' ants, b~:~ti le.: ~:; >;i;i ;c~~ms ·; :':; ; ~ 'tc.) can be an important
food source dUJi.d~;~; t~t:: :th;;; ; ; ~;;£.:i.:~1g, summer, and fall, when they
fall into the·;1i;~.~~?r f~~!b~; v~:~etation (especially overhanging
riparian brush ·:;~h4;; ; ~.+=~.~ ;~) along rivers, lakes, and streams.
Aquatic invertebr~; t.; ~~;/:·(maYflies, caddis flies , dragonflies,
larvae.
To a lesser
etc.) are an important fish food source all year, but especially during the winter when terrestrial food sources are
lacking.
No quantitative data on aquatic invertebrates are available
for the Logan River or Beaver Creek.
However, good water
quality and numerous riffle areas in the river and creek
(typi¢ally productive aquatic invertebrate areas)
t
-
suggest
that ~quatic invertebrate densities could be relatively high_ ,
Limit$d observations by UDWR (1972; 1974) 'indicate that the
relat+ve densities of Logan River aquatic invertebrates in
7
�the project reach are about 70 percent caddisflies (Trichoptera),
20 percent stoneflies (Plecoptera), and 10 percent mayflies
and midges
(Ephemeroptera and Diptera).
Because it is similar
to the Logan River, the relative densities of the Beaver
Creek aquatic invertebrate community could be expected to be
similar.
No data are available on terrestrial invertebrates (that are
potential fish food sources) along the project reach.
Aquatic invertebrates typically feed on
eta ti 0 n
( leave s, t wig s, etc.), car i on
etc. ), and other invertebrates.
::~;::~a~e::~~
a.l:g: ~~;i~
decaying veg-
C~if~'~ Q:: : :f ;i.:.s h ,
No .,! (f~f:' ·
bird s ,
a;;~ ; ~;:.~\r,p.ilable
on
sources for aquatiS::;::'~'~'~:,~:~,ebra~~~)"~Sing the
FISH HABITAT
in the Logan Can-
An aquatic habitat
yon between DeWitt
Hand Fork cOnflU~JlCe;;1 ;,.·'~;fi4: :iif 'h e
':; ~;~ :aver
3. 4 miles
Beaver Creek (Adams, 1966). The
inventory
above:: : :~:fi'~::; :m.~iit~~~ ~: ~:;f,;:
was ':!i;~¢rh~ fo i~~J~i~~
Habita~::i i;A:~: ~~ ~ y:!:~fi=l
collected at ': ~i li ~'~:f :~e
the Right
Mountain turnoff, about
u. S. Forest Service Region
4
Aquatic
procedures.
Physical habitat data
were
intervals along the study reach.
Using data on five component categories for a stream (pool
measure, pool structure, stream bottom, stream environment,
and bank stability) percent optimum fish habitat was estimated for each study site.
The five component categories
were rated from 0 to 1, with a rating of 1 representing optimal conditions.
The five ratings were summed (see Total
Points in Table 3), then divided by 5 (the maximum number of
total points)
conditions.
if all component categories exhibited optimal
The result was expressed as percent optimum
fish habitat for each study site.
8
�Table 3
PERCENT OPTIMUM HABITAT DATA FOR THE LOGAN RIVER
(RIGHT HAND FORK TO BEAVER CREEK) AND
BEAVER CREEK (MOUTH TO BEAVER MOUNTAIN TURNOFF)
Approximate
Location
Station
Number
U-S
U-6
U-7
U-8
U-9
U-10
U-11
U-12
U-13
U-14
U-15
Right Hand Fork Confluence
China Row Campground
Approx. 1 mile above China Row
Near Logan Cave
Approx. 1 mile above Logan Cave
Just above Lower Bridge
Just below Upper Bridge
Just above Temple Fork
Just above Rick's Spring
Near Bear Hollow Creek
Approx. 1 mile below Forestry
Field Sta.
At Forestry Field Station
Just above Tony Grove
Just above Red Banks Camp
Near mouth of Beaver Creek
~pprox. 1 mile above Beaver
Creek
Near Beaver Mountain Turnoff
Average
Width
Average
Depth
(ft)
(ft)
43.4
.:::.. 1.30
Percent
Riffle
89.4
Percent
Pool
10.6
U-21
PROPOSED PROJECT REACH AVERAGES
SOURCE:
Adams, 1966
BOT538/030
0.22
Pool
Structure
0.04
Stream
Bottom
0.67
'i~ll"1i: :" : :' :~~~;<i : ;il1;!]i",)i :~:! f11 fi!
..
;::~. .
0.92
0.88
0.89
0.68
0.76
0.50
0.52
88.7
94.9
16.84
1543.7
15:::
34.3
0.99
90.8
9.2
0.27
0.00
0.03
97.3
97.0
11.5
15.7
O~!O
J)Ci~\,.
11. 3::::"
Bank
Stability
Total
Points
Percent
Optimum
1.00
0.80
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.70
2.31
2.44
2.12
2.14
2.47
2.04
2.12
2.38
2.37
54
46
49
42
43
49
41
42
48
47
0.40
0.59
0.35
0.40
0.42
0.72
0.79
0.85
0.62
0.80
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.90
1.00
2.72
2.48
2.33
1.98
2.28
54
50
47
40
46
O. 71
0.72
0.62
1.00
0.80
2.65
2.22
53
44
12.35
1.6.• 4.0 ...
0.72
0.96
1:!1
-:: .
0.38
38.0
44.4
32.0
39.5
28.9
Stream
Environment
0.77
0.76
0.75
0.61
0.52
0.75
0.70
0.76
0.81
0.80
i~i~i~: i : : i:; ; "i:'~;Sii: :n ~U ~: ~~ ~:~! ~: ~~
583.6
U-16
U-17
U-18
U-19
U-20
Pool
Measure
0 .-21
~T::.
00::.
:::~:: ,: 'i: i ,: : i;i~i:i:": :":i: :i : :::
0.18
0.04
0.42
3~.75 ... ~ 95
2.34
47%
�~he
inventory results presented in Table 3 are only for the
sections of the Logan River and Beaver Creek that could po~entially
tions.
~he
be influenced by the proposed highway modifica-
Data indicate that the average stream width is 34.3 feet,
average depth is 0.99 feet, and the riffle-to-pool ratio
is 9:1.
The average percent optimum fish habitat in the
project reach is 47 percent, the best study site was 54 percent, while the poorest was 40 percent.
Three study sites
in the project reach (U-5, U-15, U-20) were considered to be
above average in quality when compared to
o ~~r
.iF'
':::
study sites
(Adams, 1966).
The project reach percent
with other regional trout
on physical habitat data,
reach of the Logan River is
trout stream .
.:::: :::::::: ..
·:": ';: ;: .l.~.i T~:· :a ~..I·:e\:.. ;4:;~ i:.
l.:1::- ~
CaMP ARI sON:::..dE.... EJ(CENW::~~:6PT IMUM HAB I TAT
P:
.:;:'::
.;/:::',;::::::'
FOR R;Edfor~fAL·:;;;T:R'OUT STREAMS
~!~~p~;;;;:r:'::~': ;: : ;: ,: : : :';i" ':~ :" "':;!;;;:g ~~:~~e
A
Fifth Water
·::ii:i:,;""::·
Diamond Fork
McCoy Creek
Sixth Water
Currant Creek
Wolf Creek
Rock Creek
West Fork Duchesne
Taft Creek
North Fork Duchesne
Hades Creek
Logan River and Beaver
Creek (proposed
: project area)
Source:
Utah
Utah
Idaho
Utah
Utah
Utah
Utah
Utah
Nevada
Utah
Utah
Utah
Adams, 1966.
10
8
22
23
15
21
8
40
22
7
36
10
34.3
Percent of
Optimum Habitat
64
62
51
49
49
48
46
44
41 .
40
37
33
25
47
�The Logan River and Beaver Creek generally lack good quality
pools
(Adams, 1966).
Overhanging vegetation, such as brush
and trees, is an important fish habitat component for the
Logan River (Brown, 1935; Dunham, 1963; Adams, 1966; Helm,
1986).
A fish habitat utilization study was conducted using
four Logan River sites between Chokecherry Campground (about
1.5 miles below Right Hand Fork) and 0.5 miles above Brachiopod Picnic Area (near Cottonwood Picnic Area) by the UDWR
in 1973.
Their results indicated that more trout used areas
where bankside vegetation was present than
tation was al ter e d.
There were 46 to 64
trout captured in areas where the
not al tered.
a~e as
pe: ~:¢ :~:nt
where vegemore brown
ripar ,i!~ :~ : : ; ~~:g: ~tation
was
. Jn8:~;~ :· c~:'f:t;'£.q:?lt trout
;/M'~ti~t.a:!4.n wh i:t:e ~fish were
Also, 32 to 68 percent
were captured in unal tered areas.
captured in equal numbers in al ter:~ :d ;: : ~ :h~:: : ~nal tered areas.
Size frequency data for
captured in 1970 and
River indicate these
ad u 1 tho I ding are a s
brown'i ;::i~;;::; ';~:;'~; ':~;untain
1971:: :; :from : \;l~; a:t.;t:~:~:~ :~
~:¢ :¢,:~ :t :i~l§.. ~~ ~ i!~ e
areas of the Logan
as juvenile rearing and
ib.;r::!; : l?::9t!b: ; ;: ~~:~~~~I:~ s ( He 1m, 19 8 6).
f:r:Pni:: : :a :l~~~:.~: ~:.. ar~: ~: ~ indicate these
tend to suppor 1;:: : t.;~ : ~ : ~ : : ; ~J~~:~ :i ;s ~;i~: (mostly juvenile or
groups of broJh;:::!~~ !!i7put ' :~ n:~ m~untain whitefish.
frequency data
There are few
whitefish
d:~;~':;:;'::;: ';~:~wning
Si z e
locations
mostly adul t)
habitat availability and qual-
ity in the Logan River and Beaver Creek.
Unpublished field
data (UDWR, 1972; 1974) from three sites along the project
reach (Franklin Basin Bridge, Utah State Forestry Field Station Bridge, Brachiopod Picnic Area)
indicate that Logan
River substrate is primarily boulders (37 to 78 percent) and
rubble (10 to 55 percent).
The three sites surveyed had
only 1 to 15 percent gravel.
Small tributaries along the project reach, such as China Row
Creek and Rick's Spring, are reported to be essential for
11
�fish spawning (Roberts, 1977).
Us~ng
only stream gradient
(no other data are available) as a ' criterion for identifying
potential tributary spawning areas : (gradients less than
2.5 percent could be spawnable), only Right Hand Fork, lower
Blind Hollow Creek, Temple Fork, and lower White Pine Creek
could provide some spawnable habitat.
Other tributaries
along the project reach have gradients exceeding 4 percent.
However, all project reach tributaries probably contribute
gravel to the system and could have spawnable areas where
they join the Logan River or Beaver Creek.
"",/ii;i'iiiii:,i:i:::::,,
Frs HERr E BOLOG~!;:' 'i/'''''iiiiii:i:::'': '!i
Sr
:::Hp::::::Sreach supports
populations of brown
(Salmo clarki), and
nait~'~:~i;:~;~ :~; ~:;~dUCing gamefish
tro\J;:t : : ;: ~sailrr:6.:/'r: ~: tE'~) cutthroat trout
mqu:~t:~: l~~ji ,~h flt~;tish (Prosopiurn williarnsoni)
I
.
catchabl ~i;: ;:;s!ii ~ ~:/:J:;:~::::;:t.Jl:/~ O-inch) rainbow trout
(Salmo gairdneri),: : : ~e:r :E:' : ; : §:t._d ,=~e~:: : : i~1rOUghOUt the Logan River
and were not b¥:f::~:~:~: ~:~:i:::;:_:£~<i?:, '::i ~~ ~iroduce in the river.
However,
several rainba~jb.;p.tth;:~~lt hybrids were reported in electro-
Until 1982,
shocking
1 9 7. 1) •
surve;:q;;;d~:~;~: : : ~9ii :lected
by Utah State Uni versi ty (Gosse,
'::~~~~;::://:'
Rainbow trout stocking data are limited.
For the entire
Logan River (including downstream impoundments), an average
of 30,860 rainbows were planted in 1962, 1963, and 1964
1966).
(Adams,
Between 1969 and 1974, an average of 15,000 rainbows
were planted in the project reach of the Logan River at Brachiopod Picnic Area (UDWR, 1974).
No information is available
on the current status of rainbow trput in the Logan River.
The only rough _
fish species reportea for the Logan River is
the mottled sculpin (Cottus
bairdi)~
12
�LIFE HISTORY
Life history periodicity data for the three species of naturally reproducing gamefish found in the Logan River are presented in Table 5.
Rainbow trout reproduction in the Logan
River is probably limited.
Logan River brown trout and moun-
tain whitefish are fall spawners.
Egg incubation occurs
through the winter, and the fry emerge in the early spring.
Cutthroat trout spawn in the spring, egg incubation occurs
through the summer, and the fry emerge in
~:pi~>
fall.
Brown
trout, cutthroat trout, and mountain whit~ftfh all reach
~::::~ :::U~~:~s:::n~a~9~;~~Oduce 'i:~:::,; ,' ~: ,': ;:~:: "'4'i;: ~~::S, of age
T a!~ 1~:: : :?:; : i: : : : :;: : . ·: : ::~:~~\:;::::>
LOGAN RIVER GAMEFISH LIFEh fI.I"S'l.lORY::::J?ERIODICITY DATA
... . ..
"',\:\,,':::',;rr,,;rr" "";;" """
.:::/.f:::::;;:::;::::~ji~
." .::
Brown Trout
~~~w~;~~ba t o~:: :": ~:" :i;, , , , , : :, ,": : ":,: :, : : ,gi'~~~: ~=~ ~~~~ er
i
::::::::~,;;:,;~,~~:~':j' :,'t ' ' '; ' :' '>' .~:~~:~~=~:~::~: ~
Spawning
' ::~ ~ ~ ~iii::::::;://:'
Nay-June
Egg incubation
Fry
Juvenile
Adult
May-August
August-January
January-December
January-December
Mountain Whitefish
October-November
October-March
January-June
January-December
January-December
Spawning
Egg Incubation
Fry
Juvenile
Adult
13
�DISTRIBUTION
Gamefish occur throughout the project reach.
The section
downstream from Temple Fork supports primarily brown trout,
while the section above Temple Fork supports primarily cutthroat trout (UDWR, 1972; 1974).
Mountain whitefish occur
in relatively equal numbers throughout the project reach.
No information is available on the status of rainbow trout
in the project reach.
2
sinee18.
9
No rainbows have
be~p!;;~;I~tocked
there
"",i"::i;","':,::i'::::",:i;;:':i,, \\,,
::~::::C:iSh population densi ty d~;;~"': ;~~")~ac~:'::'i" for the
nd
~:~ ::r:~:e:r::: ::::::i~:e ::~i;i;LJ~i;;~;:,i~'?':r: ::W:h :h:
:::u
bankside vegetation is
lJ:l1;ct':1;te;~J!/~~:~~: ~: ~
than altered (UDWR,
on
.:H:::::::::::::;::::: ..
per mile of stream) were
near the project reach near
pass
electroshock~1~1~ :/~ampling
Estimates were based on multipleresults.
It was estimated
that the Logan River supported 460 to 920 brown trout per
mile.
It was also estimated that the river supported 692 to
1,454 fish per mile of all trout species:
rainbow.
brown, cutthroat,
Increased fishing pressure and the termination of
the rainbow trout stocking program in 1982 have probably
resulted in reduced fish densities today.
POPULATION STRUCTURE
The Logan River supports naturally reproducing populations
of brown trout, cutthroat trout, and mountain whitefish.
14
�Past fish sampling data indicate that fry,
juveniles, and
adults of these three species use the river (Adams, 1966;
Gosse, 1971; UDWR, 1972; 1974).
Total length data for game-
fish collected in 1970, 1971, 1972, and 1974 (UDWR, 1972;
1974; Helm, 1986) were compared to growth data from areas
similar to north central Utah to estimate fish age (Scott
and Crossman, 1973; Carlander, 1969).
These comparisons
indicated that in the early 1970s the Logan River supported
the following age ranges of fish:
1- to 5-year-old brown
trout, 1- to 9-year-old mountain whi tefish,
;i~qd
.:::::' .:::::'
1- to 5-year-
old cutthroat trout.
Most trout and whitefish
apparently occurs
River above Third
Beaver Creek, Temple Fork,
loW~:r ;i : : :B.iJ.:.i~d:: ~: B6llkIOW
in
Creek, and
trout
are
River tributaries
and no substantial lakes
or any of its tributaries
Condition
facto~;:" ":;I:~;;;: ;: ::;:e developed using fish
length and
weight data to determine the relative "robustness" or "well
being" of fish populations.
These factors can be used to
compare the well being of fish populations from different
habitats or fish populations using the same habitat at different times.
Condition factor differences suggest habitat
quality differences (higher K values suggest better quality
habitats) .
No recent data are available on trout growth or condition
factors in the Logan River or Beaver Creek.
However, condi-
tion factors were developed for various length ranges of
15
�brown trout from the Logan River by Sigler (1952) and by
Gosse (1971).
The 1952 values were 1.83 for fish 0 to 199 rom,
1.73 for fish 200 to 275 rom, and 1.64 for fish 276 to 350 rom.
In 1971, the K factors were 1.82 for fish 0 to 199 rom, 1.50
for fish 200 to 275 rom, and 1.59 for fish 276 to 350 mm.
These K factors indicate that the condition of brown trout
in the Logan River changed little from 1952 to 1971.
This
suggests that the quality of brown trout habitat along the
Logan River also changed little between 1952 and 1971.
Because the Logan River has not changed app~i~ ~iably since
1971, current K factors are probably simi::f:~l:: :'to 1971 and
:::2p::::::. mortality factors for"'{~~~:': '~::" :':~:;:~:: fiSh in the
project area are probably severe
~:ri~;i :~;~~ental
condi tions f
predation, and angling.
Of tih~tse: ~ : . m'~ :b~: ~: l J ty caused by exposure to severe environmental :i!¢..d~d:±;; :i: 6 n~.: : : 't~OVl flows, floods,
anchor ice, etc.) is proba:b,)'y
:i~ti;~;~: :;:{~:~ d;~ng
cause of fish losses
to
area.
are also
known
only 4 inches
(Scott and
1·6;h~.:; 1 J~a::;:E{
and juvenile fish.
Brown trout
been reported to prey on other trout
crossm~: rl;:/ i i :~973).
Because of its location and
excellent accessibility, the Logan River has long been an
important fishing stream.
Fishing pressure on the river has
steadily increased since angling data were first collected
in 1950.
From 1962 to 1965, an average of 30,860 catchable
rainbow trout were released into the Logan River.
It was
estimated that 80 percent of these fish were caught (Adams,
1966).
In the absence of the rainbow trout stocking program
and increasing fishing pressure, angling could be an important
mortality factor for trout and whitefish populations in the
project reach.
16
�ANGLING
The Logan River is near a major population center in northern
Utah, supports a good gamefish population, and has excellent
accessibility.
For these reasons it has long been an impor-
tant angling stream.
Fishing pressure on the river has in-
creased steadily since 1950, while catch rates have remained
about the same.
The number of angler-days spent on the Logan
River doubled between 1950 and 1982.
Fishing pressure increases
are expected to continue through the 1990s . ;ii!i!:;;~Angling data
for the entire Logan River are
surnrnarizedi:i : f:~t::~able
. .:1i i i!:"::;::i:i :~ l i;:~ :i :l ; : ; : .
6.
LOGAN
Year
1948
1950
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1982
1985
1990
Angler
Days
Catch Rate
(fish/hour)
0.61
a
26,684
42,801
(11,599)c,e
(15,045)c
a For entire Logan River, including impoundments.
b UDWR creel census data and regression analysis
(r
=
0.87).
cApproximate number of fish caught in project reach. Assumes
47 percent of total fish harvested were caught between DeWitt
Springs and Beaver Creek (Adams, 1966).
dStocked rainbow trout only.
fish were harvested.
Assumes 80 percent of stocked
eRainbow trout only.
17
�Creel census data for 1962, 1963, and 1964 indicate that
47 percent of the fish harvested from the Logan River were
caught between DeWitt Springs, about 4.7 miles downstream
from the project reach, and Beaver Creek (Adams, 1966).
Creel census data were also collected along the Logan River
from First Dam to Temple Fork in 1982 (UDWR).
In the 1982
study, the river was divided into seven sections.
A section
from Right Hand Fork to Temple Fork covered the lower third
of the project reach.
With the exception of the section
from Second to Third Dams, where no anglers;:iw:~re observed,
the Right Hand Fork to Temple Fork sectio.p:::;:;~~i~ the least
used.
fi$.)1:f;ri9.;:.: ; b~ tween First
pet,;!'l'~:~f;; u~;i!;;~::'; 't>~e reach
Of the 1,002 people observed
Dam and Temple Fork, only 8 (0. 8
from Right Hand Fork to Temple Fo +.;J(~::(/· l\J1g). ing ~a:s observed
thr~tq:~;;: ; ~ri:~ust;
:; and;: ; :~u;:~; s~ t; >~~i~: . The
in this section from February
however, fish
were caught only during July
anglers in
this
trout
(160 rainbows,
rate of
0.5 fish/hour.
were the First
of the anglers
MANAGEMENT
The Logan
River'; ; S: :':~;;;~;::d
as a Class I I - High Priority water-
way on the Utah Unique Stream List.
Because of its location,
accessibility, and popularity among regional anglers, it was
largely managed as a "put-and-take" rainbow trout fishery
from the 1940s to 1982.
During this period, thousands (an
average of 30,860 in the early 1960s) of catchable size (8to 10-inch) rainbow trout were stocked in response to the
heavy fishing pressure the river supported.
In 1982, the
rainbow trout stocking program was terminated above Third
Darn.
The upper section of the Logan River, including the
project reach of the Logan River and Beaver Creek, is now
managed for naturally reproducing trout and whitefish.
18
�Fish habitat management in the Logan River and Beaver Creek
has primarily focused on maintaining existing conditions.
Studies (UDWR, 1973; Helm, 1986) have shown that the loss or
alteration of bankside vegetation is detrimental to trout
habitat quality in the Logan River.
Current management strat-
egies concern lirniting or eliminating future riparian vegetation damage resulting from encroachment or other actions.
No programs currently exist to enhance or improve fish habitat in the Logan River or Beaver Creek.
:::r::::l::::O::formation suggests t4i~:i!: ;~'::;:;;;"\~PtentiallY
producti9:tt:i;~iiqn:g: the " : ~f;~ject reach,
a good fishery currently exi~i:b~~~.:~:::/~:h: ~lude (in order of
importance) the general /~b: Se.:p.~~;: : Oti.:\qpali ty pool habi-
limiting further gamefish
where
their
tat, historical habi tat quali ~iy' i ;;~: e:~;;:~:d: a:tii :6 'n, limi ted avail-
::~ ~~ t~ a::o:~a ~~:yd: :,~::~~:~~":'~,~:!:~:j: ,~, ; dri~'' '~ng1 pre s ·
ing sure
Percent optimum
4~:h'I't:a.t ·::ey·atl.uations
of the project reach
~:d~:::: ::::t,~:i!~::~~'~r:'::::::b~~ :~:h r:::o:~bi:::e~::~ity
the evaluations
':; ~l;~:di: : ~{~diicate
generally lacking
1966).
ii h : i i ~~e
that quali ty pool habitat is
Logan River and Beaver Creek (Adams,
The absence of quality pool habitat, which provides
important adult holding and juvenile rearing areas, could be
limiting further trout production in the project reach.
Studies were conducted along the Logan River (UDWR, 1973;
Helm, 1986) to determine the effect of bankside vegetation
alterations on trout and whitefish densities.
Study results
indicated that overhanging vegetation is a very important
component of Logan River trout habitat quality.
Road encroach-
ments and other riparian vegetation alterations made in the
19
�1930s and 1950s continued to affect local trout habitat quality and use during the early 1970s.
little effect on mountain whitefish.
The alterations had .
The habitat quality
reductions that occurred in the 1930s and 1950s could still
be limiting further trout production in the Logan River and
Beaver Creek today.
Data on stream gradients (moderately steep) and substrate
composition (primarily boulders and rubble with little gravel)
along the project reach suggest that quali ~,:;r!!'~;iypawning areas
could be I imi ting further trout productio:p"':' =*t1 the Log an River
and Beaver Creek.
Also, only four triqp't at;i '@.s,:. in the proj-
::tS:::::l:a::rg:::~:n:: :~:::f~:~:~::~,~~;::g~'~G:~~~,ns that may
~::r:~~~i::: ~:!:~ :!:~:n~S P;',:;~;;;;~~i,;t~:::r~r::~O::::us
fo~: : : :t;:h,~ 16~iEt~::>Eb:i ::d of the project reach
(Right Hand Fork to T.~fu;:fe::\~p:~k· ')i il: ~;ndicate that this section
was not heavily utiII;~:~d; ; ::/~~;~~:; : :~ ;:l!: ~~ople were observed fishing
there during all .: : $:f : : : :1: 9 : ~ ' '2: , ;' · :l!~;: : . Th~: i '~ data suggest that angling
results
(UDWR, 1982)
t
::::::::o:h::~,:~;::~;::j:~::'~'::::~ti:~w~~:~ ~i::c::::o:h:n r::::
stOC~::{;h~: " ! !p.,t6:g~am was ended above Third
angling p;~~~~re in the project reach is
bow trout
Dam in 1982,
current
completely
supported by naturally reproducing brown trout, cutthroat
trout, and mountain whitefish populations.
Therefore, angling
could cause a reduction in trout and whitefish production
along the project reach by removing more naturally reproducing fish from the area than in past years.
RECREATIONAL VALUE
The Logan River has been classified by the Utah Division of
Wildlife Resources as a Class II - High Priority Stream and
has been placed on the agency's Unique Streams List.
20
These
�actions by the UDWR reflect the Logan River's unique fishery
and aquatic habitat as well as the stream's ability to sustain high quality, wild populations of salmonids.
At the
present time the Logan River above the impoundments is managed' as a wild trout fishery.
A self-sustaining trout fish-
ery has numerous and relatively narrow habitat requirements
at various life stages; consequently, the fishery is sensitive to any degradation or alteration of water quality and
stream morphology.
Fishing pressure is also a key factor in
maintaining a wild trout population, and
managed appropr ia tely .
Throughout the state of Utah there
stream miles classified as Class
Logan River is also unique in
anqI~ ng
must be
./iiiiiii:://:'
api(': ;~:' : '~ i::;:~~" " 'JlUmber
Ii!!'ii~t.:/:~I/ii:t ishe;il i~:~.
tha~::i i ii ~: : i i;~'/~oth
of
The
a high priori ty
and an urban fishery.
Consubstantial.
in Table 7
future number
of
rise in fishing days
reflects the po~: ~ :~;ti' 6:~ /'increase in Cache County and metropbli tan Logan Ci ty'::ii6tV, 'r the last 35 years.
;
In addition to the river's accessibility to a large number
of anglers, it serves as a natural laboratory for Utah State
University.
The Logan River is used to train students in
fish and wildlife, hydrology, forestry, archaeology, geology,
engineering, and environmental field techniques.
Numerous
studies, theses, and dissertations have been carried out
using the river's environmental features.
21
�ECONOMIC VALUE
Although fishing pressure is heavy on the Logan River, excellent catches have been made
to 36 pounds).
(such as brown trout weighing up
The mystique of "big trout" combined with
the opportunity to catch the bag limit make the Logan River
a preferred fishery for anglers.
As such, the river gener-
ates a substantial amount of spending by anglers and is a
valuable economic asset both to the state of Utah and Cache
Valley.
:;:~: :n::::~yt:: :::~' t~:e::::~ ::;,¢~)~h::;:~" !;i:~;tt:: ::::~
.:~Pu.t'il1~(::;the
became a million-dollar fishery.
shown in the Table, more than $68
': ~il'tid'~'
Based QP '::\t h:e. ..
Logan River anglers.
~{; :v.~: i : 'l $
40 ~'year
period
will be spent by
length of 30 miles I
~:1i i~ll~~.: 8 : ;: : ::;f;6;r; : : :l~ :~{~ h mi leo f s tr e am .
Historical creel census .dat:9.- i' ~ ~l 1b:~f: ~;: : ; i:hat over 47 percent
of the fish harvested ./€i:;:e:;:; ;-e;kJ:~n·\b~J:ween DeWi tt Springs and
abou t
$ 3 0 , 00 0 was expend ed i
.the mouth of Beaver ~~'~:~.::.:'.:<:.:.:': :.: :;.": ":.,., : ,': ,;'.';':; ""'"
.:::::::;:::::::::::::::;::.
.:/:::':::;:::/::::::::;;:::;::.
':~:. .......
..
":::. .g:
':;:\'. ':~11~':::T ab 1 e
7
ESTIMATED.:. Pb.ST, PE.ESENT, AND FUTURE EXPENDITURES
·::l\SY:\l.\NGLERS ON THE LOGAN RIVER
Year
1950
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1982
1985
1990
Cost/Day
Ang~'~'~,: ,;·~;s
26,684
42,801
51,206
a
48,219
a
52,227
a
56,235
53,748
a
60,244
a
64,252
$
b
2.99
b
6.81
12.55
b
22.10
b
31.67
b
41.22
45.04
50.78
b
60.34
a UDWR creel census data and regression analysis
b UDWR annual cost factor and regression analysis
22
Expenditure
$
79,785
291,475
642,635
1,065,640
1,654,029
2,318,007
2,420,810
3,059,190
3,876,966
(r=0.87)
(r=O.73)
�Another economid factor is the investment value by .the state
of Utah.
From 1960 through 1980, the UDWR annually · stocked
the Logan River with brown and rainbow trout.
An average of
36,612 trout were stocked each year at an estimated investment of $732,000 (based on an average cost of $l/fish over
20 years).
Additional investment value has been made by the
UDWR and the Forest Service as labor and expenses for management and study programs.
BOT538/024
23
�REFERENCES
Abbey, L.A.
1974.
Memorandum to L. Jester concerning the
Logan Canyon highway route environmental analysis.
Utah
State Department of Highways.
Adams, J.K.
1966.
Memorandum to B. Reese concerning aquatic
habitat quality in Logan Canyon.
Contains the results of an
aquatic habitat inventory and percent
optiIl1~nxl!:
lations for the Logan River from Dewitt
habi tat calcu-
$P~~~gs
to the Beaver
;;;;;~::~:~;~:::: ~ ~;;:;~:;;:t;;:;~~~;;;h;;~~:::~;:;;l:;;;;::~
s
U
.: :\~~~!!;::::::>
er i es •
Car lander , . K.
Fishery Biology.
1969.
Iowa State
on Fisheries Habitat
Dunham, D.
of Past and
P~6ppsed
U . S. Fore s t
s~;£~:~~:~: ;; ;,;: ~:~;~~n,
Construction in Logan Canyon.
~j.9)lway
Utah.
Envirpnmental Protection Agency.
for water.
EPA 440/5-86-001.
1986.
Quality criteria
u.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C.
Gosse, J.
1971.
Logan River Fish Survey.
Utah State Univer-
sity, College of Natural Resources, Logan, Utah.
Helm, W.
1986.
Letter to C. Forsgren (CH2M HILL) containing
unpublished fish electroshocking data for altered and unaltered sections of the Logan River from 1970 and 1971.
Utah
State University, College of Natural Resources, Logan, Utah.
24
�Utah Department of Wildlife Resources.
Results for the Logan River.
1982.
Creel Census
Northern Regional Office.
BOT538/025
26
�:/:::::::::;::::::::::::::...
'i : ", : i;: , ~: : : ,: : : ;i : ': li:" : : ":'i
'::11111:,/::'
�
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/62">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/62</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
4214344492
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
16407692 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
Aquatic resources technical memorandum, Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Aquatic resources technical memorandum prepared for Utah Deparment of Transportation detailing the existing conditions of the aquatic habitat, fisheries biology, water quality, the impacts and mitigation in the Middle and Upper Canyons and Rich County, and references.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
Aquatic resources--Utah--Logan River
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Fishery resources
Logan River (Utah)
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
1987-03
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Rich County (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 4
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_Fd4_010.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/77ecd551111f18eb119817b06804e9e2.pdf
13b732e50386e9f72b6dddebe48f0766
PDF Text
Text
FACT SHEET
'".. ................... ......•.....
:
:-
;......
,
.......... ... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Logan Canyon US-89
Tentative Alternatives for the EIS
February 1987
Prepared by CH2M HILL
in significant environmental impacts. Improvements that
are under study for application to U.S. 89 include:
INTRODUCTION
This fact sheet is the third in a series to inform the
public on the progress of the Logan Canyon study. The
previous fact sheets outlined the scope of the study and
reported the result of the transportation needs and traffic
volume projections. This fact sheet outlines the tentative
alternatives that are under study. It also provides the means
for the public to evaluate the progress of the study and
comment on important environmental issues and other
possible alternatives at the project scoping meetings on
March 3 and 4.
Widening the roadway, shoulders, recovery areas, and
ditches to normal Utah Department of Transportation
(UooT) standards for minor arterials in mountainous
terrain, or to a modified (narrower) standard that
would be less disturbing to the environment of the
canyon
Widening the roadway to provide passing lanes in all
possible or selected areas
Improving the alignment (straightening curves) and
the road gradient (degree of slope) to increase the
minimum design speeds
IMPROVEMENTS/
AL TERNATIVES
The development of alternative plans for the
improvement of U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon
is dependent on the identification of feasible improvements.
"Improvements" refers to separate actions that can be taken
to improve the road, such as widening, straightening,
"Alternatives" are
providing slow car pull-offs, etc.
combinations of improvements proposed to be applied in
specific locations that would result in a certain level of
improvement of the road. These alternatives and others that
may be suggested in the scheduled scoping meetings may be
evaluated for environmental impacts in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
A preferred
alternative will be selected in conjunction with preparation
of the draft EIS.
In the case of Highway 89 through Logan Canyon,
feasible improvements have generally been defined as (1)
actions that will correct problems identified in the previous
transportation needs study; (2) actions that will result in a
reasonable cost to benefit; and (3) actions that will not result
Developing all new road alignments and gradients
(Rich County) to 40 mph or 50 mph minimum
design speeds
Repairing existing major bridges
Replacing major bridges
Replacing small drainage structures
Developing slow vehicle turnouts
Improving signing and pavement markings
Providing recreational parking
Each of these possible improvements was considered in
terms of the opportunities and constraints posed by the
existing road and Logan Canyon.
Page 1
Continued on Page 2
�Continued/rom Page 1
It has become obvious during the study of transportation
needs that the roadway consists of several sub-sections based
on the physical characteristics of the terrain. These sections,
as shown in Figure 1, are:
Section L Middle Canyon--Right Fork to 1.8 miles
above Ricks Springs
Section 2. Upper Canyon--I.8 miles above Ricks
Spring to Bear Lake Summit
Section 3. Rich County--Bear Lake Summit to
Garden City
In the analysis of improvements, certain improvements
were identified as more appropriate to certain sections of the
road than others. As a result, separate sets of alternatives
were developed for each of the three road sections. These are
summarized in Table 1.
PROPOSED
AL TERNATIVES
the road improvements that can be made without substantial
effect on visual quality and other attributes. The range of
alternatives considered for this section is therefore limited to
more conservative improvements that provide limited
benefits to travelers, but that would protect the
environmental qualities that are currently appreciated in this
section.
AI. No Action--Existing routine maintenance including
resurfacing would be continued. Repair of bridges and
improved signing and marking would be made.
Geometric constraints (road width) and winding
alignment would remain.
B1. Spot Improvements--Would include one or a
combination of the following: turning lanes at
intersections; slow vehicle turnouts; parking
improvements and selected curve modifications
where space is currently available; bridge replacement
in existing locations or on new alignment; climbing
lanes; and improved signing. Most geometric and
alignment constraints would continue to exist.
C1. Widening along existing alignment--The current road
would be widened to a standard that is narrower than
UDOT's standard for a minor arterial in mountainous
terrain. Figure 2 compares these two standards and the
Section 1. Middle Canyon
The Middle Canyon is environmentally the most
sensitive section of the project road. The narrow canyon
floor, confined by steep slopes and the Logan River, limits
Continued on Page 3
TABLE 1
TENTATIVE ALTERNATIVES
US-89 LOGAN CANYON
Alternative Designation
Alternative
Categories.
Section I
(Middle
Canyon)
Section 2
(Upper
Canyon)
Section 3
(Rich
County)
Al
BI
A2
B2
A3
B3
D2
D3
NoAction
Spot Iniprovements
Widen Existing Road
Widen and Improve
Existing Road
E. New North Alignment
F. New North Alignment
G. New South Alignment
A.
B.
C.
D.
CI
DI
E3
F3
G3
Page 2
�Continued/rom Page 2
a number of curves that lower the design speed to 25 mph,
and has a steep gradient that also lowers the travel speed.
existing roadway width. Additionally, climbing lanes
would be provided in selected areas (specifically in the
Dugway between lower and upper twin bridges);
gradient would be adjusted in selected areas; bridges
would be replaced on the existing or new alignment,
depending on each situation; and signing and marking
would be improved and new recreational parking
provided. This alternative would widen the roadway and
provide limited improvement to geometrics, but
alignment constraings would remain.
Dl. Widening and improving the existing alignment--In
addition to the widening and other improvements
included in Alternative C1, this would improve the
entire alignment of this section of roadway to a 35 to
40 mph minimum design speed. (This would be the
same design speed as the improved section of the
highway below Right Fork, which is designed to 40
mph standards with a few curves at a lower speed.)
Section 2. Upper Canyon
While the environmental quality is still considerable
and important in this section, it does not limit possible
improvements to the highway as much as in the Middle
Canyon. A smaller range of proposed alternatives are
therefore necessary for this section.
A3. No Action--The No Action alternative for this section
would be the same as for Sections 1 and 2.
B3. Spot Improvements--The Spot Improvements
alternative for this road section would be the same as
described for road Sections 1 and 2.
D3. Widen and Improve the Existing Alignment--The entire
route would be widened to UDOT standards for a minor
arterial in mountainous terrain (Figure 1). Climbing
lanes would be constructed for a majority of the length.
The horizontal and vertical alignment would be
straightened to a minimum design speed of 35 to 40
mph. Signing and marking would be improved, and
additional recreational parking provided.
E3.
F3. New Alignment--Two new alignments to the north of
the existing road have been identified. One of these
would be selected for a new route in this section. Road
width would be based on UDOT standards for minor
arterials in mountainous terrain (Figure 2). A climbing
lane would be provided for the entire length of the
route. Alignment and gradient would allow a
minimum design speed of 40 to 50 mph. Signing and
marking would be improved, and recreational parking
provided as needed.
03. New Alignment--A new alignment to the south of the
existing road for a portion of the route would be
selected. This route would exit the existing road below
the Bear Lake overlook and rejoin the existing road just
below the residential area. Alignment and gradient have
been identified that would a minimum design speed of
40 to 50 mph. Signing and marking would be
improved, and recreational parking provided as needed.
A2. No Action--The No Action alternative for this road
section would be the same as described for Section 1.
B2. Spot Improvements--The Spot Improvements
alternative for this road section would be the same as
described for road Section 1.
D2. Widen and improve existing align men t--Widening of
the road and bridges to UDOT standards for a minor
arterial road in mountianous terrain would be done for
the entire length of this section subject to
environmental constraints (see Figure 2). Climbing
lanes would be provided in all possible areas (mainly in
the upper portions of this section). The alignment and
gradient would be improved to 50 or 60 mph design
speed. Improved signing and marking and additional
recreation parking will be provided.
Section 3. Rich County
These alternatives plus any other feasible alternatives
resulting from the scoping meetings on March 3 and 4 may
be evaluated and compared in the EIS for the project.
Graphic illustrations of the specific location of proposed
curve improvements, new alignments, etc., will be presented
at the scoping meetings.
Questions may be directed to James Naegle, UDOT
(801) 965-4160 or to Clifford Forsgren, CH2M HILL (801)
363-0200.
This section has fewer environmental constraints to
road improvement. The Sunrise campground and Bear Lake
viewpoint near the summit are important features to be
protected. The existing road is below standard in width, has
Page 3
�BEAVER MOUNTAIN
END
TUDY
~GARDEN
CITY
LOGAN
CANYON
SECTION 3
LOWER TWIN BRIDGE
WOOD CAMP.
~Q
(j-'\'O
~t;
'\j
,
BEGIN STUDY
RIGHT FORK
Figure 1
STUDY SECTIONS
C1I 5:1 SlOPE
29' MIN 55 MPH
24 ' MIN 50 MPH
111' MIN 40 MPH
urMIN 35 MPH
(2) SLOPE VARlES10:1 TO 5:1
(A) EXISTING
24-29' 55 MPH
20 -24' 50 MPH
15 -1"
40 MPH
13-11' 35 MPH
40'
(1')
RECOVER
AREA
(2')
8'
12'
~~~~~--~--~~
8'
__--~~__~r-~~
RE-C-O-V-E-R-ly~
AREA
(B) STANDARD
(HOURLY VOLUME OVER 250)
RECOVERY AREA
34 '
5'
12'
12'
5'
.~--:....-.----.....;..------.:....--~S:,
(C) MODIFIED STANDARD
Figure 2
TYPICAL SECTIONS
�
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/131">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/131</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
4129502700
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
2917852 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
Fact sheet for Logan Canyon, Feburary 1987
Description
An account of the resource
Fact sheet for Logan Canyon prepared by CH2M Hill on Feburary 1987 explaining the reasons for improvements, and the proposed alternatives for each section including maps and graphs.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Forsgren, Clifford
Naegle, James
Subject
The topic of the resource
Traffic engineering
Roads--Design and construction
Logan Canyon Study
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
1987-02
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 29 Folder 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/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
MSS148VIIIB29_Fd6_Item 26.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/f18498c1149acf10feaf0aae8d1a8076.pdf
780f698a8ddc4ba224f5dd1855202e25
PDF Text
Text
�
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/60">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/60</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
2186952952
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
40242993 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
Grid map of Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Grid map of Logan Canyon, scale 1 inch.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Christensen, Leon
Subject
The topic of the resource
Cartography--Utah--Logan Canyon
Logan Canyon Study
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Maps
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 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/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_Fd9_Page_6.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/3d6ff3d966f70a9c28eb6a7ce384ba69.pdf
000bb71612f5c5ec22029533e7d37362
PDF Text
Text
~-
.. -
EDUCATION CAMPAIGN
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon, Cache Anglers,
Logan Canyon Coalition, Bridgerland Audubon Society,
Willow Creek Ecology
Land Management in Logan Canyon
W e, in Cache Valley, are extremely for tunate to
have Logan Canyon and surrounding public lands in
our backyard. While there are some private and state
lands in the Canyon, most is federal land . It is owned
by yo u, the citizen.
As an owner, yo u have the responsibility to be
aware of past, present and proposed activities that can
affect the long-term health of this land for future generations. The purpose of this publication is to bring
these issues to you and help you become involved.
.
-- - p
J
CII ..
-
Cache Anglers
U
fCCKOG' ~
,-,
S everal public interest organizations are involved
in protecting Logan Canyon.
For 30 years Citizens for the Protection of Logan
Canyon (CPLC), and la ter Logan Canyon Coalition
(LCC), have worked to protect the canyon from
excessive and costly highway construction.
The mission of Bridgerland Audubon Society, a
Cache Valley institution, is to conserve, enhance, an d
enjoy the na tural environment with special emphasis
on birds and their habitats for the benefit and education of humanity and for the biological d iversity of
the earth.
Willow Creek Ecology is an organization devoted
to better management of p ublic lands th rough scientific research, ed ucation and d irect action.
Cache Ang lers is an organization dedica ted to the
protection and promotion of local fisher ies and
their habitats.
~<>
BOII/u'vi lle ell IIIrroof
•
The Logan River is a quality source of life.
"Your present localion is designed to
you for a refuge, a place of rest; therefore see to it that ye pollute 110t your
inheritance, for if you do, you might
expect that the judgement of heaven
will be poured out upon you."
- Brigham Young
�.M LOGAN CANYON
-D
EDUCATION CAMPAIGN
Highway Construction
Proposed improvements of Highway 89 have been the most visible issue in Logan
Canyon for a long time. Although conservation gro ups wanted to protect the canyon
from excessive highway construction, they also recognized the need for improvements, such as bridge replacements. Two bridges (Burnt and Lower Twin) have been
replaced . The next construction project is the section between Franklin Basin and
Tony Grove, including the replacem ent of Upper Twin Bridge. This is a sensitive area
since the Logan River is very d ose to the highway. Protection of the river w ill be a crudal concern. Accident statistics for the last three years in this area indicate that 70%
of the collisions are animal impacts and the remainder are cars off the road or car
swipes with no fatalities, showing that speed is a major factor in canyon accidents. A
wider and straighter highway will enc01.lrage drivers to increase speeds, resulting in a
more dangerous highway. While highway construction remains a very important
issue, it is time to broaden our concern to other issues that impact the canyon and its
watershed . What are these issues impacting the natural beauty of Logan Canyon?
Wild and Scenic Logan River
The Logan River has recently been found eligible by the Forest Service for Wild and
Scenic classification. Parts that are eligible are a six mile section from the Idaho stateline to the Beaver Creek confluence and a 20 mile section from the Beaver Creek confluence to Third Dam. A suitability study is next; and following that, an act of
Congress to make the designation official. This process will be long and likely contentious; particularly in a state with an unsympathetic congressional delegation and
many opponents who have and will make fa lse claims and accusations. The Wild and
Scenic Act is an excellent way to protect a river in its natural state and its current form
of management. It still allow s for private property rights, hunting and fishing, and
other activities that will not harm its remarkable qualities. Certain restrictions do
apply that must be spelled out ~n a negotiated management plan. Hundreds of communities across the nation have benefited from such designations. The Logan City
Council has been asked to support the Wild and Scenic designation, and we hope they
will recognize what an ...... OW' river is to our community.
-
-
LOGAN RIVER
----
WIW&SCENIC
....
,--
~-
,
t
The Federal-State Land Swap
In January, 1999 the long-debated land swap between the State of Utah and
the federal government became official. The State of Utah became the owner of
apprOximatel y 3(XX) acres near Beaver Mountain and became the landlord for the
Beaver Mountain Ski Resort. Since the mission for the School and Institutional Trust
Lands Administration (SITLA) is to provide income to the public school system, they
could sell the land to the highest bidder. Their mandate is to manage lands for thei r
"highest and best use." This swap has raised concerns among a number of groups.
Bddgerland Audubon, Logan Canyon Coalition (LCC) and Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Ca nyon (CPLC), the Great Western Trail Association, Backcountry
Horsemen, Cache Valley High Markers and the owners of Beaver Creek Lodge cooperated to form the Beaver Creek Land Alliance. Their primary interest is preserving
the scenic vistas and maintaining public access. Although there are county zoning regulations for private lands, SITLA can override local zoning regulations and develop
land according to its agenda.
........ 5<_.-.
Could tile land around Beaver MO
llrlta;n be developed Wit/I cOlldomi"iums a1ld mufti-millio1l dollar IIomes ? YE S!
Motorized Recreation
In recent years the dramatic rise and ind iscriminate use of motori zed recreation, ind uding ATV's and snowmobiles, has resulted in tremendous impacts. Wildlife and Forest Serv ice enforcement personnel are overwhelmed with countless incidents of new "ghost" roads being
forged, vand alized gates, hillsides being denuded, stream banks destroyed, and illegal travel in wilderness areas. Often it is a small per.:entage of users who are the violators. But as the total number of off-road vehicles increases, more impacts are guaranteed and the threa t to
w ildlife increases. While such vehicles are valid and legal forms of recreation, there will come a time when the Forest Service w ill need to
restrict their access.
�LOGAN CANYON'"
EDUCATION CAMPAIGN -0Erosion due to lack of vegetative cover from grazing i1l tile
North Rich Callie Allotment.
Impacts i1lclllde ground cover
reduced to 23%, 1055 of soilllll tri~
ell ts vital to plan t Viability, and
tile tra mpli1lg of springs arid
small stream chari nels to the
pairlt where they no longer exist.
These problems are serial/sly
compoll rlded by tile irrespollsible
lise of ORV's over these lands.
-
-
Livestock Grazin g
Seventy-two thousand acres of Logan Canyon are divided into 25 allobnents for grazing
sheep and cattle. Some areas are being overgrazed and stream banks in riparian areas are being
trampled, resulting in increased sediment, loss of aquatic life, and the loss of stream side
tree/shrub canopies. This results in warmer water temperatures and loss of fish habitat.
Watershed d egradation by livestock has been documented on forest lands in Spawn Creek in
the Temple Fork drainage. During the summer of 1997, Spawn Creek had four times the allow~
able count of fecal coliform, at precisely the same time as
These bacteria are indi~
~_ _ cators of disease.causing organisms for-such diseases
Allotments near
tospirosis. Another example is the Little Bear Sheep and
summit. Impacts include ground cover reduced to 23%, loss of soil nutrients vital to plant v i a ~
biIi ty, and the tramp ling of springs and small stream channels to the point where they no longer
exist.
A loss of diverse ground covers results in the decline of wild life such as snowshoe hare and
grouse. This fu rther results in a decline of animals that prey on small mammals, such as the
goshawk. In fac t, goshawk numbers have decreased so significantly that it has been listed as a
sensitive species, wi th several attempts since the ea rl y 90's to list it as endangered. The Forest
Service has recen tly undertaken a project to provide a managemen t d irection that maintains or
restores fu nctioning forested habitats for this bi rd .
National Forests are OUT watersheds, the source of three- fourths of our d rinking water in the
West. A growing sector of the public is demand ing a return to pristine mountain streams ra ther
than streams and meadows tra mpled into mud and littered with cow manure. Improved care
and proper management are imperative for the l ong~ t e rm health of our forests. Not onl y is g raz~
ing degrad ing o ur public lands when improperly managed, but it also heav il y subsidized by
the you, the taxpayer. For every $3 in profit made by the permitee, taxpayers contribu te $4 in
subsidies; hence, ano ther reason for needed reforms.
-
Grolllld cover after grazi/lg.
Ground COl'tr witllout grazing.
Logging
The Bear Hodges Ana lysis project includes plans by the Forest Service
to log nearly 3.5 million board feet of timber near the summit of Logan
Canyon. This tree harvesting project in both the T. W. Daniels Forest
(USU) and Wasatch·Cache National Forest, is an attempt to "restore" the
spruce-fir forest to an iII-defined "historic" condition through si lviculture
tech niques. Si lvicultu re is the practice of growing and cutting timber.
Managi ng pine ba rk beetle infestation by logging this stand of old trees
is also a component of this project. It is a doubtful practice, one that has
fail ed to control beetle infestations on most other forests; and it is often
used as a rationalization for timber harvests. It also ignores the larger his~
to ric role that pine ba rk beetles play in the ecosystem. Dead and d ecay~
ing trees provide necessa ry wildlife habitat and nutrients for new forest
growth . There is a larger concern that trees in the Bear Hodges area are
a remnant old g row th fo rest, one that sho uld be preserved for the sake of
biological d iversity.
ClearC/lt ill Bear Hodges area tllat liaS /l ot regt!1lerated ill 30 years.
�LOGAN CANYON,
EDUCATION CAMPAIGN
"Destroying the last wild
places ... is like tearing the
last pages from the Bible."
- Robert F. Kennedy
-
Updating the Forest Management Plan
The Forest Service is currently in the process of revising its forest management plan. This will provide direction for forest management for the next 10-20 years. The
new plan will focus on ecosystem management, a form
of management that considers all the impacts on the
long-term sustainability of the forest, and one that could
possibly conflict with the current "multiple-use" concept
of permitting logging, grazing, mining, and all types of
recreational activities. Resolving these issues in a way
that reflects more than special interests will require public input throughout the development of a new forest
plan. Citizens must be part of this process if they want
healthy forest lands for future generations.
Input from grassroots organizations must move forward. If you care and want to know more about these
issues, send us your name and address on the form
below.
We will inform you when there are crucial issues
where citizen input is essential. Your name will remain
confidential. If the Forest Service knows there is broad
support in the community, they will be more likely to
act in the broad public interests, rather than special
interests. Only through citizen action, with the help of
experts in OUf community, can we lobby for meaningful change in forest management.
YES! I'd like to help support the
Logan Canyon Education Campaign
"The last word ir/ ignorance is the person who says
of an on;mal "what good;s it ?" if the land mechanism as a whole ;s good, then every part is good,
whether we understand it or not ... who but a fool
would discard seemingly lIseless parts? To keep
every cog and wheel is the first precaution of inte/-
Tour contributions 10 directly to contlnulaa education
proJects lor savlne: Lopn Canyon.
H~IT 's a In ded,,'tJb~
(Ullnbution
Name' __________________
a
Add ress ________________
o
S<rnl _ _ _ rop i ~ of t hi~
newsle tter to rcdistnbutc
City, Stilte, Zip ____________
a
ru t ~ on you r ~mo, 1 Itst
a
r UI me on tt.;, mo iling ItSt for:
ligent tinkering."
a
- Aida Leopold
E-mail _______________
Contribution S ____________
Logan Canyon Education Campaign
P.O. Bt))o; 6001 North Log.In, Utah 84341-6001
BndgerlMldAudubon
a
Cad'" Anglers
a
C'lIlt'llS for the 1
'1'01(,(,lIen
of
a
a
Los-m Canyon
I",,*,n Canyon C"ahtiOIl
AU t.... lIbm·c
�r
.-----------------------------------------------, ~
CANYON VIEWS
Volu.me 2
Citizen fo r the Protection of Logan Canyon
December, 1996
VIEWFROM
THE CHAIR
By LAUREN KEL LER
C PLC continues to broaden its scope in our quest
to protect the beauty and d iversity o f Logan Canyon.
The Winter Recreati on Group. invo lving skiers,
snowmobilers and other agencies, will be meeting
again after a summer break. The first phase of the
road design and construction, specifically the
bridges, will be und er way th is spring. Cattle and
sheep grazing in the Canyon is being studied. The
Scenic Byways are in the final design phase and, of
course, we arc always in need of fund s.
One of our many concerns regarding to Logan
Canyon is the shared ski and snowmobile use of
trai ls and back country. For the past year we have
been working with the Chamber of Comm erce, the
Cache Vall ey Hi gh Markers (a Snowmobi le Club),
and the Forest Servi ce. One of the objectives of thi s
gro up is to submit a proposal to the Forest Service
which would restrict the use of snowmobiles in some
areas. The group is also looking for ways to
Improve trai l etiquette, safety, parking, public
awareness of motori zed restrictions and wilderness
boundari es, and interaction between skiers and
I n this issu,.e...
S HARED USE FOR S KJER S AND
SNOWMOBILERS . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
BRIDGE CONSTR UCTION BEGINS IN
THE S PRING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
VOL UNTEERS ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MEMBER S HIP . ........ . ... • ... . ....
2
2
3
3
snowmobiles. C PLC would al so like· to improve
communication between ski ers and the Forest
Service, so we are hosting a "meet the Forest Service
Ski Day" . On Dec. 26, from 9 am through 12 noon,
we wi ll be at the Tony Grove parking lot with hot
chocolate. The Forest Service will be there, ready to
li sten to any of your ideas and concerns. It is
important that we let them know there are a Jot o f
sk iers in Cache Valley and that there are a lot of
ski ers who use Logan Canyon.
Also, along thi s theme, we would like to
encourage skiers of all levels to keep a ski log for the
winter. We need to know the date, the location, the
length of the ski, number o f people, and any
comments. For example: Jan . 3 - Temple Fo rk - 4
persons - 3hrs. - enj oyed the qui et. Only one person in
the group should record the data. This informati on
will greatly help us in determining where people ski
and when and how to best make recommendation to
the Forest Service abo ut the travel plan . Thi s is very
important infomlat ion so at the end of your ski season
pl ease send us your log.
As we come to the end o f the fi rst year being
members of the CAT (Cooperati ve Advisory Team
Team advising UDOT on road construction and
bridge design) we feel we have chosen the best way
to effect changes in the future construction of the
Canyon. There were certainly fru strating times, and
you may recall reading the article in the paper this last
fall about our unhappiness with specifi c changes in
the bridges design. However, UDOT continues to
make concessions, many as a result of that article.
We feel good about the designs for Burnt and Lower
Twin bridges. We would have liked to have changed
the railing design, but compromises from both sides
were needed . As a result of o ur experiences on the
CAT Team, we are even more aware of how
important it is to have experts on our side. We would
like to thank Palri ca Ho uston for her expertise in
structural engineering and bridge design. Her
"?
�2 CANYON VIEWS
continued contributions wi ll help us in the many
phases ahead.
CPLC plans to take an active role in the comi ng
year in Rangeland Health and the Forest
Management Plan issue.
We have felt very good about our relationship
with the Forest Service and our input into the Scenic
BY'vays Proj ect. I went on many field trips with the
Fo rest Service to visit specifi c sites and di scuss
proposed action. I felt the Forest Service was open
to alternatives and ideas which would upgrade
services and decrease any visual impacts the project
might have on the beauty of the Canyon. The proj ect
will begin this next summer.
As yo u can see, C PLC is involved in many
different and important efforts to protect Logan
Canyon. To stay infonned and involved requires
long hours on the part of many individuals. We have
been fortunate to have people who are willing to
give their time and their expertise to help advance
the purpose of OUI organization. Aside from time
and know ledge, we need money. We need funds to
send out newsletters, pay for legal advice, hold
meetings, and so on. We are a tax exempt
organi zation and have a 50 1 © (3) status. If you
have not renewed your membership, please show
your support for the protection of Logan Canyon and
do so. Any additional contributi ons would be very
much appreciated.
Our focu s on Logan Canyon is specific;
however, the issues related to the Canyon are very
broad. If you have concerns about any aspect of the
Canyon please feel free to let us know.
SHARED USE FOR SKIERS
AND SNOWMOBILERS
BY LAUREN KELLER
With the shortage of snow in the lower
elevations last winter, there was a vyi ng between
skiers and snowmobilers for trail head parking and
trail use. Because of this situation, along with the
potential of opening up trail head parking in the
Temple Fork area through the development of the
Sceni c Byways project, a Winter Recreat ion group
was started. The purpose of the group was to see if
skiers and snowmobilers cou ld put together a
proposal for the Forest SeTVice to amend the current
Travel Plan.
Last October we called for a meeting of interested
ski ers to vo ice their opinion and concerns about the
shared use of Logan Canyon with snowmobil ers. The
feeling from the meeting was that skiers would like
more areas in which to ski without the no ise and
pol lution associated with snowmobiles. Skiers would
also li ke the areas that are off limits to snowmobil es
to be better patrolled.
During the winter, CPLC met with Cache Vall ey
High Markers, the Chamber of Commerce, and the
Forest SeTVice. Some areas of concern were
identified: Solitude for skiers seeking a nonmotorized experience, adequate parking, plowing of
parking areas for skiers, e.g. Wood Camp, vo lunteers
to patrol and disperse informat ion, signs to indi cate
motori zed use restrictions, impacts on wi ld life, and
enforcement of the ex isting travel pl an.
There are two specifi c things you can do to help
us. First, as mentioned eariler, keep a sk i log for thi s
winter. We need to know where you were skiing, the
date, how many hours and any comments you wou ld
li ke to make. Also indi cate what level of skier you
are, beginning, intermediate, advanced . Please make
sure only one person in your group records the data.
Then at the end of your ski season, please send it to
us. The other thing that would be very he lpful is if
you could attend our ski outing with the Forest
Service. We are trying to get skiers of all levels to
come and meet the Rangers in our district and tell
them about your concerns and ideas regarding winter
recreat ion use in Cache Valley. Also j ust come fo r
fun and to bum off any excess holiday treats. The
more ski ers the Forest Service sees are interested in
Logan Canyon the better. Dec 26th, 9 am at Tony
Grove parking area. We will be there through 12
noon, so come anytime.
�3 CANYON VIEWS
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION
BEGINS IN THE SPRING
BY SHA WN SWANER
It is our relationship with UDOT personnel that
has been the largest factor in our success. UDOT
engineers have responded positively to public input
and recommendation from the CAT Team. There is
still much to be wary concerning to how well the
contractor wi ll follow the guidelines set forth in the
Record of Decision, by the Forest Service and by the
CAT Team, during bridge construction. Cooperati on
and compromise is new for both sides of the tabl e. If
we can work through thi s process with the end result
being sa fe bridges and relatively little di sturbance to
a beautiful canyon, then we wi ll be successful. If we
are not successful, then we will have other options
open to us for the future phases of the road
construction project. It is certainly worth giving the
process a chance.
As March draws closer and the im age of
bu lldozers in Logan Canyon grows increasingly
vivid , I am left wondering ifCPLC has chosen the
right path. Maybe it is not too late to dusl off the
monkey-wrench or chain myse lf to a road grader.
However, on careful consideration, I think CPLC
has chosen the onl y reali stic course of action. By
working with UDOT, we have assisted in the
development of plans that will result in the least
amo unt of environm ental impact and will decrease
the severity of the unavoidable impacts associated
with road construction . To understand how this has
com e about, I must first explain the philosophy
behi nd our approach to UDOT, the result of our
As always we are looking for people who would
work over the last year, and our concerns and
like to help either with the newsletter, sk i and
predictions for the fut ure.
snowmob il e group, our annual meeting and other
In Apri l of 1994, I was privileged to meet wi th
miscellaneous stuff. If you are interested and have
Governor Leavitt and discuss concerns about the
even a couple of hours, let us know, 752-0706.
Canyon project. The intent of the meeting was to
Lauren Keller.
present the Governor with a petition opposing the
Canyon constnlcti on project. The result of that
contact was a meeting with UDOT Admini stration
whi ch took place the followin g month. I met with
We do not send o ut membership renewal notices
a dozen o f UDOT' s senior management and those
as we do not have the fund s or the time. So we are
directly involved with the Logan Canyon Project. At
thi s meeting was laid the groundwork for the co unting on you to renew you membership at thi s
expansion of a working agreement between the US time. We have continued to keep the cost as low as
Forest Service and UDOT which allowed for citi zen possible so that many people are able to receive the
invo lvement in the design process of the Canyon newsletter. In order to cover expenses other than the
project. The result of all of this was the creation of newsletter, we count on additional contributions. We
the CAT (Cooperating Advisory Team) which would do have a tax exempt status with the IRS. We
have input in the design phases of the project. Also appreciate your support.
from this meeting I learned three things of value.
Membership form
First, large scale public involvement can be futil e if
$25 _$50
$10 Member leuel
Other
not properly directed; second, the groundwork was
laid for d irect involvement with UDOT through the Name _________________
CAT Team; and third, it was possible to established Address_ _ _ _ _-,--_ _ _=-___
a non-confrontational relationship with key UDOT City, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,State_ _Zip, _ _ __
personnel.
Phone_---,..,-,-,,--_ _-,---Yes, 1 would like to uolunteer_ _ _ _ _ __
VOLUNTEERS
MEMBERSHIP
�Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Canyon
P.O. Box 3608
Logan, Ulah 84323 · 3608
Vlrqlnl8 Parter
41S0lJth4lJOEast
Logan Ur 8432 1
BULK RATE
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
Pennit Ng 39
Logan. Utah
�•
•
CITIZENS FOR THE PROTECTION OF LOGAN
CANYO~
NEWSLETTER
Dear "citizens",
Your presence and enthusiasm at Utesday's meeting i s a welcome and encouraging
indication that we can have a major impact on the outcome of the zoning change
meetings. We have put together some suggestions for i mmedi ate action:
PETITIONS
Please take them to your neighborhoods and/ or places of work as soon as possible.
As you will note, we have decided to encompass opposition to both Stump Hollow zoning
chan ge as well as the Right Hand Fork zoning change. Return them by mail ' or hand to
either
Ann Schimpf
Lee Rentz
715 N 3 E
Logan 753-0512
or
459 N 1 E
Logan 753-5076
or bring them to the October 14 meeting of the Cache Planning and Zoning Commission
and deli ver them to Ann. I f you need additi ana1 pet it ion forms or the "Stump Hollow
Development?1I summary sheet, please contact Ann or Lee.
Eighty-one of you signed up to receive a petition. If each obtains 25 signatures,
we will hear 2,026 voices in Cache County. Fifty signatures would add up to 4.052
recommendations! Please do not hesitate to cal l one of us to clear up any confusion
about the issues which may arise.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
A letter to the Herald Journal is a powerful message which potentially reaches about
10,000 readers--and the paper will print everyone.
Write to them at 75 West 3 North,
Logan. If you have been shy to write on previous issues. now is an excellent and
critical time to break your s ilence.
ATTEND THE CACHE COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON OCTOBER 14
The decision on zone change requests for Right Hand Fork will be made at that time.
The Stump Hollow decision has been postponed until the November meeting. Watch the
legal notices in the newspaper on Sunday, October 10 to find out the place and time
of the Right Hand Fork discussion.
It will begin sometime between 2pm and 5pm.
The
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon will run ads in the newspaper and spots on
the radio encouraging everyone to attend. We feel that although the structures under
consideration at Right Hand Fork do not present the negative economic and environmental
threat that the Stump Hollow plans do, the precedent of a zoning change is the basic
key which will allow roadside development. Because of this, attendance at the
October meeting is just as important as your presence at the November meeting.
Please speak up at ' the meeting.
We need the strongest impact possible.
WRITE OR CALL YOUR PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSIONERS
Let your feelings be known directly to them before the meeting. If you know any of
them, great, but contact them even if you have never met.
Russ Kearl, chairman
Oon G. Williams
Aaron P. Leishman
Ray Hugie
258 South Main
Logan, UT 84321
Granville E. Barlow
140 West Center
Lewiston, UT 84320
258-2652
10th North 376 East
Smithfield, UT 84335
563-5604
E. Jay Christopherson
585 South Main !
..
Providence, UT 84332
752-5453
319 East 1st North
Box 242
Wellsville, UT 84339 Logan, UT 84321
245-3323
752-2008
Cyrus M. McKell
1336 East 1700 North
North Logan, UT 84321
753-1556
�•
•
2
WRITE OR CALL YOUR COUNTY PLANNER
R ck Johnson
i
179 North Main
Logan, UT 84321
752-8327
WRITE OR CALL YOUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ma ri on 01 sen
Ted Ka rren
8640 South 200 West
1656 East 1140 North
Logan, UT 84321
752-7834
Paradise. UT
245-3309
Robert Chambers
331 East 50 North
Smithfield, UT
563-6151
POSI TION STATEMENT
The position statement committee met on Thursday night to formalize the statement
to be presented to the Cache County Pl anning and Zon ing Commission on beha lf of the
Citizens to Protect L n Canyon. If you would l ike to read the statement. please
oga
call An n at 753-0512.
ENLIST YOUR FRIENDS
More petitions and nStump H
ollow Development?!! summary sheets may be obta ined from
Ann or Lee. We wi ll be glad to add many more names to the mailing li st.
ADVERTISEMENT
We particularly need to get the word to the smaller towns in Cache Valley.
If you
are willing to post IIStump Hollow Deve l opment" sheets in fa r corners and/or travel
for petit i on s i gni ng , please ca ll (aga in ) An n or Lee to get more materia l s .
NEWSLETTER
Another will be sent as soon as there i s news to share.
YES, WE NEED CONTRI8UTIONS !
We wou l d apprec i ate any dona ti ons you could gi ve to help our public ity effort
(ma iling cos t s . printing cos ts, radio ti me, and Xerox; ng cos t s al l add up! )
ill accept cac h or check
L Re ntz, t he chairperson of the Media Committee, w
ee
donations at:
459 North 1st East
Logan, UT 84321
Make checks payabl e to:
Lee Rentz (C iti zens for the Protecti on of Logan Ca nyon)
STEER ING COMMITTEE
Ann Sc himpf
715 North 3rd East
Logan, Utah
753-0512
Lee Rentz
459 North 1st East
Logan, Utah
753-5076
,, -
Alice Lindahl
48 Mar i ndale
Logan, Utah
753-1248
�•
A PETITION OPPOSING ZONING CHANGES IN LOGAN CANYON
We, as citizens of Cache County. recommend that t he request for a change from zone
designation FR-40 (forest recreation) to pun (planned unit devel opment) at Stump Hollow
be denied. We further recommend that the land at Right Hand Fork in Logan Canyon remain
an FR-40 lone. We feel that these de velopments would i mpose costs on the vast majority
of Cache residents which would greatly outweigh the benefits to a few people .
A f ev/ of t he issues are:
1. The cos t of county services provided for Stump Ho ll ow \'1Qu l d not be met by its own
residents (through ta xes) for 15-20 years, so ta xpayers l'Iou ld have t o bear the burden.
2.
Water and sewage problems at Stump Hollow have not been adequately eva luated and they
pose a threat to the watershed.
3. A zoning change would set a precedent and open the rest of the canyon to development.
4. Cache County residents would lose a very valuable and much loved recreational land
if the canyon is developed for commercial purposes. Fi shermen, snowmobilers, hikers,
hunters, cross - country sk iers, picnickers, touri st s, rock hounds, and photographers
enjoy l ogan Canyon in its present state .
We want to secure these mounta in lands for the futu re .
NAME
STREET ADDRESS
TOWN
PHONE
�•
NAME
•
STREET ADDRESS
TOWN
CITIZENS FOR THE PROTECTTOIl O LOGAN CANYON
F
PHONE
�•
•
STUMP HOLLOW
DEVELOPMENT ?
A private owner plans to erect condominiums. cabins, a restaurant. gas station, and
motel on 477 acres in Stump Hol l ow. To do this, he has to get a recommendation for
rezoning from FR-40 (forest recreation) to PUD (planned unit development) from the
Cache County Pl anning and Zoning Commission.
Negative Consequences of the Devel opment
• A possible contamination of downstream waters because of soi l inadequate for
septic tanks .
•
Acc'ording to Pau l Woodbury (Utah Di vis i on of Wildlife Resources). this land i s
now summer range fo r el k. deer, moose, grouse, and snowshoe hare. There woul d
obvious ly be a negat i ve effect upon these and other anima l s on both the private
and surround i ng Forest Service lands.
• Stump Holl ow now prov i des a year-round m x of hikers, snowmobilers, hunte r s, and
i
cross - country skiers with recreational opportunities. The development wou l d make
Stump Hol l ow undes i rab l e fo r these forms of recreation.
• Logan Canyon has remained an excepti ona lly beautiful wild place . The pressures
for urbanization threaten the very natural qualities that the developer uses as
his strongest sel l ing point.
• According to Cache County Planner, Rick Johnson, the county's taxpayers woul d
have to subsidize the developme nt for at l east 15-20 years before taxes from
the project met the ser vi ces rendered.
Right Hand Fork Homes?
Anot her pri vate l andowner wants his land rezoned from FR-40 to allow bui l ding
several cabins and homes near the highway at Right Hand Fork.
Where Will It Stop?
A zon i ng change here . another one there ... Pretty soon, the worl d begi ns .
l ooking the same whet her you ' re i n Los Angel es, Detroit . or Logan Canyon .
Development everywhere . . . merely to make a few bucks . Let ' s not all ow
these proposed devel opments t o set a precedent for others. Keep Logan
Canyon green!
What You Can Do!
Sign the pet i tion !
Write a l etter to the ed i tor:
The Hera l d Journal
75 West 3rd Nor t h
Logan , Utah 84321
Write a letter of protest to the county planner :
Rick Johnson
Cache County Pl anner
179 North Main
Logan, Utah 84321
Attend the critica l publ i c hearings when they
come up.
for the Protection . of
�•
•
.1
,
, >,
".
,
~
,1 f
)
�I
C'J7Cf.:< 76J..~~r
THE
1
LOGAN
CANYON
BULLETIN
CITIZENS FOR THE PROTECTION OF LOGAN CANYON
JANUARY 1991
The Question of Logan Canyon
... is not as big as acid rain, or ozone depletion, to be sure-but it
might be an indicator. It can tell us how sincere we are, and how
thorough, in our '90s leaning toward the land. Here is a deep .
beautiful and winding canyon. gradually shallowing as it ascends
into an open country of high meadows and ridge-top forests. For
decades now this canyon has held a fairly mooest two-lane road
that winds eastward from Logan with the lay of the land.
eventually crests a 78oo-fool summit of the Wasatch Range, and
then drops swiftly in switchbacks to Bear Lake. The whole forty
miles, in any season, is a treat to the eye, because this is one of the
few Wasatch Front river canyons where the road has not become
the dominant feature of the landscape.
It still looks like respected country .
-- Tom Lyon
Logan Canyon: Here and Now
For the last thirty years there has been a drive to punch a wider,
straighter, faster highway through Logan Canyon. In 1961 , five miles of
the lower canyon were "improved"; in 1968, six more-up to the Right
Hand Fork. But then came the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) in 1970, and the road straighteners no longer ha ve a perfectly
free hand. Now they have to justify their plans, and di scuss alternatives,
and now we too have a say in what happens.
Under the requirements of NEPA, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) has been researching the environmental impacts of different
construction plans. After several years and the expenditure of over three
quarters of a million dollars, they've come up with a draft study that
doesn't specify a "preferred alternative." Unfortunately, their study, in the
view of many, has been marked by slipshod procedures, insufficient data,
and lack of consideration for the environment.
Now it is up to those of us who care about the beauty and intactness of
Logan Canyon to come forward and make a stand. Citizens for the
Protection of Logan Canyon have made their own study of the canyon
and have prepared the Conservationists' Alternative, which is incl uded in
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
We urge you to give the Conservationists' Alternative your careful
examination, to write a letter, and to make a statement at the public
meeting on the DEIS. You can make a difference!
�The Conservationists' Alternative
The goal of this alternative is a highway that fits into Logan Canyon with
minimal ecological disturbance and maximum safety, rather than a hi ghway
that moves the greatest number of people through the canyon at the highest
rale of speed. The Conservationists' Alternative meets this goal , but it is not a
do-nothing al ternative. Current roadway width and alignment wou ld be
maintained throughout the canyon. with the following exceptions:
Bridges and culverts re placed and widened to 28 feet, with all but
Lower Twin Bridges kept on the existing alignment.
• Turning lanes constructed at Tony Grove Recreation Area and Beaver
Mountain Ski Area.
• Climbing lanes constructed above Red Banks Campground, below the
state sheds, and in the Sinks area, but not at the Dugway.
• Increased traffic law enforcement.
• Slow vehicle turnouts and multipurpose parking constructed at several
locations.
• Roadbed raised near Logan Cave and in several other locations to avoid
spring fl ooding.
WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS ALTERNATIVE
What Can You Do to Help Protect Logan Canyon?
Support the Conservationists' Alternative.
Write a letter expressing your concerns.
Speak out at the public meetiog in Logan.
Writing a Letter is as Easy as One, Two, Three
First: Introduce yourself. Mention why you are concerned about Logan Canyon and
experiences you have had there.
Second: Support the Conservationists' Alternative. Also point out problems in the
DEIS. You can refer to the above lists for details, or write to us for more
infonnation.
Third: Put your return address on the lener, sign it, and date it.
Send your letter to :
James Naegle
Utah Dept. of Transportation
4501 South 2700 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84 11 9
To get a copy of the DEIS, call:
James Naegle
(80 I) 965-4 160
Letters must be mailed by February 1, 1991.
Letter-writing workshops will be held at A Book Store, 130 North 100 East, Logan
7:00 p.m., on Thursday, Jamlary 3; Monday, January 7; and Thursday, January 10.
Despite what some say, the road builders do "count votes." So speak out!
�Other Alternatives Considered in the DEIS
After careful study, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon concluded that
these alternatives would compromise safery, destroy the canyon's un ique
e nvironment, or both. These alternatives include:
• "Standard Arterial" - The widest. straightest. highest- speed alternative.
With wide shoulders and "recovery areas" adjacent to the road. well over twice as
much land wou ld be disturbed as at present. Large cuts would scar hillsides. and
the road would intrude into the river.
• "Mod ified Standa rd " - Identical to the Standard Arterial, except the roadway width would be somewhat less in the narrow and scenic middle section of
Logan Canyon. There would be fewer cuts than under the Standard Arterial .
• " Composite Alte rn ati ve l1 - A combination of the Standard and Mexlified
Alternatives. It is a late addition to the list of alternatives and retain s many severe
environ mental impacts, such as a climbing lane at the Dugway. It would also have
more adverse effec ts on streams in the upper pan of the canyon.
• "S pot Improvement" - Road width would not c hange; however, hillsides
would be cut to straighten curves, and climbing and turning lanes would be built
in environmentally sensitive areas.
• " No Action " - NEPA requires agencies to consider this alternative in a
DE IS. There are legitimate construction needs in Logan Canyon. however, so
conservationi sts have not supponed this alternative.
Shaded area shows one of the
highway cuts proposed under
several of the alternatives.
Unfortunately, these alterna ti ves and the DEIS itselr have some serious flaws, incl udin g:
• Disturbance of the river and loss of riparian habitats are not adequately addressed.
• Impacts on wildlife, especially fish. nongame species, and the threatened Maguire's Primrose, are weakly treated.
• Disposal of rubble. many thousands of cubic yards under some alternatives, is ignored .
• Greater accident frequency or severity is possible with increased speeds under some al tern atives; this
possibility is not addressed.
• Site-specific impacts are addressed vaguely; mitigation is put off until the "design ph ase" which is some
unspecified time in the future.
• Worst-case traffic projections are used to justify major modifications to the highway . yet Logan Canyon is
often only lightly travelled.
• The safety record for Logan Canyon is not compared with similar mountain road s; yet safety is a major
concern and is the rationale for some construction.
• Logan Canyon is nationally renowned fo r its scenery, and has been designated a Scenic Byway, yet th is
prominence is not di scussed.
Logan Canyon Cannot Speak for Itself
But you can speak for Logan Canyon.
A public hea ring on Logan Canyon is scheduled for T uesday, J anua ry IS, 1991. at the
Mt. Loga n Middle School Auditorium, 875 N. 200 East, Logan .
If you pla n to speak, you will need to a rri ve ea rly to sign up ir required.
The points that apply to letter writing also apply to your spoken comment. It is likely that
thetime allotted to each speaker will be about fiv e minutes. so plea se prepare your
comments accordingly. If you can both speak at the hearin g and write a lener. do both.
Even ir you do not pla n to spea k, please attend the hea ring to show your sup po rt fo r
Logan Canyon.
Printed on recycled paper
Photos by Scott T. Smith
�11
Improvement makes strai ght roads; but the crooked roads, without improvement, are roads or genius."
•. William Blake
LOGAN CANYON is at risk. LOGAN CANYON needs you .
..... '-
.,
P.O. 80. 3501
Logan, Ulah 84321
\
�I
•
LOGAN
CANYON
NEWSLETTER
November 8 , 1976
UPDATE :
NO l'IElI
\'Ie etil l
Citizens for the Protection
of Logan. Canyon
NE~'IS
dol'] 1 t know ...:hen the Plenn inA;
Z. CPLC lIoiJ:;ETIilG
CPLC held a meeting on I;ov. 4 to discus:;
plans tor the future o f our group.
~.
- '
C
WE PAsS {\
CPIJC
V
ol. I. No.3
...,-............-:-
ON STUMP HCLLQ\"
and Zonin g Com ~lssi o n will be asked to make
a dec ie1o~ on th i s im~ortont · 1ssue. Unfortunately , we may not have t hat information un til one week b~rore the P ~ Z
meeting it self . night Hand Fork zonin R
-- requea t - ~e in the 8a~e cnte~ory.
NOV.
.
The
followin g ~ene r al plan s of action ra .;ulte d :
_ 1. ' Fini.sh off the petition drive with
• Durst- of activity next- week:~nd (Hov, 13),
~'
have 2,100 a1gnaturea, ~d-..)uI~bl_.
th a t nu~ b cr ,
In e n effort to re a c h t h j ~
~o~l , CPLC members will man Ret1tion
booths 8 t ma ny 3i t ea around tb,, ' valley .
on S l;\t llrd ~y . No·r . 1 3 . U.S . U. will host
<l booth from Nev. 10 until 12th.
You
can help by collecting all thane petiti ons
yo u ha ve posted and by pre senting' the
i s ~u~ to-you-r---rt~~h-bo-p.hee Ii 1 r youo-l.~.~,,~.it-----I
no t already cfo ne s o. t;ven if your sheeta
h a'l,,' e only a f#!w n tl !'!l .l!'"SOn t ?!.efft--let t hem
be counted I
~
E!..ECTl orr RESULTS
The Nov, 2 election t" esu l t~ l",ere h o t.h
positive en d ne ltrt tive in t heir pot'ential
Petition s will be due in b y Mo nday, Nov. 1 5 . effects on CPLC ~oals . Bo'b Char.fb'J r s .....6%1-
,
2. Hold onto petition s ignature s until
the actual ? & Z m
eetin g and Commission
meeting ar e h eld.
,. Have ~ doo r-to-do or s~~atur~ campllip:n wh en we kn ow for nu re the actual date
of the relev 3nt P & Z me r. tin~ . Th is, hope tully, wil l ale r t re~~den ts e~ain ,
4. Turn jn cu r :; i r;n e d r.o :;it ion ntlltp. ment t o t he t;;Jche COlllmis r. ionl'!t"n on l'lbout
November 15.
5. Nin l'! CPLC ~embe r a volunte l'!.p. rl t o
serve aD a pe rmanent Itovernin" bo;,,;r d.
l'hc y
wil~ ensur~ th."t tht'! structure and proll;::-e85
of CPLC wi l l no t be lo s t if we hBve 9 lon~
wait for the " s t ump Holl ow" r:teetinl';.
t~ } 4- ye ~r Cnche C o mm i s~ion pos t,
vo tes.
7h is is
stronp;e a t
~o~d-~he
~ tllte~ le nt
against de velopmen 't
by 429
h as ma de the
of any candida t "
in Logan Canyon,
.1' . HOy f" heurer won the 2- year poet ae
eOMmiasionot-r---+b,v'}. al3 voter.) .-- Ria po~\ ition hn ~.; b~l'!n o n(> of non - c:>mmitt. l on
;
Sturn,!) lIol 1ow. It i G d i ff icult to say
how ~r. l' i'I~~.Hd--l. e-l\-n. --!m- t·h~1-" ... ue .
Our I :rl~ ..' tr.'it cl('ct i ~' n lor'1~ ' \.11\ [ : ; ;" rl' , ~' O:::! , I
dcfe"t • . lIe \" ''''0 '-I1 11in,.; to i ntl'o;iU <: f)
l e p;islation which would allow p',H'c h ass ot
the l.;:r.d. It would ha7.e 'bsen ad.:i6 d . tl'•.a-n,
to Cache Natio nal Fore~t.
STUJ.IPER- STICXERS
FINAL PETITICN DRIVE
Plea5e turn in your peti.ttons t o Lee or
Ann by Uovembcr 15, Hondar_ H!.~ht now we
,
,.
\'/e ' ve ordered 400 :TIors . They will be
avniVtble a t Mount ai n ~!an on North Main
~ n d at the Harmoniou s Living Cen t e r at
. U.S.U. for 501l .
�~' G
li
.;t:~~
·,.,:.t:..
_t:."
_h.:-. - ,,_
t:;.ack c;.~
~ r:.:: l~~'j'i..,:
..
'.', ""'
.
. ,- ..
..
l:--:""",}t.
~
_.:..!~'"
,r.:~'::,
,"
.)"'·~ !JO )~~
:,,~~ ........... _ _
,,'r. i:!. ~ .
::. ~
e"(."gv ft,,"
:..;:. l .. '-'
. ::\'. "f" :I\:.2
',,of
t~H:
't::"!:..E-
',ro c:-_
~t
~~~. ';'-:ll.l~.~ ~ :1~:::t -: ri8'~lt ~c!{""·.< t~@ rl l'l.~ ··
---~
·j :"'::: ~-:.:.OH'; :
!l! -!ix::.J
"2; a n d /~n i nr. met: ti't$'
.al-~
B r.Lc1.i,e~
Ian J.
n~~
A
udubon
Sj >;! :- n
---------
5..ut
VOl!
, w ,,,,,,-~,,
C
--
' o"
~~_
l:e!"G
· .,c.l.
.-
....
~,'~'
,.f:
:1'~
.. 6"'.F
T
:-:-illIr.g
". f'
'" ' .. 1._1 ~. rl ci& rg~ v':: ~t._ ~["J; ,
:.t.lrf' t o t~e E~r 9.1tj ~~t (ill::'
:.r \': :,:,i t~ you r commissiun: r.5.
50 . 0')
?3.2~
E"c.til ;,(> '!" S'a".k€;r s
<
_nnct.ve.
·,,-.;n- fr l./::• .::!£): a.n d n~i "·:.'~·'··t._
'~"'c~'r>:;
.. .
:.":J:i. -' f ;.=-';u~ ..... con.:;:-._.. J. { r r;'i.~.1...
-,-
50 . 0:;
': h :.
,~
'+ 1.48
'~'H /J li<
Prin ting
35. 54
7:",=-C ., £!J. p ~ }_ it:.s
19. 4D
77. 78
f or your he lp, a ll of :--ou . 'Ne 1.1.0 ..
:lU:nbe r abc\;;t 140 menw erlh }ee.~:J! :i..
('!(;I') t. S.
:';!'Vl6J.~ r E: r
b.ds .
h):'t;L
tU2 Nove~b ~ r
77 .50
mnpe.r s t i'!lte rs
3251. 70
EY.PE!;:s~:;
CFJ/i 11 :-,5 priIl t e d :
2 2 00 Stump Holle .....
fl y e:~
6 90 I,e w5L; t te r t.tl
N e'lfslettp.~·
)00 Dumper
#2
St ic ke r ~
:rany fl O.f.terB
.:ll"d 2 newspa p er a ds in t he Herula L ou::.
W.:: ~an a ntici p ate ('li E"::' $100 . 00
i1io rc if al l t he o lj I!r.d !1~\01 St\.~ m ;-e:
'It:'cb,rs sd l. Tr. i a Ilw ne y wil l ~e UQed
.{)t:' r a r o !:l.n C ne ~~ s 'pape:r spo ts ':.0 t,'.l;lrt
E
e7f: :,y one to t.'1 e df'. t.e of t n e F eo( ~ Dleetin~
~-
~fJ1£
•
...... - ~ J
15
petiti ~o
I')"'
iea~]ine.
D';::)R TO WOR
Lal: r y liye has take !, tn~ pt~c. CJ.(';11 tilt'r ..
:.!.' . ;t. i n ~~l! s'l!lle a ~l"! ... \_\ 0-'.:.l':: gcn er. !:.i!lg .:l l.:lrg e: n'.;ttI!n~: or !>i&ni.:.u' !>
i:i ", active app r oach ;:'0 peti~!(hlit"Z t·crt.;.......I.':
::l';!sE:::t''Iez a c~o;pliIl:e:l.::
Co Ol;!
is .1n e:(<--;;~]
~t.i::
others to £0 110\01 ,
575 FE- titj ons
500
YOU , ••
,
- .- .
GOVtRllHi G 30.l\!ID
He bb1 (1 ta.nn e r
753-001 3
.Oo \' id "A. . Ad a:n3
A '£ELEPHON E TREE h')'6 Lt"<':r. for:ne€.! !;,) ;:,Hl;:
l.il1 b e [Iot::.r LI.::<i U) "i;":>:1...... ,
..1·1jtr.ing Urj;t-~.,:: CQ::l<;!s up,
C~i.r; m er.lb~ r s
Lie Rer.tz
!i ~.a N 1 !.
l>ct: ~ n, UT [)4 32l
MI n Schimpf
·7'.5 N 3
,.
"
Alice !,1ndahl
:"-!S Ms.rinriale
753-1248
l,vgan, UT
753-1476
La:-ry E. Ny~ 245- 3010
\ol~ndy H. Pal o..... 563-3488
J~r. y ou~s
753-;278
i:tlte Packard
~~i! ~
753-}806
M Shult z
.
752 -5447
J·.' hn .L ;;cn.'..Ilt t• . 752-5447
·t1.<3.ney l~!.u=d'
rS2 - j917
A~r..
Schl.n.pf
·\ li("~ !..lr:.dahl
]':3-03 12:
753- J 2!. S
'Lee Rentz
753-5076
SI U
KPER
'JTUMP Il JU.O\l VROG.RESS REPORT
!
A no tice a ppeared i n cAe Herald Jerurl"l ul
No vember] saying t h e re "Will !H! .a pr(\e;n:~H
r cpor t (HI Stump ll ollo',J and Rtght Na.n;d l'-t'ri<:.
at tj,e N';'QWIlbe r 11 m ~eti ns o ( t he P & z.
-:.omrr..t s ~I'J:l (at 41:00 [I -m .) .
hccordin.s t(l RId,
Jchn'~o!l . Cou n ty Phl.nne r _ he ;.:Hl h'il p.r-t!£oet,tircg
t il l! ~ ol'r E: :Jponden ce he ha s [" ec cis~d f:-co;ll die
de.,Felopcrs concern ing tli'ese- lWO propos. ·ts
pl~s a l l relevant. ncwspaper S I.'!;
app e ar~d.,
Lee Rent.z w~U
meet:ing ,'
fee l
<
�,
\
-If
Turn In ;:>et ltl ons by Monday. tlover.lber 15
*
\;C!Y ;..h : he news med i a fo:", new cleve lcrments
.-----,
BULK RAT-E
J ~'
DGERlAtID AUDU60N SOC ! ElY
~ Ov Box 3501
{ ~c·~n . IJT 84321
postage
I
'.:J
LOCI·.11 c~
PERK IT #
~lerrl.ll
L1 brar7
Learning
Resow:<:ea P:rograa
utah Stat. Univ. UMC :JO
LoG"J! . l1I' 84322
l
1
!
Par d
¥
;
"
.
�Logan Canyon at Risk
The time has come to speak
out for the preservation of
Logan Canyon and Logan
River.
Two public seoping hearings
concerning the future of U.S.
Highway 89 through Logan
Canyon will be held locally in
early March. The first hearing
is set for Mar ch 3 at 7 p.m. in
the Mountain Fuel Supply
Building in Logan. The second
hearing will be held March 4 at
7 p.m. at the City Hall in
Garden City, Utah.
The hearings are required by
federal Jaw
as part of the
process being undertaken by
the Utah
Department of
Transporation (UDOT) and the
Denver-based
engineering
consuhanls, CR2M Hill. to
prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS ) th at
could recommend a larger and
faster highway through Log an
Canyon.
Developing
a
list
of
alternatives for the Logan Canyon highway is integral to the
EIS process . The final list of
alternatives will not be com·
piled until after receiving public
comment, which includes the
comments given at the scoping
hearings.
"It's Important that people
who love Logan Canyon for its
scenic beauty and recreational
opportunities attend these meet·
ings and speak out, " said Jack
Spence, a longtime northern
Utah conservationist.
"Without lots of comments
from concerned citizens, the
highway engineers will build
without regard to the area's
natural environment," Spence
said.
Study cost over
$500,000
The current highway scoping
hearings are a pa rt of CH2M
Hill's $500,000 study contract
with UDOT. The contract reo
quires t he engineering firm to
develop a transportation plan
for Logan Canyon 's highw ay
through the year 2010.
Previous studies have been
undertaken to explore major
highway construction in Logan
Canyon. The most recent study
ended in 1980 after local citizens
expressed their concern for the
canyon.
Another highway study in 1971
met a similar fate .
"Local residents should at·
tend the hearings to explain
Scoping Hearin g Schedule
Logan
March 3
7 p.m.
Mountain Fuel Supply Co. Auditorium,
45 E. 200 North.
Garden City March 4
Garden City Hall.
7 p.m.
Persons planning to speak at the hearing
will be asked to register as they enter the
building. Before public comments are taken,
UDOT and CH2M Hill will make a brief
presentation. Comm ents will be heard before
discussion is opened .
For persons unable to attend the hearing,
written comments will be accepted by April
6, 1987 at :
Mr. Clifford Forsgren , Project Manager
CH2M Hill/ Salt Lake City OUice
P .O. Box 2218
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
phone : (801) 363-{l2QO
how they enjoy Logan Canyon
as it is today," said Rudy
Lukez, chair of the Sierra
Club's Cache Group.
"We do not want to sacrifice
Logan Canyon so that a few
people can travel from Logan to
Bear Lake a few minutes
faster," Lukez said.
One of Logan Canyon's most
scenic and fragile sections is
from Right Hand Fork to Ricks
Spring (see map page 3). This
See Risk on page 2.
Memories travel the can yon
By C. L. Rawlin s
This much is certain : They were married the 28th of
June, 1911, and left Logan for a honeymoon at Bear
Lake. He drove the team and ~he probably indulged in
raptures over the canyon greenery and imposing
limestone walls. She may have slapped, daintly, at a
mosquito as they passed into the brief, cool shadow of
cottonwoods.
My grandfather would have pointed out the smokemarked overhang where teamsters hauling stone for the
Temple camped a generation before. The road left the
main canyon where it narrowed and climbed the Right
Fork to Willow Canyon. Alter descending the Temple
Fork , they stopped - as we always did on later trips at Ricks Springs for a brillia ntly cold cupful, which
Grandfather would have fetched with self·concious
courtliness.
Where they camped, I don' t know ; a meadow would
be chosen, with grazing for the team and a level
sleeping spot within the sound of water. Journeys then ,
when the desirability of automobiles was still hotly
debated, were often reckoned not in miles , but in nights
CITIZENS FOR THE
PROTECTION OF LOGAN CANYON
P.O. Box 3580
l oga n. Utah 8432 1
(801l1152-9 102 ,S6H9OfI (e l
SCOff T. Sm ittl
Winter solitude in Logan Canyon
spent out, under the sky.
The hill-and-meadowscapes below Beaver Mountain
were green then as now , with balsamroot and mule·ear
daisies yellowing the slopes. Past the mountain, the
road followed - and still follows for those with patience
- Beaver Creek In a gradual climb north to the summit.
Roads showed the sensitivity to slope and contour that
comes when bodies - horse or human - do the work of
traveling. Huge cuts and fills were too costly in those
sa me terms .
Alter frequent halts to rest the horses, they reached
the summit : occasion for a picnic and savoring the
hard·won view . The descent to St. Charles is steep and
my grandfather cam e from a family having much to do
with wagons; he checked the brake before laking the
grade.
The return took them a good. two days. Retelling, my
grandmother never complained of the heat, dust, jolts,
or slow pace. That there was a road at all seemed
sufficient miracle. The canyon , she often said, had
never been more beautiful.
C.L. Rawlins wr ites, T
eaches wr l T iJ and wor ks on field stUdies of acid
ln'
deposlt1on In The Win d River Ran ge i n Wvom i ng.
Bulk Rate-
U.S. Postage
PAI D
Logan, Utah
Perm it No. 104
�2 CITIZENS FOR TIlE PROTECT1ON OF LOGAN CANYON _ rEDURARY 1987
CITIZENS
FOR THE
PROTECTION
OF
LOGAN
CANYON
On March 3 and 4, you will have the opportunity to
present your views on Logan Canyon and its highway .
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon have
prepared the following list of recommendations for the
study . We urge you to attend the March scoping
meeting and support CPLC's position.
_ Protection of Logan Canyon's scenic beauty, fish
and wildlife habitat, rare plants, recreation sites and
naturalness must be a prime concern.
_ An Environmentlllmpad Statement (EIS ) must
be prepared for any significant road modification
proposals to protect Logan Canyon's natural surroun·
dings from haphazard modifications .
- Travel speeds between Right Hand Fork and
Rick's Spring should remain as currently posted . This
area is very scenic and too sensitive to permit any
significant roadway modifications.
- Bridges which cannot meet structural safety
requirements should be replaced when possible. These
bridges should be two lanes wide only. Minor
alterations to bridge approaches would be acceptable.
- Turning lines at Tony Grove Recreation Area
and Beaver Mountain Ski Area may be constructed to
The Logan Canyon Bulletin is published by Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon - a citizens
group of volunteers and non-profit organizations working toward long-term protection of Loga n
Canyon's scenic beauty, fish and wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities and naturalness .
The Jardine Juniper is CPLC's symbol. Located high above Wood Camp recreation area, this ancient
and beautiful tree represents Logan Canyon's recreational diversity and unsurpassed scenery.
Every few years, the utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) begins a study of Logan Canyon's
highway, U.S. 89. The last study in 1979 and 1980 was left uncompleted after highway expansion
proponents found strong local opposition to proposed roadway modifications. Since June, 1986, UDOT
and Denver-based engineering consultants, CH2M Hill, have been spending over $500,000 to prepare yet
another analysis of the roadway.
Perhaps one of the Rocky Mountain's most scenic roadways, Logan Canyon's highway provides many
people with access to numerous U.S. Forest Service campgrounds and picnic areas, fishing sites , and
snowmobiling and skiing trailheads. Throughout the four seasons, a visitor to Logan Canyon can find
beauty through these many recreational opportunities or simply by taking the drive from Logan to
Bear Lake .
The new UDOT study is moving toward the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) and this could be the first step toward major alterations in the Canyon . Before an EIS is
prepared, public scoping meetings must be held and citizens must be given a chance to present either
written or oral testimony on the study areas .
facilitate turning traffic .
_ Parklng areas should be built near Temple Fork
Road and Cottonwood Canyon (near Logan Cave) to
improve traffic flow and safety.
_ Additional warning signs should be placed along
the highway telling motorists about bicycle traffic,
pulloffs and pedestrian travel.
_ The road should be resurfaced and restriped
where required. This will improve through traffic
travel and nighttime safety throughout Logan Canyon.
_ No cUmbing (passing) lane should be built at the
Dugway (between Lower and Upper Twin ~ridges) . A
dim bing lane would affeel a very scemc area hy
requiring major cut and fill operations with unsighUy
retaining walls.
_ No rold modifications should alter the Logan
River's watercourse since the river is a major
recreational resource. Alterations could destroy im·
portant streambanks.
_ No new roads or major changes to the existing
road should be constructed from the Bear Lake
Summit to the Bear Lake Overlook. This highway
section is in a very popular and scenic recreation
area .
ation sites, the U.S. Forest
Service decided in the 1984
Wasatch·Cache National Forest
Continued. from page 1
Plan to "mana~e Logan Canyon
section contains important fish as a scenic highway." Forest
and wildlife habitat along with plans are approved and implemented only after a lengthy
spectacular cliff formations.
" Modifications to the highway public review process.
- even with simple widening could have disastrous effects on
the river's fish population,"
said Bill Helm, a fisheries and
wildlife professor at Utah State
University.
Logan Canyon provides ac" The Logan River is very
unique since it is a Class II cess to many Forest Service
waterway," Helm said. "This recreational sites. More than 30
means that trout can easily campgrounds and picnic sites
grow to large sizes and exist in are located along the roadway.
Most of the road is located
large populations.
along Forest Service property
" But, the river is fragile and
could easily be damaged, " in the Wasatch-Cache National
Helm said. " You just cannot Forest.
"If sections of the canyon are
mitigate everything ."
widened to permit increased
traffic speeds and wider turns,
then some of the forest's cam·
ping and picniC sites could
become less enjoyable," said
Bruce Pendery, chair of the
In addition to taking traffic Bridgerland Audubon Society's
counts and predicting future Conservation Committee.
traffic volumes, the current
To help promote long-term
study includes a scenery in- protection for Logan Canyon's
ventory of Logan Canyon. The scenery, fish and wildlife
study was completed by the habitat, and recreational opWasatch-Cache National Forest portunities, Citizens for the
Service's landscape architect, Protection of Logan Canyon
(CPLC) has been reorganized.
Clark Ostergard.
Ostergard's study shows that CPLC was instrumental in
sections of Logan Canyon, stopping
major
highway
particularly from the Right modifications in 1919-1980.
"CPLC's purpose is to proBand Fork to Ricks Springs,
cannot have si~nificant road vide a common base for aU
modifications Without damag- Individuals and organizations
ing irreplaceable scenic views .
who care about Logan Canyon's
Because of Logan Canyon's future ," said Pendery.
"CPLC supports a variety of
beauty and its popular recre-
Risk
Recrea ti on
Sites
Canyon
very scen ic
small
projects
for
the
highway, "
Pendery
said.
"These include several road
modifications, such as turning
lanes, replacement of unsafe
bridges and several new parking areas."
Perhaps CPLC's most interesting proposal involves designation of Logan Canyon as a
National Scenic Highway .
"While
National
Scenic
Highway designation does not
guarantee absolute long-term
protection of Logan Canyon, it
would increase the public's
awareness that we have a
national treasure in our
backyard," Lukez said.
DeSignation of U.S. 89 through
Logan Canyon as a National
Scenic Highway would require
action by the U.S. Congress.
Cit izens urged
to partiCipate
The March 3 and 4 hearings
will be the best chance for local
citizens to inOuence the
highway'S design .
"And without the voices of
those who love the canyon for
what it is today," Lukez said,
" those who want a larger
highway Soon may have their
way."
If people cannot attend or
speak at a hearing, written
comments will be accepted unW
April 6. Comments should be
sent to Mr. Clifford Forsgren,
Project
Engineer"
CH2M
Hill/ SaIt Lake City Office, P.O.
Box 2218, Salt Lake City, Utah
84101.
- Congress should designate Logan Canyon
Highway as Utah's first National Scenic Highway.
This designation would recognize Logan Canyon as a
scenic and recreational jewel similar to other
attractions in our National Park System.
- Logan River above Third Dam should be
considered for National Recreation al River
designation under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
This federal designation will protect the river's quality
for all future generations.
For more information, please write to Citizens fo r
the Protection of Logan Canyon, P .O. Box 3580, Logan,
utah 84321. Phone 801/152-9102 or 563-6908 (evenings) .
Funding for the Logan Canyon Bulletin is provided by
numerous individuals in northern Utah. We welcome
your support.
Contributor's to TM L.ogan Canyon BulleTin InclUde northern Utllh
residents Steve Flint, Rudy L.ukez, Bill Hel m, Jllck Spence, Bruce
Pendery-, C.L.. Rlwllns, Tom L.yon, Dllne Browning, Dennis Will Ind
Seon T. Smlltt (photogrlphy ), Jlne O' Keefe (Irtwork, copyr ig hted )
Ind John ReeVH (clrtography).
Traffic data weak
By Steve Flint
Highway modifications often are justified by using estimates
of future traffic patterns based on past traffic trends. However.
when Duduating gas prices and changing travel patterns are
considered, traffic flow predictions can be an uncertain
adventure at best.
The Utah Department of Transportation (uDOT) and
engineering consultants, CH2M Hill, are using past traffic
trends for Logan Canyon predictions. This information does not
establish reliable traffic trends for the canyon.
Even the consultants are not completely confident about the
available traffic data . In a draft technical report, CB2M Hill
reports:
"Data point scatter and (the) short period of record make(s)
it difficult to forecast future (traffic) volumes with any degree
of confidence."
If traffic data is reviewed on an annual basis, there is no
suggestion of an increase in traffic through the canyon. Over the
past 13 years, the annual traffic Dow has fluctuated a bit from
year to year without any pattern of increase.
However, summer traffic during June, July and August shows
a different pattern. There is more traffic in the canyon during
these months and, for the past few years, traffic has been
increasing slightly during these three summer months. Based on
past trends of traffic and population change, the most
substantial prediction of summer traHic growth is 1.95 percent
per year.
The presumed need for major highway modifications is driven
by this projected increase .
During past studies, UDOT has greaUy oVerestimated future
traffic predictions. A review of the 1971 and 1979 Logan Canyon
highway studies shows that UDOT's official predictions for 1985
traffic rates were 30 to 55 percent above what eventua lly
occurred.
The current UDOT /CH2M Hill Logan Canyon Study is using an
exponential model to predict future traffic patterns. This model
soUers from the same mistakes made in previous studies when
summer traffic was analyzed .
A more realistic model uses linear growth that predicts a
smaller increase in summer traffic. This means that acceptable
traffic now levels without major highway modifications are
possible in the year 2010.
Sleye Fllnl Is II member of 1M Brldgerland Audubon SocieTy's Cons.enlllT
lon
Commllll!@. Hetin beenreviewlngUDOT 's Tralf1cdlllslnceJuIY1 9116.
�FEBRUARY 191r7 -
Accident data incomplete
By Jack Spence
Safety is important for
everyone who travels on a
roadway . For any highway.
safety involves two major
Issues - accident rates and
accident severity.
Yet, accurate accident rates
in Logan Canyon cannot be
determined because both the
Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and consultants.
CH2M Hill. have refused to
complete
any
comparative
studies.
This is hard to understand
because with its mountainous
terrain
Utah
has
many
highways comparable to U.S.
89, which runs through Logan
Canyon. A comparison of accident rates and severity levels in
Logan Canyon with data from
Ogden,
Little
Cottonwood,
Provo and Spanish Fork canyons would make sense.
~ITIZENS
FOR TIlE PR0TECl10N OF LOCiAN CANYON 3
Logan Canyon Accident Survey
T,,"of Accident
Speeding a Problem .
The collected Utah Highway
Patrol information (see box)
shows that most accidents are
caused by going too fast.
And, because of increased
speeds, major road improve-
ments could increase some ac-
cident rates.
Safety Studied Twice
During the study of accidents
in Logan Canyon, two different
reviews were completed.
First. using data collected by
UDOT from 1980 to 1985,
engineering consultants CH2M
Hill concluded that four of 13
highway sections had accident
rates higher than the standard
safety guidelines.
However, these conclusions
were challenged when errors
were found in UDOT's rates.
When corrected data could not
be produced, CH2M Hill decided
to use another safety com pari-
son method.
The second method divided
Car runs off ttIe ro.td
56% Driver speeding
46%
Car hits an animal
Logan Canyon into one-tenth1N Other Improper driving
25"
Head·on comslon
12% Driver not looking
23"mile sections. CH2M Hill then
Hit car In Intersection
.,. Road snow· or la· covered 23'J(,
found that 16 of the 374. onRear'end another car
~ Driving under the Influence 10%
e-tenth-mile sections had acci2% Driving left of center line ' "
0 ....'
dent counts higher than the
Driver asleep or III
'"
highway's average.
Vehicle defective
4%
Even though 16 sections had
Note : The total "cause of accld~ts" is greater than 100 percent
higher than average counts,
bKause a single acci~nt could have multiple causes.
none of these sections were
greatly In excess of many of the • Source : Utah Highway Patrol accident reports, 1980· 1985. _ _ _ _,.,jl
value. in addition, the average
___________________
remaining 358 sections have a
3) Lower speeds on tight in a serious accident in Logan
low number of accidents.
corners, especially near ice and Canyon are small at any time.
Since there is an absence of
animal hazards
Safety Alternatives
4) Improved highway sur- valid supporting data , safety
Even though road construc- faces and brighter roadway cannot be used to justify major
tion is usually considered the striping
highway modifications.
best way to improve highway
5) Improved road crowns to
safety , other alternatives do increase water runoffs from the
exist.
highway
J ac k SpenCt , a wt ll·known constrv.·
These include :
lion IS! in norlnern Utah, nel ptd organ ll t
1) Better speed enforcement
an d ltad CP LC In 1919. Ht has rtll ltwtd
Chances Are Small
UOOT 's Logan C,!"! von safe lv dal, si nct
by the UHP
2) Better advisory signing
The chances of being involved Julv, 1986.
Fishing threatened
By Bill Helm
AS it flows through Logan Canyon , the Logan River provides many
opportunities for recreation in a natural and scenic setting. A
popular four-season activity along Logan River is fishing .
The river is one of only a few Class II trout stream s in Utah . Class
II trout streams provide good fish habitat. This lets trout grow
quickly to a large size.
Road construction activities in Logan Canyon already have
damaged the river's fish habitats . Channel straightening and
elimination of streambank vegetation have decreased the number of
trout from 50 to 90 percent in some locations.
Class U Defined
To be ranked a Class II trout strum in Utah, a waterway must
have many slow and quiet resting and hiding areas with adequate
plant cover . This lets fish rest while being shielded from potential
enemies. Feeding areas must be nearby with moderate flowing
water.
Class II waterways also require spawning habitats with
medium-sized gravel bottoms in an area of moderate river currenL
The bottom must be stable with little or no silt.
.
",.
Changes Could Hurt Trout
Major changes to Logan Canyon's highway could damage the
Class II fisheries . If the river is straightened , water speeds could
increase beyond tolerable levels for trout. Placing fill on a
streambank ' or removing streamside vegetation would eliminate
resting and hiding cover. Streamside trees, shrubs, and grass
provide food for insects. which trout eat, as well as providing hiding
cover fo r trout.
Streamside vegetation is valuable for many other reasons as well.
It slows overland water runoff while trapping silt. This keeps the
river clean for increased and healthier trout populations.
Streamside vegetation also screens anglers [rom the highway
while providing a wilder and more natural outdoor experience . This
vegetation allows passing sights and sounds to be muted or even
eliminated .
While important for fish and fishermen alike, streamside
vegetation provides habitat for birds and mammals who live along
rivers. It also anchors streambanks. This minimizes bank erosion
and stream bed shifting.
LOGA N
CANYON
HIGHWAY
m,,,,
STUDY
Changes Add Up
" T.
"LitUe" changes throughout the river soon add up to one "big"
change. Minor modifications between Logan Canyon's highway and
the river could invariably damage the entire Class n trout fishery .
l oeAN
.'"
.'
Bill Helm Is a proltsSOt' 01 IiSh t r its a ll(! wil dllft at Ut,h Sla tt Un illersitv. Ht hn
<Kl illtly supporttd pr oted ion 01 Loga n Ca nvon a ll(! its r illtr lor ma!"!y vtars .
�4 CITIZENS fOR 11-IE PROTEcnON OF l.OO AN CANYON _ FEBURARY 1987
Logan Canyon
By Tom Lyon
The significance of the Logan
Canyon struggle, as I see it, is
that it means we are waking up
to some implications of the 20th
century. Now that is a pretty
tall order for a controversy over
a highway . But it was nol so
long ago (1968, to be precise )
that a six-mile section of the
canyon was reamed and dynamited for what is called
highway improvements - that
was the section from Dewitt
Springs to Right Hand Fork with almost no oPPOsition. In
1961, the lower section was
similarly manhandled for the
same reason, with even less
comment. Now we are waking
up, and we are taking a stand
that has some powerful implications.
We are, I think, starting to
see Logan Canyon for what it
actually is. We are seeing it, in
its beauty and naturalness, as a
place to be in, not go through.
This is a significant change,
amounting possibly to the
beginning of a whole different
orientation. As Americans, we
have always been going somewhere else, always looking over
the shoulder of what is around
us, never quite being where we
are. Now we seem to be settling
in, some percentage of us ,
getting ready to live in place.
The world is filling up fast, and
perhaps finally we are seeing
the well-known handwriting on
the wall. We ought to - it is all
in capital letters.
The beauty is that in staying
put for a while, we can begin to
fee l the inward sense of place,
so that for example the way the
sun hits the Wellsvilles on
winter mornings, of the way the
Logan River looks and sounds,
charging down the canyon in
spring, becomes an unspoken
part of consciousness and nol
just views. The allegia nce is
natural, literally natural. Suddenly it seems perfectly absurd,
something out of a different
world, to cut and fill Logan
Canyon so that tra vellers between Los Angeles and Yellowstone (or between somewhere else and somewhere else,
hut always travellers ) can save
possibly two minutes of driving
time.
That different world is where
the money and speed are. It is
where " what's happening" is
happening . It is that world that
sends the three-piece suit
brigade to Logan, Utah, all the
way fro m Seattle or Denver or
even New York to testify
against wilderness for Mount
Naomi, and that has cut and
scraped. the hills by Bear Lake
and put second homes sticking
up everywhere, and that makes
each one of us, possibly, wonder
at some time if it wouldn't be
nice to have a passing lane on
the Dugway between Twin
Bridges. That is the world of no
place, of placeiessness, of
AWatershed
Tree ca nopies create roadway tunnels along parts of Logan Canyon.
always going somewhere and
never anywhere, at taking the
landscape around you and
converting it into something
else, perferahly money , with as
little delay as possible. (Then
you can take the money and go
somewhere else.)
That world has had its way
for a long time. But it runs on
unconsciousness, and now not
everyone is asleep. Too late for
the San Fernando Valley, and
too late for the hills of Bear
Lake; but maybe we are still in
time for Logan Canyon. There
is already a road in it, a paved
one even, and it is definitely not
the Logan Canyon that the
mountain man Warren Ferris
saw in 1826 - there were grizzly
and big horns then. But as they
say, you start from where you
are, and this is where we are.
-:::----:;-_-:-_ _ ....,._ _-:(Tom Lyon is a professor of
English at Utah State University. He has been involved (or
several years in the movement
to protect Logan Canyon.)
Logan Canyon Needs Defenders
No t striving. unresistilJg. )'ieltlilJg
II o .'er t'om es
Flowing lo wer tluJII ils tribu taries
It ret'eives a ll illlo itself
Fulfilling its purpose silnlll)'
II makes n o da i", .
F r o m L Ull
1'"..
VO ICE YOUR SUPPORT FOR LOGAN CANYON'S FUTURE AT THE MARCH PUBLIC
HEARINGS :
CITIZENS FO R THE
MARCH 3, 7 p.m ., MOUNTAIN FUEL AUDITORI UM , LOGAN
PROTECTION OF LOGAN CANYON
MAR CH 4, 7 p.m ., CITY HALL, GARDEN CITY
P.O. Bo)( 3SBO
Logan , UTah 84321
(801 )1752-9102 ,56H908 (e l
�
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
4540
Image Width
Image Width in pixels
3438
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/422">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/422</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
RGB
Checksum
1350707157
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
CPLC Newletters, 1976-1996
Description
An account of the resource
CPLC Newletters from 1976-1996 (incomplete) discussing the need for the protection of Logan Canyon and examination of the Conservatives' Alternative.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Wilderness areas
Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon
Logan Canyon Study
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Newsletters
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
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, Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon/Logan Canyon Coalition Papers, 1963-1999, COLL MSS 314 Box 1 Folder 4
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
MSS314Bx1Fd4
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/8cc556c84395e047389043fa09b4192a.jpg
554f709a287b9d21f91ba86e518f99e0
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/142">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/142</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
View of Logan Canyon from the Utah State University campus, Utah
Description
An account of the resource
View of Logan Canyon from USU Campus. Black and white photograph (5 x 7 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Cooley, I. LaVell, 1901-
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)--Photographs
Mountains--Utah--Logan--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1920-1929
1930-1939
1940-1949
1950-1959
1960-1969
1970-1979
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, LaVell Cooley photograph collection, 1920-1985, P0101 4:01:07
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the LaVell Cooley photograph collection, 1920-1985 can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv30639">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv30639</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.
LaVell Cooley photograph collection, 1920-1985
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P010140107
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
1920-1985
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/6ea11b1e4909bdf966c4fba52a05b718.jpg
214ccb33dbf52af7aba211abb4e8977f
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/131">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/131</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Group of horseback riders at White Pine Basin, Logan Canyon, Utah, between 1910 and 1920
Description
An account of the resource
Group of horseback riders at White Pine Basin, Logan Canyon, Utah. Black and white photograph (3 x 5 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Crookston, Newell J., 1890-1976
Subject
The topic of the resource
White Pine Basin (Cache County, Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Mae Crookston Wennegren photograph collection, 1910-1920, P0130 1:036
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Mae Crookston Wennegren photograph collection, 1910-1920, can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv9026">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv90267</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.
Mae Crookston Wennegren photograph collection, 1910-1920, P0130
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P013010736
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
1910-1920
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/39520069bc546861bbdbc1254c4af8cd.jpg
166056a6200c2be146ebf659b99524f5
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/241">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/241</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
View looking up the canyon from Third Dam, Logan Canyon, Utah
Description
An account of the resource
Looking up Logan Canyon from Third Dam. Black and white photograph (3 x 4 in)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Daniel, Theodore W.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)--Photographs
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1940-1949
1950-1959
1960-1969
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, Ted W. Daniel photograph collection, 1892-1997, P0373 03:08:02
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Ted W. Daniel photograph collection can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv25793">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv25793</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.
Ted W. Daniel Photograph Collection, 1892-1997, P0373
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P037330802
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1940 and 1997
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
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
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/d4a53434e33ed17e552386db7cbf3903.pdf
60c41e1ee105eb90c65d9191e6745aa4
PDF Text
Text
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BEAR RIVER ASSOCIATION
OF GOVERNMENTS
Roger C. Jones
_ 170 North Main
Logan, Utah 84321
(801) 752-7242
Box Elder, Cache, Rich Counties
CHAIRMAN
Jay A. Monson
Harch 28, 1987
Rudy Lukez
P.O. Box 423
Logan, UT 84321
Dear Rudy,
Enclosed are the two documents you requested:
1.
2.
My analysis of the Logan Canyon improvement issue for use by the BRAG
Governing Board in commenting for the scoping meetings; and
Comments in letter form from the Board.
Please note that Cindy Yurth's article in the Herald Journal was
incorrect. The Board did not "suggest" improvements. Rather, they asked UDOT
to consider the entire range of improvements. They wish to see what the
impacts of the alternatives will be before endorsing one or another
alternative.
Also be aware that Jack Spence has made several comments on my analysis.
Specifically, he thinks:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
I understated the role which the Forest Service will play;
no mention was made that some people want the highway designated as a
national scenic highway;
the USFS will not allow a 40 mph highway;
I was not clear that most of the traffic occurs only in summer;
it 1'5 wrong to be concerned with safety issues for which there is no data
(such as ' whether bicyclists are deterred from using the highway by a
"feeling" of danger);'
, Figure 2 ' is improper since it does not show that most ·of the accidents
occur in only a few spots.
Suffice it to say that Jack and I disagree on several of ':t-hese polnts,
which I would be happy to discuss with you at iyour convenience.
I do think the BRAG Governing Board is taking a ' responsible position on
this' issue. . They want all of the suggested al ternati ves analyzed because they
have constituents who come from both extremes on these- issues. Once the draft
EIS is developed and CH2H Hill presents the results in a meaningful way, I
think the Board will adopt a reasonable and responsible position.
trul Y,
¥i
.
Bry
Box Elder County
Frank 0 , Nishiguchi
Don E. Chase
James J . White
Larry Howe ll
Peter C , Knudson
...
!i))~
Dixon
GOVERNING BOARD
Cache County
Bruce G . King
Jay A. Monson, Chairman
Darrel J . Gibbons
Newel Daines
Bruce Darley
Rich County
Ken Brown
Blair R. Francis
Dee Johnson
Rick Argyle, V. Chairman
Bryce Nielson
�~
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Roger C . Jones
BEAR RIVER ASSOCIATION
OF GOVERNMENTS
~.
~.~.
"
.Ox Elder, Cache, Rich
170 North Main
Logan, Utah 84321
(801 ) 752·7242
Counties
CHAIRMAN
Jay A . Monson
March 17, 1987
James Naegle
Utah Department of Transportation
4501 South 2700 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84119
Dear Mr. Naegle,
On behalf of the Governing Board of the Bear River Association of Governments, I would like to comment on the scope of the environmental analysis being
undertaken for the proposed improvements to State Highway 89 through Logan
Canyon. As you may know, BRAG is charged with reviewing projects being
undertaken in northern Utah which may affect more than one community. As such,
we feel it our responsibility to ensure that all of the interests of our
citizens are represented, and therefore offer these comments.
)
The highway through Logan Canyon serves our citizens as both a recreational resource and a major arterial. Rich and Cache Counties rely on many of
the same attributes. The canyon is itself a scenic resource for those driving
through, and also provides access to more active forms of recreation such as
fishing, hunting, hiking, skiing, etc., as well as access to the recreation
resources around Bear Lake. These resources benefit our citizens directly, but
also attract tourism, on which we rely for part of our local economy. Logan
Canyon is also a critical link for almost 10,000 residents from around Bear
Lake (from Utah, Idaho and .:Wyoming) · to. the amenities and necessities offered by
Cache Valley (such as access to emergency health care). Hence, we feel our
ci~izens want to preserve the aesthetic value of the canyon, but not so much
that the transportation capabilities deteriorate to unsafe or seriously
inconvenient levels. We recognize that, as the population naturally increases,
the dema nds on the highway:.:will increase, and we should attempt to foresee this
demand and compromise between the need to preserve a pristine environment and
the desire for maximum convenience.
It is difficult, however, to favor a particular alternative without
knowing the probable impact of our choices. We therefore wish to make the
following requests:
1.
2.
Please proceed as rapidly as possible to repair or rep l ace those bridges
in the canyon which are deteriorating or are narrower than the existing
roadway.
In the middle section of the canyon between Right Hand Fork and Ric ks
Springs, please conside r an alternatives which increase the design spee d
from the existing minimum of 25 mph t o 35 or 40 mph.
rio >.. boer C.O U nt ~.
r- r ~} !lri 0 r4 ,. . l1lquCI ::
i It .r.
~ _ L T' d"
J<1rTit , :- . i
I
V lln l l ('
~rr~' HI.)',• •.
.'
y' '' lt '!'
C
t-\IHl{l':> P"
GO V ER N ING B O ARD
Cac h e C oun t\,!
bru c!.: G . h m·c
Jjl \1 A Mon~ ll n . Chj~lrn"\tJ l)
/).,, 11:1 J (;" , ()O"~I ".J.. ""' !
U.un,·
Hl tHl ' [)..,l lt'?
Rich
Count~..'
b l.1!! K f ra rK!>
Un JonllM Hl
Hu " t\1 ~ ;" . \ ' Chdlr n ),,'
.
~ "'C (" N " 'I~()
�James Naegle
March 17, 1987
Page 2
3.
4.
5.
In the section between Ricks Springs and the summit of the canyon, please
consider alternatives which W9uld increase design speeds to 60 mph.
In the section between the summit of the canyon and Garden City, please
consider alternatives which increase the design speeds to either 40 or 50
mph, but which use the existing alignment as much as possible.
Please consider turnouts at frequent intervals and changes in highway
patrol policies which would ensure that slow moving vehicles would allow
trailing vehicles to pass. Please consider passing lanes where the canyon
allows but which do not require severe cuts.
Finally, please analyze the impacts to the aesthetic and ecological
character of the highway necessary to achieve these improvements to driving
safety and convenience and inform us in a way which allows us to determine how
severe the impacts might be. We will then be much more able to tell you which
compromises would serve our citizens the best.
We look forward to your timely report.
·.-
•
Yours truly,
~cff!
./
-yJ.4
·//I/)~
Jd A. Monson
Chairman
Bear River Association of Governments
�LOGAN
HIGHW PROJECT
AY
STATUS fu~D IS SUES
Prepared for
Elected Officia l s i n the Bear River Reg i on
Februar y 18, 1987
Bryan Dixon
Ck Y ON
~
The proposed improvements to state Route 89 through Logan Canyon have
generated substantial controversy. However, those "for improvements" and those
"against improvements" may agree more than f irst appears. Most residents in
Cache and Rich Counties wou l d probably favor some improvements to the highway.
The road is very narrow in places, and several bridges are obviously
deteriorating. The fundamental disagreements concern the extent of work which
should be undertaken. Neither opponents nor proponents wish to see the beauty
of the canyon marred by thoughtless construction, neither want decisions thrust
upon them, yet both want safety and convenience. Whether one considers the
canyon primarily as a recreational resource or a transportation corridor is
perhaps the main determinant of one's support for major improvements. The
process of public review requisite in any federally supported highway project
provides opportunities for individual opinions, prejudices and wishes to
influence what will eventually be done. There will be a separate public
hearing for local elected officials to provide input, in order to ensure that a
broad constituency - not just the most vocal - is heard. Indeed, the fact that
everyone should have the same opportunity to influence the project is one of
the privileges and treasures of American society. This analysis is intended to
summarize the status and major issues surrounding the project, and encourage
the informed debate necessary for the public interest to be fair+y articulated.
Introduction to the Federal Environmental Review Process
Part of the review required of any major federal project is that the
impacts on the environment be considered. The intent is primarily to prevent
agencies from ignoring those impacts. However noble, the environmental review
process (as indeed could any process) has been abused in the past to stall
projects, despite reasonable opportunities for public input. In the case of
Logan Canyon, the decision whether to do an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has not yet been made. Although the Utah
Department of Transportation has conducted a number of analyses so far, the
period for constructive public input is just beginning. There will be a public
hearing for elected officials Wednesday, March 4, 1987 at 10:00 a.m. in the
Logan City Hall, 255 North Main, Logan. Hearings for the general public are
scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on March 3 in the Mountain Fuel Auditorium and at 7:00
p.m. on March 4 in the Garden City Hall.
History of the Project
(See the attached map for geographical references.)
1961 Road widened and straightened from mouth of Logan Canyon to Dewitt
Springs.
1968 Redesign work from Right Hand Fork to Ricks Springs completed.
1969 Road widened and straightened from Dewitt Springs to Right Hand Fork.
1969 National Environmental Policy Act enacted, requiring that all "major
federal projects having a significant impact on the environment" draft a
�1972
1979
1980
1986
statement desc r i bing t he env i ronment a l impacts a nd poss ible w
ays to
mitigate t hose impacts.
Federa l Highway A
dministration (FHWA ) determ i ned that a f our l ane hi ghway
through Logan Canyon would require an EIS.
Project from Right H
and For k to G
arden City down-si zed f rom f our l ane
h i ghway to lane widening from 22 feet t o 34 feet; i ncrease from 35 mph t o
40 mph design speed. FHWA r eclassified the project t o requ ir e onl y an EA.
Environmental analysis suspended while guidelines relating to ErS's were
amended.
Project resumed, environmental analyses continued.
The Environmenta l Review Process For Logan Canyon
The principal concern of the proponents is the schedule. They believe the
road should be improved, and are frustrated by the possibility of endless
delays caused by meaningless reviews. In fact, Utah Department of
Transportation (UDOT) officials have estimated that if an EIS is deemed
necessary the schedule could ta ke one extra year. The delay is due primarily
to the increased time for review by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA )
in Washington - as opposed to only regional FHWA review required for an EA.
UDOT fully intends to do some work on the canyon road, however. In
anticipation of the possibility of significant impacts, UDOT has approached the
project as if it would require an EIS, with public input, environmental
analyses and intensive review at the level required by an EIS. If possible,
they wish to limit FHWA review to an EA.
The decision whether to require an EIS will be made by the FHWA after some
prelimi nary work is completed. UDOT will narrow the range of desired
alternatives by soliciting public input (in scoping meetings in March). They
will then complete enough design work on a few alternatives to determine the
scale of the environmental impacts of each. These, together with a "preferred
alternative" will be reported in a "preliminary" Draft Environmental Impact
statement. This preliminary DEIS will be distributed for public comment.
The results of this DEIS will determine the depth of subsequent review.
If the environmental impacts are not significant or can be mitigated, the FHWA
may decide that an Environmental Assessment would suffice. If so, the DEIS
will be published as the Final Environmental Assessment and the final design
work will be completed, and construction begun.
If, after the preliminary DEIS is completed, the FHWA believes that the
project is too controversial or the impacts are significant or cannot be
entirely mitigated, they may require the completion of an EIS. In this case,
the public comments on the preliminary Draft Ers will be incorporated into a
final Draft EIS. The final Draft EIS will be reviewed by not only the regional
FHWA, but also by the Washington, D.C. office. (It is this latter process
which could add up to a year to the project.) After FHWA review is completed,
the Final ErS, together with the chosen alternative, and an explanation as to
how the public's comments have been addressed will be published. Final design
work will be completed and construction will follow.
2
�UDOT officials have estimated the time necessary for the environmental
review. They estimate t hat the preliminary Draft Ers could be completed by
summer of 1987. If the impacts are not judged significant or can be mitigated,
the EA will be published, final design work could begin in September 1987, with
construction beginning in spring of 1988. If an EIS is judged to be necessary,
the Draft EIS could be submitted to FHWA in July 1987 , with a fina l decision on
an alternative in early summer of 1988. Design work could then be completed i n
fall 1988, and construction could begin in spring 1989.
Alternatives Being Considered
UDOT believes that some work is inevitable. In fact, the "no action"
alternative includes repair or replacement of four bridges. These four bridges
include Burnt Bridge, Lower and Upper Twin Bridge, and the Logan River Bridge
(Red Banks Bridge at mile 394.5). Whether more extensive alternatives will be
pursued depends primarily on whether the public wants grEater design speeds,
increased parking capacity, and passing lanes.
Because different sections have different degrees of sensitivity,
preliminary alternatives ' have been outlined for each section (note that a four
lane highway is no longer being considered):
Section I: Right Hand Fork to Ricks Springs
A.
No action (includes bridge repair/replacement)
B.
spot improvements such as turnouts, parking, minor realignments,
perhaps a climbing lane between Lower and Upper Twin bridges
C.
Widening along existing alignment and spot improvements
D.
Widening and new alignments with spot improvements to increase design
speeds to 35-40 mph
Section 2: Ricks Springs to Summit of Canyon
A.
No action (includes bridge repair/replacement)
B.
spot improvements such as turnouts, parking, minor realignments, ,and
climbing lanes along existing alignments
D.
Widening and new alignments with spot improvements to increase design
speeds to 50-60 mph
Section 3: Summit of Canyon to Garden City
A.
No action (includes bridge repair/replacement)
B.
spot improvements such as turnouts, parking, minor realignments, and
climbing lanes along existing alignment
D.
Widening existing alignments with spot improvements to increase
design speeds to 35-40 mph
E/F. Widening along one of two new alignments north of existing highway to
increase design speeds to 40-50 mph (existing road to be maintained
by Rich County)
G.
Widening along new alignment south of existing highway to increase
design speeds to 40-50 mph (existing road to be maintained by Rich
County)
Justification for Improvements
A major point of debate is whether to increase design speeds by
straightening curves and widening the road. Important factors include: 1)
public safety, 2} convenience, and 3) environmental degradation.
3
�UDOT and CH2M Hill (the firm hired to write the DEIS) have assembled data
on accidents and traffic volumes in Logan Canyon. However, the data are not
conclusive because of i ncomp l ete records, l imited number of data collection
points, and l ack of similar data comparing Logan Canyon with other canyons.
(That is, given that accidents occur, how serious is the problem?) Figure 1
was produced from data published by UDOT and CH2M Hill and shows average number
of accidents per mile during 1980-35 for each of the 13 sections designated
f rom Logan to Garden City. If the data are reliable, the sections between
Right Hand Fork and Ricks Springs are clearly the most hazardous, as evidenced
by a much higher than average number of accidents per mile. Figure 2 brea ks
down the accidents in each section by type. The major type of accident in
almost every section of the canyon is simply running off the road. This cause
greatly exceeds other causes in the Right Hand Fork-Ricks Springs sections.
Hitting other vehicles occurs primarily at intersections such as Franklin Basin
(Section 2c). Hitting animals is the major cause only in Sections 2a and 2b,
where the road is relatively straight and open, but where there is also open
range. (Data on the type of animal struck was not available.)
The calculations of ' accidents per mile are not entirely reliable because
the only traffic counter in the canyon was at the Card Guard Station in
"Section Ob" (moved in 1982 to west of Garden City). It is unknown, for
example, how many motorists from Logan turn around before reaching Garden City.
Some have concluded that there are not in fact many serious accidents - there
were only five fatalities and 86 incapacitating injuries between 1980 and 1985,
out of almost 4 million trips in the canyon. The rest of the 512 accidents
involved property damage or minor injuries. However, "danger" is the
possibility of accident. There is no way to know what price this exacts on the
mental well-being of drivers, bicyclists, or pedestrians. There is certainly
some value in reducing this danger. And, even though no data are available, it
seems intuitive that many may avoid sections of Logan Canyon during certain
times or seasons simply due to the threat of accident.
A factor not measured is public convenience. While Cache County residents
may use Logan Canyon primarily for recreation, some residents in Rich County
depend on the road for access to medical, retail and other services not found
in Rich County. For them, Logan Canyon may represent more of a barrier to the
essentials of life than an avenue to recreation, especially during winter.
Lacking good data either on comparable seriousness of accidents or
perceived inconvenience, UDOT has tried to determine what improvements should
be made based on the desired "level of service" (a partially subjective scale
of driving convenience) and projections of traffic volumes. These could then
be compared to standards used by traffic engineers. If valid, it may be
possible to base construction alternatives on a rational model of service
quality desired by drivers. They have attempted to project traffic volumes to
the year 2010 by extrapolating from historical data. Unfortunately, not only
are there inadequate traffic counts, but the period to be forecast is several
times longer than the period over which data has been collected, making
oxtrapolat · ons en'QUS at best. Moreover/ there is disagreement about what
kind of funct i on would best fit the data. UDOT suggests an exponential
extrapolation, but assumes an upward sloping curve, and offers no theoretical
4
�reason why that curve is better than some other curve (such as an exponential
curve with an ex ponent le ss than one which would imply that traffic volumes
would approach some upper limit, or asymptote).
In the end, UDOT has concluded that the level of service is already very
low during the summer (presently "D"), with sUbstantial delays due to the
volume of traffic and the numbers of recreational vehicles. (See Table 1 for
descriptions of Levels of Service.) Any of the population and traffic
projections with any of the viable road improvement alternatives preclude the
best levels of service. In an effort to maintain a level with only
"noticeable ... passing impediments" during normal traffic flows, and delays no
more than 60\ of the time during heavy flows (i.e. "C"), UDOT believes it will
be necessary to widen lanes and shoulders, and provide turnouts and passing
lanes to enable autos to pass recreational vehicles in the summer. The crucial
question is where would such improvements be acceptable in the canyon.
Although these needs could be met with improvements to Logan Canyon, there
is also value in preserving the beauty of the Canyon, part of which comes from
a narrow, confined corridor. Unfortunately, changes to the road such as
excessive bank cuts, lane widening or passing lanes (in some places) might
reduce scenic vistas and destroy a feeling of seclusion created by vegetation
and steep rock walls close to the road. The tight twisting nature of the road
might help some people forget the hectic pace of life left in the city.
Campers and hikers near the road would certainly not appreciate greater road
noise from higher speeds. Fishermen wish to leave the river unchanneled and
free, making for better trout habitat. Some have mentioned an endangered plant
in the canyon (though it is still unclear it road changes would in fact
threaten the plant).
Summary
The ideal alternative is clearly a compromise between the additional
safety and inconvenience of a major widening, and the desire to preserve
interesting vistas and drives. Since the data on traffic projections and
levels of service are inexact at best, the decision will depend heavily on
public input during the Draft Environmental Impact Statement phase. In
closing, however, it should be noted that the real delays may come when funding
for construction is sought.
Elected officials concerned about the road improvements are encouraged to
contact the staff at BRAG for a information on the studies and alternatives.
Detailed information on alternatives to be considered is just now emerging.
BRAG staff could present a statement at the public hearings. In preparation,
BRAG staff could arrange a tour of the canyon scheduled for Tuesday, March 3,
to allow elected officials to meet UDOT and U.S. Forest Service officials and
discuss particular highway sections of concern. BRAG staff would like input
from officials about how their constituents might weigh the needs for safety
and convenience and how sensitive they would be to changes in the canyon near
the road. Elected officials may be the only source of input by the
unrepresented public. For more information please contact Bryan Dixon at 7527242.
5
�'J
REFERENCES
This report was based on personal contacts with the following:
Lynn Zollinger, Assistant District Engineer, Utah Department of Transportation
Duncan Silver, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City
Todd Weston, member of UDOT Transportation Committee and Interdisciplinary Team
Gale Larsen, Valley Engineering, as local consultant for public input and
traffic analyses in the canyon
Stan Nuffer and Cliff Forsgren, CH2M Hill, as engineering consultants
Dave Baumgartner and Fred Labar, U.S. Forest Service, Logan District of
Wasatch- Cache Forest
Jack Spence, Rudy Lukez, "and Steve Flint, environmental representatives on
Interdisciplinary Team, and representing "Citizens for the Protection of Logan
Canyon"
and the following documents:
Draft Traffic Forecast, August, 1986,
(auth~r
not indicated)
CH2M Hill, Draft US-89 Logan Canyon study, Technical Memoranda, December, 1986
Various maps
6
�S T M~DARDS
TABLE 1
O LEVELS OF SERVICE
F
Level of Ser vice - "A"
M or i sts dri ve at desired s peed
ot
Drivers delayed no more than 30% of the t i m by s lo w m i ng ve hicle s
e
ov
No "platoons" of t hree or more vehicles
Level of Service - "B"
Slightly slower speeds than above
Passing demand approximates capacity
Drivers delayed up t o 45% of the time
Numbers of "platoons" increase dramatically above this level
Level of Service - "c"
Slow moving vehic l es cause congestion
Significant reduction in passing capacity
Drivers delayed up to 60% of the time
Chains of "platoons" begin to f orm
Level of Service - "D"
Unstable traffic flow
Passing extreme l y d ifficult
Drivers delayed up to 75% of :the time
Hean "platoon" size of 5-10 vehicles are common
Level of Service - "E"
Orderly traffic flow begins to break down
Passing virtually impossible
Drivers delayed over 75% of the time
Level of Service - "F"
Speeds well below capacity
Heavy congestion
Level E seldom reached
(adapted from CH2M Hill, Draft US-89 Logan Canyon Study. Technical Memoranda,
December, 1986, page 6-3, originally from Highway Capacity Manual. Special
Report 209, Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council)
7
�, i
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
I
.' i
""
~ "
:cit
"."
(.
', IJ';·":"' -
"::, (
.../' ..
~
-r-" "
MILE POST
FIGURE 6
"
SAFETY EVALUATION
HIGHWAY SEGMENTS
LOG AN CAN YON STUOY
. :.
MAP - Logan Canyon, From Draft US 89 Logan
Canyon Study, Technical Memoranda,
CH2M Fill, Decerrb er 1986
Showing section of canyon used :'_n ~naysis
. '.
....
~ .
"
•
•
~
'.. ~';'
~I
\
�~\J O.
~ r · r- ; Ii
0
+
n
C'
,........ .,_. ',-, I \..-l "'-' I I ~ •.J
P PoJ" fi
' t
i\ A; I A
I V I I 1 ../
iI n ;
\
I V '.::j n
r ... n
L
'-..A
......,
I I
1980- 85, By Sedion of Log an Carryon
32
30
RT HD FO RI<
I
~
,
-t
RiCK'S SPRiNG
/\\.
28
r \\
I
I
26
2 4E
~
~;~
+'
c
~
7J
20
18
"0
0
~
......
0
\...
iJ
IJ \ \
22
\
.ll
\
\
Ave rage Far Enti re Canyon
12
:J
\
I
L¥\
14
\\
1
/ V
LOGAN
16
/
I
10
c
....
Z
\
GARDEN CITY
~
:i
2
0
00
Ob
10
1b
1c
~t ia n
2b
.1d
of Logan Canyon
FI GURE
1
2d
·30
.3 b
�,'\J 0
.
J\ c c ide n t s Per
~jl i Ie:
Log a n Can yon
1980-85, By Section and Type
26
24
22
(J
20
.2
\..
()
u..
'c"
1A
14
u
{J
~
12
'0
~
.0
E
.2
.L.
~
RT HD FORK
~
~
16
.....
t.I
-.::J
I
10
-4
i
1
LOGAN
8-1
:1
:2
0
Oa
Ob
1a
1b
1c
;1d
20
2b
2c
2d
30
.3 b
.x
Section of HighwO"t
Run off
Road
~ Hit Other
Vehicle
FIGURE
~ Hit
~ Animal
2
~ Other
�
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/158">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/158</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
1561002923
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
9834544 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 and status update on Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Bryan Dixon to Rudy Lukez, March 28, 1987, correspondence from Jay A. Monson to James (Jim) Naegle, and the Logan Canyon Highway project status and issues with a history of the project, timline, alternatives being considered, justification of improvements, map of area, bar and dot graphs of accidents per mile from 1980-1985.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Dixon, Bryan
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Monson, Jay A.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Traffic engineering
Environmental policy
Roads Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
Logan Canyon Environmental Study
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
1987-03-28
1987-03-17
1987-02-18
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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 29 Folder 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/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
MSS148VIIIB29_Fd6_Item 24.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/c0836952b4784e44f7f851bdc330fbaf.pdf
6f806d2fe0aee220e103a14b6ed8a4ef
PDF Text
Text
After reading local newspaper reports of the 1987 Logan Canyon Highway
scoping meetings, I noticed assumptions were made on the part of some groups that
the majority of local residents were opposed to any extensive modifications to the
highway.
In talking with a number of Logan City residents, I received conflicting
reports and strong indications that many Logan City voters did not agree with those
assumptions and that the scoping meetings were not a true barometer of local feelings.
In fact, some felt that the scoping meetings reflected a stacked deck in favor of the
opposing viewpoint.
At the urging of a number of local residents, I decided to find
out for myself by conducting a telephone opinion survey of Logan City voters who
voted in the 1987 elections.
draft of the
ques~ionnaire
Although it wasn't intended to be mailed out, the first
was sent by Cache County Chamber of Commerce leaders to
chamber members and returns were tabulated and results presented to that organization.
After the questionnaire was criticized by the local newspaper(particularly one writer)
as being biased, I contacted a former Utah State University Sociology Professor, Dr.
William DeHart, who had considerable experience with survey questions and format, to
review the questionnaire and assist me in eliminating or reducing possible bias.
I
spent a number of sessions with him in fine tuning the questionnaire before I conducted
the telephone opinion survey.
I also discussed the questionnaire with Dr. Steven
Daniels, formerly of the Department of Forestry at USU, who offered some valuable
suggestions.
It seemed ironic to me that the local newspaper should accuse me of
bias when they, themselves are guilty of incredible one-sided, biased reporting on
the highway issue.
I guess one should always first identify the color of the snake
in the grass before striding too far.
After obtaining a list of Logan City residents
who voted in the 1987 elections, I randomly sampled 208 voters by personally
telephoning them and asking the survey questions.
I chose to personally telephone
participants to reduce bias and to ensure consistency.
I did not solicit any
additional responses although many expressed appreciation for the contact and offered
additional opinions.
Of those who offered additional opinions, I asked if they had
attended any of the Logan Canyon Highway scoping meetings.
affirmative.
Their reasons for not attending ranged from "I don't like to argue"
to "a lack of time" or "conflict in schedule".
would listen anyway".
syndrome".
Not one answered in the
Some were concerned that "no one
I consider this a clear example of "the silent majority
In retrospect, they have only themselves to blame if the opposing
viewpoint receives credibility.
My feeling is that this group of people does not
write letters to the editor, tends to avoid controversy and does not like to attend
meetings, yet many have strong opinions about important issues and appear to exercise
their voting privilege.
Perhaps that's why politicians who consistently campaign
door-to-door and contact this group of people tend to get elected.
�-2Some of the more often expressed comments included:
*
I would like to see the road widened to include shoulders so that a vehicle
could be stopped completely off the road in the event of an emergency(flat tire,
stalled vehicle, etc.). This is especially a problem in the middle section of the
canyon between Right Hand Fork and Ricks Springs where shoulders are extremely
narrow or nonexistent. To increase enforcement of the current speed limit would
create a safety hazard unless shoulders were widened to permit a vehicle to stop
completely off the road.
*
Straightening some curves in the middle section of the canyon would not necessarily
increase speed but would contribute to a more even speed and flow of traffic.
*
As important as the environment is, there are other issues of equal or greater
importance including highway safety, snow removal, access to recreation areas
(Beaver Mountain, Jackson Hole, Yellowstone Park, Bear Lake, etc.), maximum
utilization of the canyon, emergency vehicle and hospital access for Bear Lake
Valley residents, and economic development potential by providing Bear Lake Valley
residents and beyond better access to local merchants.
*
There have been enough studies of Logan Canyon Highway. The money spent could be
better utilized in making needed modifications. According to UDOT engineers, there
have been two environmental studies of the highway since 1975 modifications were
completed. Approximately $50,000 was funded in 1978 to conduct an environmental
assessment to continue modifications from Right Hand Fork to Ricks Springs. The
current study, started in 1986, is a full environmental impact statement and has
cost approximately $620,000 to this point. Recently, an additional $86,000 was
appropriated to finish the study. More money will have to be allocated to
publish the final document. It's interesting to note that the reconstruction of
a two-lane highway based on 1975 dollars would cost about $500,000/mile and about
$l,OOO,OOO/mile using 1988 dollars. These figures are according to the March 88
issue of Engineering News Record(ENR). According to UDOT, the Summer average daily
traffic(ADT)in the canyon is about 3500 vehicles and peaks at about 500 vehicles
per hour. The Winter ADT is about 1800 vehicles.
*
I'm tired of a few pseudoexperts using strong-arm tactics to impose their will
upon the majority. We have the organization and the structure in-place in the
form of unOT and their consultants to consider all issues including the
environment and highway safety and design. Let's use the existing structure and
rely on the real experts who are being paid out of tax dollars and get out of their
way so they can do their job.
I took the time to examine the background and
expertise of the UDOT personnel assigned to the Logan Canyon Highway project.
Everyone of them have significant training and experience in environmental
planning and highway safety and design.
*
Acceleration and deceleration lanes would be useful at major campgrounds and access
roads such as Spring Hollow, Malibu/Guinavah, Temple Fork, Right Hand Fork, Wood
Camp, etc.
*
All you need to do is drive Logan Canyon and you're immediately brought to the
reality of the hazards and of taking your life in your own hands.
*
Let's fix the highway so it's safe to drive and quit worrying about having to
transplant a few flowers and trees. While a four-lane highway through Logan
Canyon is neither appropriate nor necessary, extensive modifications are needed.
�-3-
*
Although a minority, Cache Valley groups opposed to highway modifications are a
well organized and extremely vocal coalition. They are living proof that the
squeeky wheel gets the grease. But in the same vein, let's not forget that the
empty wagon rattles the most.
I approached the CPA firm of Hancey, Jones and Wright and asked if they would
compile the statistical information for the survey.
They offered to do that as a
public service and are here today to make the presentation to the Municipal Council.
I also contacted Dan Jones who explained that he samples about 6% in his opinion polls
with excellent results.
I sampled about 6% of the population in my opinion survey.
With that report, I'd like to ask Gary Jones and Carl Law of Hancey, Jones and
Wright to give the summary report of the survey.
�
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/1">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/1</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
1216771242
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1872988 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
Report on Highway 89
Description
An account of the resource
A three page typed report investigating the popular opinion of the proposed changes in Logan Canyon on Highway 89.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Duersch, Fred, Jr.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Public Lands--Utah--Logan Canyon
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
United States Highway 89
Logan (Utah)
Logan Canyon Study
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)
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, Senator John P. Holmgren papers, 1985-1989, COLL MSS 133 Box 45 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</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
MSS133Bx45Fd8_Item 3.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/8e636fcae685dfd41cf31fb0fc306b6c.jpg
51d3e7ca6f77441791e8ab5d33f3d4c7
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/240">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/240</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, 8-bit RGB, at 600 dpi. Archival file is uncompressed TIFF (600 dpi)
display file is JPEG2000
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2011-11-02
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
Girl Scout Lodge in Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Girl Scout Lodge in Logan Canyon. Black and white photograph (3.5 x 5.5 in).
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
dup photo
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Black and white photographs
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1910-1919
1920-1929
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, Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364 1:01
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album can be found at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv43746</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.
Logan Boy Scout Troop 5 photograph album, 1915-1925, P0364
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Image
StillImage
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
image/jpeg
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
P0364 1:01
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
between 1915 and 1925
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/581a9890fa0f0cffdb2e38fd8cf0bf69.pdf
4a8747b0fab3ee89ecb37e56799a249e
PDF Text
Text
LC
Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Canyon
17 June, 1987
Mr. Wes Wilaon
USKPA, Region
999 18th Str t, Suite 1300
Denver~Co
rado 80202-2413
Dear Mr. Wilson,
I am writing to express my concerns with the draft ETS ~urrently
being prepared for the Logan Canyon highway project (US 89) through
the Wasatch-Cache National Forest east of Logan, Utah. This draft is
be:ing prepared by CH2MHILL for release this summer. My hope is that
the EPA will be able to intervene in the process so that an inadequate, biased document is not released to the public. I realize
that this is an extraordinary requeslt, but I feel the si tuation
warrents attention.
Several environmental groups and a number of unatr'iliated citizens
are working together as Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon.
We are attempting to make sure the draft EIS is an acceptable document
when it is released. As CPLC member Rudy Lukez has already contacted
you with a number of our concerns, I will emphasize problems in the
most recent drafts which we have reveived. It is only a few days ago
that we- got our firs.t look at the impacts and mi tigation sections
of most of' thes- chapters, yet. C1f2MHILL expects the Interdisciplinary
e
Study Team to have completely reviewed them by Monday, 22 June.
Despite the fact that no discussion has taken place on the great
majori ty of the impact assessment part of the document-, a summary
chapter of the different alternatives has already been written. This
chapter is clearly biased in favor of the intensive development
alternatives. It scareely acknowledges any environmental impacts, even
though some are reviewed in other chapters.
.
Clearly there will be major impacts. In several alternatives, over
7,000 feet of retaining wall is proposed for a 4.5 mile stretch of
road. Most riparian vegetation will be destroyed where these retaining
walls are placed at the edge of the Logan River. While the Terrestrial
Resources chapter admi ts some of the impacts would be obvious f ·o r
decades, the summary chapser ignores this information. In addition to
these retaining walls, a continuous cut into the hillside would be
necessary to accomodate the wider road. Despite the fact the WasatchCache Fores.t · Plan calls for the visual "retention" of natural
characteristics in the canyon, the summary chapter ignores this conflict.
p.o. box 3580 logan, ut 84321
�2.
During the public input period it was clear that there was strong
support for a "spot improvement" alternative. It was recommended
that each proposed modification be examined on the basis of need,
contribution to safety, and environmental impact. Increasing .speed
(which is all that the more extreme action alternatives would do)
is not considered important by most people, although it seems to be
about the only thing that the Federal Highway Administration represeniativ~
is interested in. CH2MHILL has slighted this alternative. Their spot
improvement alternative replaces virtually every bri@ge and culvert,
straightens nearly every curve, and places a climbing lane in one of
the most difficult sections of the canyon. Impacts are obvious but
once again neglected.
This: process has been continued despite our repeated mention tha.t
the Forest Flan permits only limited changes to the canyon highway.
The plan is very s·pecific on this, particularly where the Forest
Service responds to the public input from the draft version. At the
interdisciplinary study team meetings, we have quoted from the plan,
yet CH2MHILL has consistently ignoi:ed this,.
There are a number of other unanswered questions' in the present
draf·t . Disposal of rubble from the many propos.e d cuts has scarcely
been addressed; the few available locations (abandoned gravel pits
and old roadbeds) will only handle a fract,i on of the material
genetiated by the more extreme action alternatives. Erosion from the
resulting cut slopes has not been addressed in the necessary sitespecific manner.
While I could continue with examples, r think this illustrated the
problems with the present draft. If they adhere to their present
timetable of a summer release of the draft ErS, it is doubtful that
~e necessary revisions will be done. Some sections require complete
rewriting. We would like to see the public receive a. fair and
accurate document. This is why we are requesting your assistance.
We worry that after $620,000.00 is spent on this study, there will
be a feeling that it is necessary to proceed regardless of the
q~Iity of the document.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
. ~~a2ZLr
Stephan D. Flint
Home: 752-9102
Work: 750-2474 or
752-2242
Copies: Bridgerland Audubon
Cache Group Sierra Club
Utah Wilderness Association
Hill Helm
�
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/58">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/58</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
515882524
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1572529 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 Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon representative Stephan Flint discussing the drafted EIS and the how the document could be improved to better reflect the needs and wants of the citizens.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Flint, Stephan D.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
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
1987-06-17
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache 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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS Series VIII Box 27 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/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_Fd9_Page_13.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/d2fc5512e48db87a809aedb4fa40bbb2.pdf
56c753dcfdb768cbee5acba209682074
PDF Text
Text
CPLC
Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Canyon
May . 10, 1988
Dave Baumgartner,
Logan District Ranger
U.S. Forest Service
860 North 1200 East
Logan, UT 84321
Dear Dave:
After reviewing the maps for Logan Canyon's highway, we are
submitting the following concerns, comments and questions:
Overall Statement
The environmental community has been asked to evaluate a
number of proposals within a new alternative which has never
before been presented and hence subjected to close review and
environmental or engineering analysis.
We do not understand why
our alternative
(August,
1987)
has not
been given more
consideration.
We simply do not feel comfortable with this
approach; in fact,
the approach at this point seems to be
"backwards."
We ask that the Forest Service carefully consider
our comments as follows:
General Comments
(1) The overall process is becoming difficult to follow at this
point. We really do not have a complete understanding of what is
actually being proposed and how some of the newer proposals (such
as moving Beaver Creek) will affect the Canyon's environment and
scenic quality. We would like to see a specific list which could
be shared for comment solicitation from the public. Perhaps, a
new public scoping document/hearing needs to be prepared if the
new
highway
modifications/alternatives
will
be seriously
considered. It would be much easier to discuss the Canyon's
future with a common document from the engineers; this document
should be prepared before the "grand field trip" occurs.
(2)
The "grand field trip" should be held on a weekend so that
it is not limited to elected officials and government
staff.
(3)
We still want a
complete and
-
correct EIS without
1 -
p.o. box 3580 logan . ut 84321
�any gaps or factual errors.
(4)
Regarding curves and associated cutting/modifications, we
believe that cutting curves will simply -increase speed.
We
cannot accept vague notions of "improved sight distance" or
"driver comfort" with regard to the proposed modifications.
Also, the proposed modifications should be clearly identified on
the ground and maps;
at this point, we only have the original
CH2M Hill maps which you have indicated may be different from new
alternatives proposed by the three government engineers.
(5)
The final disposition of any removed rubble from curve
cutting and road realignment must still be identified and
explained. Because of the costs associated with the hauling of
rubble, it hard to believe that newly generated rubble would be
removed to Cache Valley or Bear Lake Valley. We are afraid that
UDOT would find some reason to "utilize" the rubble somewhere
along the highway or maybe on state land.
We have "Rubick's
Pile" and UDOT's regular river filling to remind us of their past
actions. This information must be included in detail, including
the economic aspects and reality, in the EIS.
(6)
We
still
believe
that
proper
signing,
including
reinstallation of the missing advisory signs,
will be the most
cost-effecti~and environmentally
sound method to insure highway
safety.
s&lely
(7)
Visual quality must
not
beA considered -from the
driver's perspective.
The perspective of all canyon use~s must
be carefully considered for each proposed modification, i.e. a
site specific analysis should be done.
Specific Comments
(1)
Curbs and gutter:
We need more details on the type, size
and location of the newly proposed curbs.
Our concerns include
(a) the possibility of drain gratings becoming bicycle traps, (b)
the possibility of new river contamination from runoff, (c)
increased maintenance activit:'y and problems, - (d)
increased
probability of this system to fail due to heavy precipitation or
lack of maintenance.
For example,
the curbs and gutters in Logan have numerous
problems despite regular city activities.
Another example
involves blacktop curbs in Capitol Reef National Park, where they
are crumbling and breaking apart.
If the proposed curbs and
gutters do fail, they might suddenly be replaced by ahoveranxious
maintenance staff at UDOT;
this could result in something very
undesireable.
The bqttom line, however, is that we simply need
much more detailed information on this proposal.
We cannot
resolve this issue by just talking about it. We need examples,
drawings and maps, along with a discussion of the issues.
- 2 -
�(2) Dugway: We are still opposed to a climbing lane in the
Dugway. A slow vehicle turnout below Lower Twin Bridge shou~d be
considered as noted in our proposal.
(3) Upper Twin Bridge: We believe that raising the roadbed will
affect the river because of the added fill.
(4) Logan Cave:
How will pedestrians go from the proposed
parking lot to the Cave? If the roadbed is raised, it should be
done in such a way that it is moved away from the river's edge
and the riparian habitat and vegetation is restored.
(5) Temple Fork
drawings.
Parking:
We need
more information, including
(6) Elk Point Bridges: We agree with the Forest Service that
the proposed dual bridges for Elk Point are not needed, would
damage the immediate environment, increase safety problems and
affect wildlife, ' especially big game,
who use the area in the
winter.
. . ~1!)"' j~ It
)'; c
I~e< . . . .
(7)
Increased Pavement Width at Tony Grove Basin:
We are
pleased that the 40 foot pavement width has been abandoned at
this location. However,
we are concerned about another "hodge
podge" approach to the Canyon's highway. The highway's size
through this portion of the Canyon should be as similar as
possible to the highway in the Middle Canyon and Beaver Creek.
We are afraid that
_ varying the road size by as much as is
proposed will convey a false impression that this is a high speed
route.
(8)
Beaver Creek: We still do not understand what is being
proposed for
what locations.
We
really need maps and
justifications. At this point, it appears to be an attempt to
justify a significantly wider highway which may not be needed.
(9) Multipurpose Turnouts:
The current prpposals do not
consider multipurpose turnouts. UDOT appears to be afraid of
this idea, and we are not really sure why since they do work in
other states.
We have listed several possibilities in our
proposal.
(10) Upper Canyon Climbing Lanes: We need more information on
the proposed sizes for the climbing lanes past Beaver Mountain.
We could not support a full size standard highway with a climbing
lane through these upper sections.
We are also concerned about
potential road cuts near Amazon Mine.
(ll) Limber Pine Fill: We would like to see a fill map for this
curve and identify the source of the material.
- 3 -
�Please 'understand that these comments cannot be complete '.\ since
we do not have any specific document to look at.
~hanks for your - consi~~ra~iohs,
/1,vnuA/J
Steve Flint, Conservation Com
Bridgerland Audubon Society
1~ r
Tom Lyon, Board Member
Utah Wilderness Association
cc:
Dale Bosworth
Dick Pine
Stan Tixier
- 4 -
�
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/134">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/134</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
3888207725
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
2549459 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 Rudy Lukez, Steve Flint and Tom Lyon to Dave Baumgartner, May 10, 1988
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Rudy Lukez, Steve Flint and Tom Lyon to Dave Baumgartner expressing their concerns about many of the alternatives while questioning while their alternative is not seriously considered, asking for Forest Service to carefully consider their comments as contained in this letter, mentioning that the overall process of the project has become hard to follow, and requesting a complete Environmental Impact Statement.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Flint, Stephan D.
Lukez, Rudy
Lyon, Thomas J.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Traffic engineering
Roads--Design and construction
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Logan Canyon Environmental Study
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1988-05-10
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_5.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/90f397d662aa859d917a077a039735f5.pdf
44f3f702a61ea224570d3ba4f2b8577b
PDF Text
Text
5/1/87
A number of us met with Dale Bosworth, W. N.
F. Sup., and his staff concerning the issues
in Logan Cyn. We talked about the fact that
the forest plan which highl ights the Logan
Canyon as a managmeent area to be mainatined
in the existijng condition should dictate the
Forest Service position on the FHA and UDOT
proposals to upgrade the canyon. In other
words some alternatives whioch would not meet
the constraints of the management area in the
forest plan simply should be upfront
discarded by the Forest Service because they
are not consitent with the forest plan.
We also impressed the staff with the impacts
of any development proposals and the fact
that the Forest Service is not being
aggressive enough in the issue.
seemed to 1 isten and genuinely be
concerned about the imapcts and the concerns
of failure in making the Forest Service
aggressive. He was unwill ing to terminate at
the top alternatives in the FHA d. EIS which
are not consitent witht he forst plan. He
argued through mitigation you may be able to
solve soime issues. He would not interpret
the plan as to what it meant. he kept
saying different interp. of the plan eXIst.
finally got mad and said damnit it's your
plan what does it say--no answer but it had
an impact.
80S.
He will send a letter to all cocnerned
assuring them F)S) will get serious.
�
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/164">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/164</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
1740859882
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1586111 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 Stephan Flint to Wes Wilson, June 17, 1987
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Stephan Flint to Wes Wilson, June 17, 1987
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Flint, Stephan D.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Environmental policy
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Correspondence
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-06-17
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_16.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/87f27be5fc4b44715c9e736513b021d3.mp3
4afbeb1cc783da65344622f31dc0babe
http://highway89.org/files/original/45987ab74b11c9efbdb8c823a81f8a0c.pdf
52c21a00eb8658d9b61ec2b9c93e8162
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Katherine Gilbert
Place of Interview: 1636 Sunset Drive Logan, UT
Date of Interview: 8 April 2008
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Barbara Middleton
Barbara Middleton
Recording Equipment:
Transcription Equipment used:
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Radio Shack Cassette Recorder: CTR-122
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Susan Gross
Kathy Gilbert [who made some additions] and Barbara Middleton;
Randy Williams (29 June 2011)
Brief Description of Contents: Katherine Gilbert briefly talks about her childhood in Canada
and fond memories of outdoor experiences in her youth. She discusses her college education and
subsequent jobs and training, and then speaks about influences as an adult which inspired her to
be proactive toward protecting the natural beauties surrounding her residence. She discusses the
formation of the Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon [CPLC] and her role within the
organization. She talks about the CPLC’s part in the planning of improvements and expansion of
the highway and bridges in Logan Canyon.
Reference:
BM = Barbara Middleton (Interviewer; Interpretive Specialist,
Environment & Society Dept., USU College of Natural Resources)
KG = Katherine Gilbert
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcribed. All additions to transcript are noted with
brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 1: A]
BM:
This is Barbara Middleton and this is tape one, side one on Logan Canyon Land Use
Management Oral History Project. We’re here with Katherine Gilbert at 1636 Sunset
Drive in Logan, Utah. And it is Tuesday April 8, 2008. Katherine, would you introduce
yourself?
KG:
Yes. It’s a pleasure to do this Barbara. I’m going to use the cheat sheet here and look at
the questions. Did you want to ask me the questions first, or did you want me to just refer
to them?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
1
�BM:
Go ahead and just refer to them, that’s fine.
KG:
Okay.
[Reading question to self] What is your background and please describe your schooling,
training in your field?
Well I have a had a love affair with Utah since 1976 when my husband and I and two
children returned to Logan after my husband having had the opportunity to spend a year
and a half here as a post-doc. When we came here he was in the Department of Fisheries
and Wildlife in the College of Natural Resources and I was a mom at home. And of
course we just absolutely adored having Logan Canyon at our back door, and we partook
of many activities in the canyon; whether it was hiking in the fall or in the spring or
skiing at Beaver Mountain in the winter, and ultimately cross-country skiing.
My background is that I had an undergraduate degree in the hard sciences from Queens
University. And by hard science I meant it was mainly chemistry with a little bit of
biology. After that training I worked in medical centers; first of all in Montreal –
Montreal was where I was born (Quebec, Canada), and for five years at Duke University
in an immunology research lab where they were doing some of the first kidney
transplants. After I came to Utah and my children were in school I got a master’s degree
in School Psychology. I worked for Cache County school district for approximately 20
years after getting my masters degree in school psychology. I just recently retired in June
of 2006.
[Stop recording]
BM:
Alright, we’re back on.
KG:
Okay so Barbara has asked me to say when I was born. It was 1942 in Montreal. I grew
up there. And I think that my love of the out of doors was inspired by my wonderful
summers in the Laurentian Mountains and at a wonderful lake where we swam and
boated and hiked and just literally spent every day outside.
The next part she’s asked me to add to was when I got my undergraduate degree, which
was in 1963 at Queens University, Kingston, Ontario. And after that I returned to
Montreal for a couple of years where I worked at Primary Children’s Hospital in a blood
lab, basically just doing standard analysis for medical purposes, which at that time was
not automated but was starting to be automated.
I came to the United States in 1965 and lived in North Carolina for five years, where my
husband was doing a PhD graduate degree. At that time, that’s when I worked in the
immunology lab at Duke University Medical Center which was really a booming,
growing university with a lot of funding from NIH [National Institutes of Health]. So that
was an exciting field to be in. We were looking at the basic immunology of transplants –
looking at what caused the tissue to be rejected. We were working with mice strains. I
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
2
�worked for five years in the immunology lab and taught school for one year at Durham
Academy, a private school.
Have I answered enough of those questions?
BM:
That’s fine.
KG:
[Reading question to self] So who were some of the most influential teachers in
instructing you in your field and why were they so influential?
I can’t say that for this work that I became involved with in Logan Canyon it was
teachers, per se, but it was the outdoor experiences growing up – which was in the ‘50s
which had to be ideal because one was able to escape to the country and live the simple
life relatively easily. And so I had wonderful summers in the Laurentian Mountains. And
also being at Queens University which is on the Saint Lawrence River right where Lake
Ontario starts; and that was a lovely natural area to be able to look at every day of your
life because the university was on the lake.
BM:
Kathy, a little bit on the Laurentian Mountains – do you think you could tell us where
they are like points in between if you wanted to locate those on the map?
KG:
Yes. We were about 45 miles north of Montreal. You would head up into these rolling
hills – they’re much like the Adirondacks, they’re old, old mountains. And they’re
developed in the winter for skiing. The towns that I would have been near, close to where
our lake was, were Saint Sauveur (and those are paintings of Saint Sauveur on the wall
there; old with the horse drawn buggies and 20 years later).
BM:
We’re looking at two pictures, great winter scenes, are those oils?
KG:
Yes. And they’re done by a very well-known Canadian artist. I’ve carried those around
with me over the years to remind me of Saint Sauveur.
BM:
Wonderful. Is that somebody skating?
KG:
It’s just a kid in a toque on the street.
BM:
In a toque?
KG:
The red toque. [Knitted hat: beanie.] Houses were very brilliantly colored, painted – it’s
French Canadian.
Then from Saint Sauveur the next town was Morin Heights and that was actually an
English enclave in the Laurentians, and it still is to this day. And then Sixteen Island
Lake (which literally had 16 islands) was a beautiful lake; pristine, clear – it had no road
down it so when we went down the lake to see our friends or go to the clubhouse, one
would go on a boat (which for us was a flat-bottom rowboat with seven horsepower
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
3
�motor on it). We went there every summer. It’s called “Lac des Seize Iles” in French and
there are some people who have lived on the lake for generations. It was a physical
landscape that you learn as a child and those memories stay with you the rest of your life.
BM:
Were there other siblings then that were with you, brothers and sisters?
KG:
Yes, I was the oldest of three so we all went as a family. So that would have been the
influence for my enchantment with the West, to come west and to see all these beautiful
open lands and running streams and the opportunity to live at the mouth of Logan
Canyon. I think when you’ve grown up in a more developed area the opportunity to live
in a more natural area is very attractive.
Okay, the next question about [reading question to self] What were your family’s land use
traditions? Were there special celebrations during the year that you remember and want
to share?
As far as Logan Canyon goes we certainly enjoyed it for hikes and walks and retreats on
the weekend, especially going skiing. It gave the children an excellent opportunity to
learn downhill skiing, which I think is a great sport at certain times in your life and a way
to meet people and be active. I think people who like the winter find a way to spend time
outside.
BM:
Is that Beaver Mountain then?
KG:
Yes, we went to Beaver Mountain.
BM:
What are other places then in the canyon that the kids really enjoyed that you went to
specifically.
KG:
I think as far as going as a family, we just did hiking – short hikes, maybe up to the Wind
Caves and that sort of thing. And then I think when the kids were in high school they
went on their own – like they could drive up. And I’m sure they had picnics. They didn’t
use the canyon a lot. We tended to leave Logan in the summer, so our recreation was
back East with our family on the Saint Lawrence River.
My hobbies and recreational pursuits are again just outdoor activities. I enjoy getting out.
And certainly as I gave up the downhill skiing I really enjoyed going to places like
Temple Fork and some of the cross-country ski trails around Beaver, before they came
inundated with snowmobilers. Wood Camp Hollow
BM:
Saint Anne’s?
KG:
Yes, but what’s the marker on the road?
[Stop and start recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
4
�KG:
Right Hand Fork was another favorite place, mainly because it was close.
(So have we finished, I think I finished that page, yes.)
[Reading question to self] To connections to Logan Canyon, what was your earliest
memory of Logan Canyon?
Well my earliest memory was the early ‘70s, probably 1970 when we actually came to
Logan, my husband had a post-doc here and we actually camped in Logan Canyon near
the Zanavoo Lodge. There is a name for that campground, but we camped there and
looked for a place to live. It’s quite dramatic driving down Logan Canyon for the first
time.
[Stop and start recording]
So it was Bridger Campground. And then of course living near the university and living
at the mouth of the canyon, you know, we went up to the lower part quite frequently just
for day walks or short walks.
BM:
And how long did you live there?
KG:
Live where?
BM:
At the campground?
KG:
Oh, we just stayed there a week or something. Yes, we just stayed there a week and
looked for housing.
BM:
Okay.
KG:
I think it was a week. I wasn’t too impressed camping with a new baby. [Laughing]
BM:
How old?
KG:
Oh about four months, I don’t know – I don’t remember. I’m trying to think when we
came. It was the end of summer I think.
BM:
So it was fairly dry.
KG:
Yes, it was dry. It was cold at night. And we were in a Volkswagen Bug with a roof rack
on and, anyway.
BM:
That’s great! [Laughing]
KG:
[Reading question to self] So in what areas of Logan Canyon were you most active?
Special places? What is your favorite place in the canyon?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
5
�I was most active in Temple Fork, Tony Grove, Right Hand Fork, loved the Summit for
skiing in the winter – the Sinks before all the snowmobilers went up there; Beaver
Mountain for skiing.
BM:
I can’t imagine how that area, especially, Beaver Mountain area and that Sinks area has
changed.
KG:
Oh, it’s just remarkably changed; and we can thank Doug Thompson, our Logan mayor,
for that who advertised nationally for snowmobiling in that area. And that will be another
topic, I think in your interview about the canyon and the policy and the motorized traffic
transport; the amount of canyon areas dedicated to that. But that, I think, is probably
treated better in the comment about the Forest Service management about the canyon.
BM:
Can I just ask you one question?
KG:
Sure.
BM:
Getting up there, the road has changed, but time wise how long did it take you to drive up
to a place like Beaver to go with your kids; and the road conditions at that time --?
KG:
Were excellent. It was well plowed. We would allow 45 minutes – of course in the spring
when the road is bare and dry you could maybe come home faster. When we started using
Logan Canyon it had the upgrade of the lower ten miles or whatever it is. When you start
at Logan and go up the canyon – that had always been finished when we used it. That
was in the ‘60s I think, late ‘60s that they did that.
BM:
Did the canyon ever close because of bad weather? Was that a fairly frequent-?
KG:
No. Never. Never that I remember. Let’s see now.
What are some of the major influences, obvious needs that helped you make the choice to
pursue this connection with Logan Canyon?
We obviously used it and got to know it. A turning point for me was coming back from a
sabbatical in Australia and we had had a wonderful opportunity to spend a lot of time on
the east coast and get out to the Great Barrier Reef. A few people and the beautiful areas
in Australia and it was brought home rather quickly that the people that are living in the
area are the people that are going to protect it. So part of this project is to document the
second upgrading of the road – the higher part of the canyon. And I returned to Logan
just at this time when they were making the proposals for what road modifications they
were going to make to handle the traffic better.
BM:
So what year are we talking about?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
6
�KG:
Well I think we’re talking about 1995, but you would want – it could be ’94, it could
have been started. I’ve had a hard time remembering – there was a lot of talk about this
road and what was going to be modified and I don’t know that, again this is the place to
talk about that. If you want to get through this questionnaire and then sort of chunk the
road development, the influence that the Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon had
on how that road was so-called “improved” and then about the land management uses -because that all kind of goes together in a bundle.
BM:
Would the sabbatical year would have been ’94-’95?
KG:
Yes.
BM:
Okay, okay.
KG:
Yes. And I can certainly confirm that. Unfortunately I’ve packed a lot of that
information, like pictures from my trip and stuff. I could be off by a year or two. I’m sure
that this will come together when you start looking at other people’s data, so I wouldn’t
be the only source of information on that.
BM:
Right. So part of what you’re saying here is that this sabbatical influence was being able
to be in a place like eastern Australia and then coming back and being confronted with
seeing what changes were about to happen?
KG:
Yes. Plus it was pretty arbitrary what was going to happen. People wanted to get up to
Bear Lake faster – it was hard to trail a boat in the narrow canyon. People in Garden City
wanted to get to the hospital faster. So there was quite a push to upgrade the
transportation corridor. The tractor transports wanted a shorter route to I-80 and using
Logan Canyon accomplishes that. The truckers wanted a safer canyon. These were all
rationales for making a wider, straighter highway. But maybe keeping the trucks out of
the canyon would make it safer! At the beginning, we weren’t aware of the truck lobby
for an upgrade of the canyon to make it safer. However, we won’t digress on that one at
this point.
[Reading question to self] What are some of the major influences, oh yes, that helped you
make the choice.
It was the contrast, it was the beauty and the uniqueness of the Great Barrier Reef and it
makes you frame again what is unique in your area. And there is no question that Logan
Canyon is unique. It is a Scenic Byway; it has not been developed, like many of the
canyons in the intermountain west where you have little enclaves of private holdings (so
you get little stores and gas stations and conglomeration of cottages or whatever). Logan
Canyon is scenic and continues to be scenic.
[Reading question to self] Land use changes in Logan Canyon. How have you
contributed to Land Use Changes in Logan Canyon?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
7
�Well, basically I haven’t. That is an issue with how you get the Forest Service to look
after land use. And we have tried for 15 years to change it and we still have the same
status quo. Again, I’d rather talk about that when we talk about the forest plans and of
course it was the Wasatch-Cache Forest when I was working on it but now it’s the
Wasatch-Cache-Uinta Forest.
[Reading question to self] So what is your overall impression how land use policies are
determined in Logan Canyon? In the Wasatch-Cache-Uinta National Forest?
[Stop and start recording]
KG:
Okay, are we on here?
BM:
We are on.
KG:
Okay. Barbara has asked me to talk a little bit more about the influence in my personal
life of what prompted me to become impassioned about Logan Canyon and preserving its
natural beauty and integrity and treating it with respect as we would like to see future
generations enjoy it as much as we have.
I mentioned earlier in the tape that it was coming back from Australia and seeing the
beautiful landscapes there, particularly the Great Barrier Reef and how unique it was and
how fragile it was, and getting the concept that really even though I love the Great
Barrier Reef it’s the people that live there who need to protect it and look after it and be
aware of what’s going on. And I was in the Great Barrier Reef in the mid-90s so we
weren’t talking about global warming and all the things that are happening to the reefs
very quickly around the world.
But long before I got involved with Logan Canyon there were a group of people at Utah
State who were very concerned about the impact of a road and the impact on the natural
beauty of it – back in the ‘60s. (And just as a side, as we started to work on the road and
whether it needed to be straightened or bridges needed to be widened, Paul Packer who
worked for the Forest Service for years, when he made a comment about the road once.
He said, “Those original road builders for Logan Canyon in the ‘30s did a marvelous job
of following the natural contours and it is a scenic byway and it should stay that way
because you can’t widen it in the narrow parts without destroying it.”
So to give Barbara a list of the people who I know worked on the early issues in Logan
Canyon were: Tom Lyon (he was in the English Department and he did a lot of nature
writing); Bill Helm (was a Fishery Biologist); Jack Spence (was a Chemistry professor);
Ron Goede and John Neuhold (Ron is a Fisheries Biologist and so is John. John worked
at the university, Ron worked for the state). But when I became involved with Logan
Canyon and the issue of the new road, it was Bruce Pendrey and Steve Flint who had
carried on the task of monitoring developments in Logan Canyon. Before CPLC formed
officially, in other words became incorporated as a non-profit, these two guys who were
in the Range Science Department at USU, were writing to or communicating with UDOT
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
8
�(Utah Department of Transportation) and the Forest Service and keeping an eye on what
was going on and trying to alert the public about the issues of Logan Canyon and
improvement on the road.
And before I say anything more about the issues that CPLC worked on, the lower part of
the canyon (and I believe it’s the lower seven to 10 miles) was improved in the ‘60s. And
it was a Fishery Biologist like Bill Helm who was just dumbfounded what they did to the
river because if you want to have a good trout stream you need pools of slow water and
you don’t want to force the river in to a narrow channel. When you widen the road you
make the river faster and straighter. I remember at one of the public meetings a presenter
showing us a picture of the lower canyon before it was widened. And he made the
comment, “You think Logan Canyon is beautiful now, you should have seen it before
they widened it.” Literally the trees arched right over the whole road. It was literally like
driving into the woods, this picture, from the lower – right after you cross the bridge
where you enter the canyon. Right there at, is it First Dam?
BM:
Boy.
KG:
So, there’s no question that they did some major road revision and I’m not an expert to
know specifically what was done but I’m sure it’s there if you want to interview these
other people.
So the reason that the public – and I say the public – because we were able to fill places
like the Logan Middle School auditorium, we were able to fill it with people when UDOT
scheduled public meetings to tell us what they were going to do with this road; how they
were going to improve it. And you have to remember that it was the consulting
companies like C2HMHill [from their website: 6/30/2011: As a global leader in
consulting, design, design-build, operations, and program management, CH2M HILL has
the human and technical resources, the international footprint, and the depth of knowhow and experience to help clients achieve success in any corner of the world.], who are
huge national consulting company, who made very, very thick books on what they were
going to do. It was really something to try and convince them they that needed to be more
sensitive to the canyon.
[Stop and start recording]
BM:
We’re on again.
KG:
So I should just add that when they first did the improvement in Logan Canyon there was
no NEPA process (which means National Environmental Planning Act) which was
passed in the early ‘70s. And that’s something that I won’t go into now. But now when
you have national lands, public lands, you have to follow that process. So I would like to
start how the citizens in Logan and surrounding areas became more specifically involved
with the second project that UDOT was going to do in Logan Canyon. The bridges
needed to be replaced and the approaches to the bridges needed to be replaced. So there
was a process for that that was a pretty big learning curve for all of us.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
9
�And I’ll stop at that place and let you turn the tape? Or do you want to -- ?
BM:
That’s good.
[Stop and start recording]
[Tape 1 of 1: B]
BM:
We’re starting Tape 1, Side 2 with Kathy Gilbert. Kathy, go ahead.
KG:
It soon became evident to the people that had been monitoring the proposals for road
improvements that it was actually going to happen. And so there was a small group of
people, again, that decided that they would try to do something, to find out more about
the process. Bruce and Steve no longer had the time; so six of us joined together to take a
look at so-called road improvements.
And we met regularly and we looked at what we had to do. And I personally remember
saying, “Well I will go to the Forest Service and see how they’re going to monitor, how
they’re going to look after the forest when the Department of Transportation decides to
build a highway through it.” And I didn’t even know there were things like a forest plan.
But what I quickly learned was that the Forest Service was just going to stand by and let
UDOT or C2HMHill tell them the kind of road to build. The Forest Service might
monitor a stream here and there, but that was it.
For this road upgrade the NEPA process was in effect. This meant public meetings and
an opportunity to comment on plans. The proponents of roads are very good at drawing
up these plans and it is difficult for individuals to challenge the system. The proponent
usually gets what they want and it was obvious that the Forest Service was not going to
be proactive in protecting the forest or the river. Once the Record of Decision (ROD) was
issued by the State of Utah, we had a number of challenges. We challenged the amount of
road widening needed for the bridges, especially in the lower canyon, how the bridges
would be built and how they would take out the old bridge so impact to the river would
be minimal. We wanted building materials that integrated with the natural landscape.
But to give you an overview, a group of us formed the Citizens for the Protection of
Logan Canyon (CPLC). We incorporated as a non-profit, so we had our bylaws and we
had our mode of operation (with the president, and a secretary and a treasurer). We took
that Record of Decision, and I have to say that Sean Swaner who was a student at USU in
biology lead the charge. He was brilliant and a quick study on many issues. He had great
people skills and did an incredible amount of work talking to the engineers about the
actual design of the road and why we should have a shorter wide approach to the bridge.
CPLC recruited lots of members and got members out to public hearings. Utah
Department of Transportation (UDOT) was willing to listen to the public. They had had a
major fiasco with widening Provo Canyon and they wanted to do better. Over a period of
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
10
�about a year we got many changes that reduced the impact of the road and protected the
canyon and the river. We did need a safer road; we did need the bridges replaced. And I
think it was one of these situations where, no, we didn’t get everything but we got a lot of
accommodations that preserved the canyon. And that was good.
BM:
In terms of feeling positive that UDOT really did make an effort to listen and incorporate
some of these –
KG:
Yes, they did. I mean I’m not saying that they just did it willingly from the beginning.
We had a lot of correspondence and had to hire a lawyer to press our case. It was a huge
effort on our part. We tried to get the Forest Service involved so that they would stand up
for what needed to be done for preservation. We didn’t want a big wide road and I think
if you drive it now you’ll see that there isn’t one. I mean there are some wider lanes up by
Red Banks campground that we didn’t think were needed, but that is not significant
compared to the overall changes.
[KG wrote: BM your question is missing here. This following paragraph is about the
visitor center that Logan Canyon Coalition worked on to reduce its impact.]
Certainly this is a project that took place much later, it’s just recently been finished, is the
new Visitors’ Center at the summit. CPLC only negotiated for the road. We didn’t get
everything, but there were some people in the group who felt like we should get more and
they broke off and formed Logan Canyon Coalition. And the persons that were most
involved with that initially were Gordon Steinhoff and Kevin Kobe, and they would
certainly be people worth interviewing for that because I didn’t keep up with it at that
point. I felt like we’d gotten the best we could and the construction was starting. And that
was it, it was finished; it was a done deal.
Once the road construction started I took a rest from it. There were volunteers involved in
monitoring during the construction but basically CPLC took a rest. Some of us felt that
the road was no longer an issue and that it was land management practices that would
have a bigger long term effect on the canyon. This is the domain of the Forest Service.
So I think I’m going to defer to Barbara here and see if she has any questions; more about
the formation of CPLC, and what we did or didn’t do.
BM:
What year was that when you split?
KG:
I can’t remember the year we split. The year we incorporated was 1995. And that went on
until – as far as the road issue and the bridges and the building of the road – that went on
to 2000. We did not get involved in anything from the summit down to Garden City. We
felt if they wanted a straight-away, they could have it. It was really the river and the
protection of the canyon – the narrow part of the canyon – that we were interested in.
BM:
So the summit, exactly, what would be a great reference point for people who are in that
canyon? Limber Pine trail?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
11
�KG:
Yes.
BM:
Okay.
KG:
You’re just at the very top and you’re almost looking down on Bear Lake, really, or the
new rest stop.
BM:
You mentioned that in the CPLC you also had students and landscape architecture
involved. Because we’re at the university, would you just mention some of those other
departments besides Landscape Architecture and Natural Resources?
KG:
They weren’t any departments involved. It was people like, for instance, Mike Timmons
in the Landscape Architecture department and he had been involved with some of those
early people with the first road upgrade in the 60’s. He said when he first moved to
Logan that was one of the first things he heard about – is this road that they were going to
build. This road was always going to happen. The second part of this project was always
in the distant future. We knew it was coming and UDOT has its budgets and it replaces
bridges and it widens roads as the budgets come up and they’re available. So I think
people were stunned at what they did in the lower part of the canyon. I wasn’t because I
never saw it before. So that’s just – we were primed! [Laughing]
BM:
Well and also with that UDOT back run you mentioned with Provo Canyon being – did
you say a “failure” or ---
KG:
Well, I don’t know that it was a failure. It was very expensive for them and they did try to
make it into four lanes – and I guess it is four lanes. But it was another very scenic
canyon that was a massive construction project. I can’t comment on it, I just know that
there were slides and they were over-budget and that sort of thing. So I’m sure it was
distressing to all the people involved.
BM:
In those kinds of influences have got to be part of the history of why things happen at
different times –
KG:
Right.
BM:
Such as, you know, UDOT maybe listening a little bit better.
KG:
Right. Right. I know. And again, I did not do that negotiating part. Sean did; he was
incredible.
BM:
Do you think there were other influences in the Cache Valley community during this
mid-90s to early 2000 era that were influential besides just land use management? Are
there other – can you reflect on any other kind of history or movements that are going
on?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
12
�KG:
Well, Bridgerland Audubon Society was the people that were the umbrella group for
CPLC and the road. They were supportive of us – in other words, I think it’s really
important when you’re doing this grassroots work that you have a group that you can
connect to. Bridgerland is another 5013C – or a non-profit. They had people, they had the
contacts, they had a newsletter that went out once a month. So they were certainly an
umbrella group for people who were interested in becoming more active in how the road
– you know, the impact of the road.
BM:
Were there other issues at the time that they were involved with? I know wetlands, right
now is a very big issue, and protecting Cutler, and that…..
KG:
Right. I can’t speak to that because I was not a member of Audubon. I certainly knew of
it and had friends who were in Audubon but I wasn’t involved with Audubon, so I
couldn’t tell you.
BM:
Okay.
[Stop and start recording]
BM:
What are the aspects of this projects with policy and with involvement – which I phrase
as “participatory democracy” – and is important for all levels of our population to hear is
the challenge of involvement and also the joys of being involved with that. And I wonder
if you could reflect a little on that, on your role?
KG:
Well I like the idea of the joys of it because I certainly met a tremendous diversity of
people and it was really fun to work with them and to see their passion. And so when you
get involved with something like CPLC or protecting Logan Canyon, it is very
reinforcing to work with others who have the same passion. And I think if you asked all
those people to show their favorite family pictures – we all have pictures standing at
Wind Caves on a beautiful fall afternoon, or standing by the river – and the idea that it
could be lost is really quite a tragic thought to people. So that is where the initial
motivation comes from: to want to protect something that’s in your backyard, that’s in
your everyday experience that adds pleasure to your life. And then when you start to
work at it and you see the mammoth institutions that you are up against, such as the
highway department (“we build roads, we fix bridges we do it the way the engineers tell
us to do it”); or the Forest Service (“Traditionally we’ve run cattle on these lands; they’re
degraded, we know they’re degraded; we have experts on plant ecology and streams and
fish but right now, politically we can’t do anything.”). So that can be a huge stumbling
block that you feel you’re up against these institutions or these have agencies that lots of
money and power.
But at the end of the day, for me as I started to work on it – first of all it was an education
process – learning about streams, fish, plants, cattle, whatever; even meeting ranchers
that I never would have had the opportunity to meet – is that I was going to try to
influence activities (whether it’s road building, cattle running, forest management)
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
13
�because at the end of the day if it wasn’t fixed or it was done, it wouldn’t be for lack of
trying.
That’s a very roundabout way of saying at the end of the day I gave it a fair shot. And I
had lots of people to help. Lots of professionals who were also passionate about it –
maybe didn’t have the time, but certainly gave of their professional knowledge. And you
work at these things as long as you can work at them and do it at a level that is satisfying
to you. And I felt like I had to learn quite a bit before I could write letters to the Forest
Service or to UDOT or to whomever I was communicating with. But at the end of the day
you just have to say your part. And that’s where it’s at.
BM:
And you felt like you had a tremendous team working with you at that time?
KG:
Well yes, everybody had great ideas. Yes, there were a lot of people and they’re out
there. They’re out there for everything if you’re willing to seek them out. There are
currently people in the valley, like the Bear River Watershed Council, who have
continued on. I’m not up on what Audubon is doing these days, but I haven’t been living
here so.
[Stop and start recording]
BM:
Kathy, do you have a particular story that you would like to share from your work here in
Cache Valley, in Logan Canyon, a particular one that comes to mind? In terms of
walking the landscape with some of your colleagues on this, a particular place?
KG:
Well we did a lot of work up Spawn Creek and I have that documented in a book, where
we were looking at the impact of cattle on the land and measuring sediment in the stream.
And the Forest Service has had that as sort of their exemplary place. Again, I’m not up to
speed on what’s happening right now. But it was fun to go up with John Carter and my
husband Barrie, and the few people that came to do those treks – to just walk the stream
and see it at different times of year. But I don’t really have any specific story in the
canyon, except to be astounded to some of the ugly places due to what the cattle of done.
And I mean it’s documented in pictures. I mean it’s just trashed, like beaver dams that are
just – well you wouldn’t want to even eat your lunch there.
BM:
And overgrazing?
KG:
Yes, well it’s just abuse of the land. It’s just not good management. And I think it’s very
sad.
BM:
What about books or writings that have influenced you?
KG:
Yes. I mentioned earlier today – Debra Donahue, Revisiting Western Lands [The
Western Range Revisited: Removing Livestock from Public Lands to Conserve Native
Biodiversity (1999)]; Wallace Stegner who writes eloquently about issues in the western
landscape. I frankly can’t remember the names and the titles, but I did read books that
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
14
�were recommended by friends and colleagues. And I certainly will get the names of those
to you.
BM:
And why the Donahue book -- Revisiting Western Lands?
KG:
Well she had such an experience – both from the legal perspective, she’s in the law
school in Wyoming. The head of the State Senate tried to get her fired when she came out
with her book. You’d have to read Andy Kerr’s review on that website. It’s been a while
since I’ve read it; it’s just that she had a great combination of knowledge about the
landscape and then the legal part of it. So it was very brave of her to write that book and
it was very informative for those who are trying to get the federal agencies to do their job.
BM:
And that was published about when?
KG:
I don’t know. I think mid-90s; I can’t tell you. I don’t have the book right now to lay my
hands on it.
BM:
Okay, I can look that up; and then Stegner also?
KG:
Yes, Wallace Stegner.
BM:
Um-hmm.
KG:
He actually came to Utah State in the ‘70s to give seminars to the English Department, if
you can believe it! How did I get involved with him? I don’t know, I just like his
writings. He did a lot of nature writing – I can’t tell you. I read his biography. He’s
eloquent.
BM:
Was he here with the Western Writers Project with Tom Lyon?
KG:
I think so. I don’t know. I wasn’t here – I didn’t come until ’76 to Logan. And my
understanding he was really here the early ‘70s, but he gave workshops regularly. All his
papers are in University of Utah.
BM:
That must have incredible to see him.
KG:
Yes, it would be.
BM:
And hear him.
KG:
Um-hmm, um-hmm.
BM:
Okay. Anything else you’d like to add for today’s tape? We’re going to continue at a later
date, looking at some of the specific letters and some of the other work that you’ve done
with the CPLC. But anything else for today that you’d like to add to culminate our visit?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
15
�KG:
I don’t think so; I think that’s just about it.
BM:
Well thank you very much for today’s interview.
KG:
You’re welcome!
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
8
April
2008
Page
16
�
http://highway89.org/files/original/c94ac092808436836b10ec4a9d32eba5.mp3
de4ab70137316b8395c4a8d8076edb31
http://highway89.org/files/original/f63c793673e7543a4a93195ce22988f9.pdf
e69442e9721f537a78e61e144ac97ed0
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Katherine Gilbert
Place of Interview: Katherine Gilbert’s home in Logan, UT
Date of Interview: 29 April 2008
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Barbara Middleton
Barbara Middleton
Recording Equipment:
Transcription Equipment used:
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Radio Shack Cassette Tape Recorder: CTR-122
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Susan Gross
Katherine Gilbert [who added some information] and Barbara
Middleton; Randy Williams (30 June 2011)
Brief Description of Contents: Kathy speaks about the direction the Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Canyon [CPLC] took after the completion of the Logan Highway project; getting
involved in land use management issues. She also discusses the differences between the CPLC
and the Logan Canyon Coalition [LCC]. She ends the interview with some memories of growing
up in Montreal and skiing in the Laurentian Mountains.
Reference:
BM = Barbara Middleton (Interviewer; Interpretive Specialist,
Environment & Society Dept., USU College of Natural Resources)
KG = Katherine Gilbert
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcribed. All additions to transcript are noted with
brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 1: A]
BM:
We’re here with Kathy Gilbert on Tuesday, April 29, 2008. We’re in her home on Sunset
Drive in Logan. And we are here to continue with our discussion with Logan Canyon and
the oral histories and some of the activities that Kathy was involved with through the
CPLC and some of the other organizations.
Okay Kathy. Kathy’s got a map in front of her and is going to talk a little bit about the
location of some of the areas – a Logan Canyon map.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
1
�[Speaking directly to Kathy] Why don’t you point out some of the areas that you were
involved with. Bear Hodges, or --?
KG:
Well, first of all I’ll just go over our mission statement for the Citizens for the Protection
of Logan Canyon [CPLC] It was to “protect the natural beauty and overall integrity of the
canyon.” Now that the road was “fait accompli” in the sense that we’d had our input with
the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), with road and bridge modifications and
it had been built according to the guidelines in the Record of Decision we turned our
attention to other issues. The road building took about 5 years beginning to end (19952000).
And as we educated ourselves about the issues in Logan Canyon it was no longer the road
having a huge impact, but how the lands were managed. And so the Forest Service was
redoing the Forest Plan and there were issues that they had to address. And there were
procedures, policies that they had to follow. And at the same time that they were redoing
the Forest Plan, there was a mandate, I believe, at the federal level that the Forest Service
had to do an Environmental Impact Statement (commonly known as an EIS) for every
cattle allotment. And of course the Forest Service didn’t have the manpower to do this.
And we felt that the first allotment that needed to be looked at (and we needed to look
over the shoulder of the Forest Service) was the North Rich cattle allotment because it is
one of the largest. It is 27,000 acres along the ridge of the Bear River Range and goes
into the sinks of Cache and Rich Counties. And I have a letter here to our membership,
dated April 24, 2000, which does a nice job of summarizing what the allotment was – still
is – what action was being taken at that time by the U.S. Forest Service, and why this
particular allotment was important. And it was important because it had a diversity of
species and parts of it had been very much abused by land uses. So that was the
beginning of our switch from the road to the land management issues.
BM:
So basically what you’re saying is that in order to protect the canyon and the kinds of
values and aesthetics and conservation concerns with wildlife and water -- the group
really formed with the road issue, but with the road issue moving into other areas, it was
now becoming the adjacent land management and all that involved. So this was your first
--.
KG:
Right. Yes, and the big impetus of course the Audubon people and there was quite a
broad base in Cache Valley – was the increase in motorized traffic (both snowmobiling in
the winter and all terrain vehicles in the summer). And they were making many, many
inroads – non-legal roads, paths – that they traveled along (this was the summer traffic).
And then of course with the winter traffic and these high-powered snowmobiles they
were able to go up very steep slopes and that has an impact for the wildlife. In other
words, when the snowmobiles pack down the surface of the high terrain, predators such
as coyotes start to compete with the lynx. The lynx can travel in deep snow and so its
food base is depleted if coyotes get access because of snowmobiles. And then there was
also the issue of the Nordic skiers and their yurt in the high country. The skiers would
tromp in, taking all day to get there, to stay in the yurt and the snowmobilers would have
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
2
�come in and trampled all the nice powder. So they wanted an area set aside for nonmotorized use. And the two people that you need to talk to about that are Bryan Dixon
and Lou Reynolds – who were very active in the new Forest Service Plan in protecting
that area for non-motorized traffic in the winter. And they actually had a lawsuit over the
Forest Service arbitrarily changing the winter travel plan. They won the first time and
then the snowmobilers went back to Rod Bishop, a congressman and had the decision
reversed.
BM:
Now the cross-country ski people, was that Nordic United?
KG:
I think they formed that group. I’m not up on it. By this time I was out of the valley
enough for extended periods of time that I couldn’t keep up with it.
BM:
I’ll check up on that.
KG:
And CPLC was essentially dissolved as far as, what you call NGO – Non-Governmental
Organization.
BM:
Like a non-profit?
KG:
Non-profit, yes.
BM:
So dissolved as of 2002?
KG:
Actually just in ’06. We kept it registered with the state for several years, because it’s
very expensive to start it up with all the paperwork, but. CPLC began under the auspices
of Audubon which gave them, you know, non-profit status and access to the
environmental community. They were very supportive and very good.
BM:
Is Audubon still involved with some of those issues?
KG:
I wouldn’t say so.
BM:
No? So between the time that you started under the auspices of Audubon and the
organization was dissolved – in that time, the road issues, and then the adjacent land
issues involving monitoring with group citizens – there were other people that were
becoming involved and going out and helping the Forest Service actually keep track of
some of those areas?
KG:
Well I’m going to be pretty definite here. We never wanted to “help” the Forest Service.
We wanted the Forest Service to do their job. And John Carter did a lot of monitoring on
his own because he realized that when he was out hiking in the forest – and he did a lot of
it – he saw how degraded it was. And he took pictures, and he wrote them and he
requested interventions to stop these destructive practices -- there’s a whole literature, a
whole background that he can tell you about – he formed his own organization and then
he joined with Western Watersheds eventually (which he’s still with). This is a huge
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
3
�issue in the West. It’s not unique to Logan Canyon, nor to the Forest Service; BLM lands
have also got the same issues.
BM:
Um-hmm.
KG:
So no one man could do it. I think what happened with our group is as we worked more
with the Forest Service and we got more involved and educated ourselves, we saw these
land use issues that really none of us were aware of.
BM:
Um-hmm.
KG:
BM:
So I know there were groups that started up in Cache Valley that were interested in
monitoring these “illegal roads” and – it’s Dan Miller and his group (and I gave you that
contact) – and he would tell you what they’ve done. And they may have had volunteers
that went out and saw who was running around the forest on illegal roads – but it’s very,
very difficult to manage. And the Forest Service had no staff to manage it.
Right.
KG:
So.
BM:
Well and there are groups – there is a group that I am familiar with up in the Smithfield
area – and it may be Dan Miller’s group – that is actually going out and they have been
regularly photographing through photo points to monitor the changes.
KG:
Yes. We have monitored the forest to death. It has massive destruction – the Forest
Service needs to do something about it. But the motorized recreation people are such a
force that I don’t think – it’s the same as the issue in Yellowstone about snowmobilers
going into the park. We have overwhelming support that the public doesn’t want
motorized traffic in the park and they can always find a way to let in a certain number.
It’s a huge lobby. So I don’t know what those groups are doing but we don’t need any
more monitoring – we need action.
BM:
And the changes in the canyon, with some of the land sales, the land swaps – when land
comes up for private availability, do you see that as an increase in more of the access --?
KG:
Well, I thought when I was involved with the land swap up there they were very
interested in doing it right and protecting the riparian area and Dick Toth and his
landscape architecture group drew up a wonderful plan for that area. And there are ways
to mitigate – you have development, but you concentrate it and you listen to the experts
that can tell you how to preserve the viewscape and how to preserve water quality, and
you know? It can be done. It seems that monetary interests trump everything.
BM:
And the choices get made in that direction?
KG:
Well, you know, it’s political. It becomes political.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
4
�BM:
Um-hmm.
[Stop and start recording]
BM:
Alright, the tape is back on and we are talking a little bit about what the transition of
some of these groups, how CPLC had a spin-off with LCC [Logan Canyon Coalition] or
a change with LCC and I’d like you to explain that a little bit.
KG:
BM:
Well, I am only going from my cut-outs from the newspaper [laughing]. And on the
second page in the Bridgerland Section (which all local people will be familiar with)
there’s a byline – April 15, 1999 – where it’s a story about Logan Canyon Coalition, or
LCC, wanted to pursue further the designation of Logan River as “wild and scenic.” And
I think the thinking was that by getting it designated “wild and scenic” it would then
drive guidelines for any further roadwork. And this (oh, I have to look at this and read it
because I don’t remember it). Anyway, my memory of what LCC did that I thought was
really important, is they cut back on the size and just the look of the Visitors’ Center at
the top (the Summit of Logan Canyon.) They downsized the building and made it more
environmentally friendly.
Okay, and when you say “the top” we’re talking about the top of Logan –
KG:
The summit –
BM:
The summit of Logan Canyon. [Overlooking Bear Lake.]
KG:
The summit of Logan Canyon where they’ve built a little visitors’ center and a
washroom, and I think that was really important to have that – I don’t know that we
needed a visitors’ center, per se, but it certainly is a beautiful view from up there. And
they got things like solar panels so you wouldn’t have power lines. And that was an
interest that certainly Gordon Steinhoff pursued. I am very vague on what other roadwork
LCC wanted to have a say in. By this time the people that remained in CPLC were quite
involved with the new Forest Plan. Informing our members and commenting on the
Forest Plan was a full time job.
BM:
Um-hmm.
KG:
I have a few letters here that speak to that.
BM:
But here again is that continuation with LCC really wanting to focus on what they could
look at with the forest issues and their interest staying a little bit closer to the road, and
CPLC – as you mentioned – is starting look at the adjacent land –
KG:
Well I don’t remember LCC having anything to do with land management issues. Now I
could easily stand corrected on that.
BM:
Okay.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
5
�KG:
I’m sure they came to our meetings and supported us, but I don’t remember them
formally as an organization doing that.
BM:
Okay.
KG:
But then I wasn’t really very close to it at that point.
BM:
Okay.
KG:
I think the road had been done. Essentially UDOT followed the Record of Decision, and
there were lots of hearings about that in the early ‘90s. And then we monitored it to make
sure that they did it (and Sean Swanner was absolutely critical to that). And I really hope
that you’ll be able to follow up with him because he was just brilliant at it. He had a
wonderful disposition; he didn’t get angry. Everybody liked him. He was your ultimate
negotiator and kept his eye on the ball and didn’t get sidetracked by personalities or
emotional issues. And I just thought he was wonderful.
BM:
And that’s a hard one because for the people I’ve spoken to with Logan Canyon it is an
emotional issue. It’s a –
KG:
Well, it was such a blatant violation of it by this transportation corridor. There’s just no
question. And so he was able to work very consistently– just took one step at a time. He
could read the technical drawings, that’s what amazed me; and could talk to the engineers
and they were receptive to him, so it was great.
BM:
Okay.
[Stop and start recording]
BM:
Okay, we’re back on with the tape.
KG:
Alright, so Barbara has asked me if I would like to summarize something for CPLC. I
guess – well I don’t guess – this is on a personal note: I think it’s very reinforcing to
work on a local level with issues that are very important to you personally; in other
words, preserving the value of Logan Canyon from the natural perspective. And I think
you can learn so much, you can have great interactions with your neighbors, your friends,
people that you meet in the community. And you never know that’s going to happen until
you do it and you just have to get out front and do it! And find people who have the same
interests as you – and there are always those people out there. And I think in the end,
although it was a lot of time and effort for me and I got preoccupied and worried about
whether we were doing it right – I took away a lot of information and I learned a lot.
That’s about it.
BM:
Thank you Kathy.
[Stop and start recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
6
�BM:
Alright, we’re back on.
KG:
Okay. This part of the tape is really not related directly to CPLC. The people that I have
met in the environmental movement in the west have typically been from the east. They
are impressed with the amount of open public land. You can walk more than a mile and
not run into a fence! When people see how public lands have been abused by vested
interests, they want to change policy so these lands can be preserved; these lands are
beautiful just as they are. They don’t need to be “used.”
I think growing up in the 50’s gave us a sense of place. There was a line between the city
and the country. Even though I grew up in a big city I could go to the country just 40
miles away; skiing in the winter, the lake in the summer. We drove on two lane highways
to get there. The little village in the pictures is St. Sauveur, 20 years apart, painted by the
same artist. We walked around that village, often in our ski boots – not easy! We walked
to the ski hills and then walked home at night buying our bread at the bakery and our
supper at the local grocery store. We rented a room in a local home and practiced our
high school French with the madam of the house. On those lovely sparkling winter nights
we went to the pub and drank beer. It’s changed now. They built malls on the edge of
town and the little narrow streets are crowded with tourists in the summer and winter.
The paintings are painted by Betty Galbraith-Cornell who painted the pictures about 20
years apart. The older one with the horse-drawn sled was a very common scene for me as
a kid. That would be a way that people got around; lots and lots of snow. And in the later
one is just the streets are plowed and it still had that ambience, but it’s even of course
changed dramatically today where they’ve put shopping malls on the outskirts. But this
was just a lovely, old French-Canadian town with little colored houses. And a lot of
English people would have had cabins there, ski cabins, where we would walk. So that’s
about it. But it was a wonderful, magical place because it was little.
BM:
A lot of time spent outdoors.
KG:
Yes, we spent, yes we did. We spent all day outdoors. And of course I think that’s the
secret to winter, is that you get outside for the day! [Laughing] And that you’re dressed
and not cold!
BM:
KG:
Well, thank you.
I don’t know if I said the same as last time, but I got the beer in there!
BM:
Did you say Betty Galbraith-Cornell?
KG:
Yes. I think they were. Yes. I’m trying to think – yes they were. It was actually a friend
of my mother’s who knew this artist as a personal friend.
BM:
Thank you Kathy.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Katherine
Gilbert,
29
April
2009
Page
7
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/104">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/104</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Radio Shack Cassette Recorder: CTR-122
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-01-11
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
Katherine Gilbert interviews, 8 April 2008 & 29 April 2008, and transcriptions
Description
An account of the resource
In her first interview Katherine Gilbert briefly talks about her childhood in Canada and fond memories of outdoor experiences in her youth. She discusses her college education and subsequent jobs and training, and then speaks about influences as an adult which inspired her to be proactive toward protecting the natural beauties surrounding her residence. She discusses the formation of the Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon [CPLC] and her role within the organization. She talks about the CPLC’s part in the planning of improvements and expansion of the highway and bridges in Logan Canyon. In the second interview Katherine Gilbert speaks about the direction the Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon [CPLC] took after the completion of the Logan Highway project getting involved in land use management issues. She also discusses the differences between the CPLC and the Logan Canyon Coalition [LCC]. She ends the interview with some memories of growing up in Montreal and skiing in the Laurentian Mountains.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Gilbert, Katherine, 1942-
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Middleton, Barbara
Subject
The topic of the resource
Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon
Land use--Utah--Logan Canyon
Beaver Mountain (Utah)
Canyons--Utah--Cache County--Recreational use
Queen's University (Kingston, Ont.)--Alumni and alumnae
Montreal (Quebec)
Laurentian Mountains (Quebec)
Wind Caves (Logan Canyon, Utah)
Right Hand Fork (Logan Canyon, Utah)
Skis and skiing--Utah--Logan Canyon
Roads--Widening--Utah--Logan Canyon--Citizen participation
Roads--Environmental aspects--Utah--Logan Canyon
Scenic byways--Utah--Logan Canyon
United States. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
United States. Forest Service
Utah. Dept. of Transportation
CH2M Hill, inc.
Logan Canyon Coalition
Bridgerland Audubon Society
Swanner, Sean
Grazing--Cache National Forest (Utah and Idaho)
Range Management--Utah--Logan Canyon
Allotment of land--Utah--Logan Canyon
Natural resources--Utah--Logan Canyon--Management
Rangelands--Utah--Cache County
Rangelands--Multiple use--Utah--Logan Canyon
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral histories
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Montreal (Quebec)
Laurentian Mountains (Quebec)
Quebec
Canada
Wind Caves (Utah)
Right Hand Fork (Utah)
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1950-1959
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
20th century
2000-2009
21st 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 & Archives, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 2 Fd. 8 & 9
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx2fd8KatherineGilbert
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
8 April 2008
29 April 2008
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2008-04-08
2008-04-29
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/6ecd1a5239f78841f0e972568bea2206.mp3
4ac23eb454cb20494fd3826dcac56b25
http://highway89.org/files/original/bf96d46ed29a408de96e43cb3f0580b0.pdf
25ba4986f127c99e294c9cd2e1ae1ed1
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
John Neuhold and Ron Goede
Place of Interview: John Neuhold’s home, Logan, Utah
Date of Interview: Sunday, 22 February 2009; 9 a.m.
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Barbara Middleton
Barbara Middleton
Recording Equipment:
Radio Shack, CTR-122
Transcription Equipment used:
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Susan Gross
Barbara Middleton; Randy Williams (July 2011); reviewed by
John Neuhold (July 2011)
Brief Description of Contents: John Neuhold and Ron Goede discuss their experiences at USU
Summer Camp (and the skills and camaraderie they gained there) and other experiences in their
education, including those with the GI Bill; the Mossback group; and the politics of land use
management.
Reference:
BM = Barbara Middleton (Interviewer; Interpretive Specialist, Environment &
Society Dept., USU College of Natural Resources)
JN = John Neuhold
RG = Ron Goede
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcribed. All additions to transcript are noted with
brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 2: A]
BM:
I’m going to mark the tape here so we know what we’re doing.
We’re at John Neuhold’s house here on Island Drive and it is Sunday, February 22, 2009.
We’re here with John Neuhold and also Ron Goede. The purpose of our talk this morning
is to discuss a little bit about some of their memories of Forestry Camp (Field Camp,
Summer Camp; it goes by a lot of different names) with Utah State University.
Let’s start off with John – your arrival at Field Camp and some of your first memories of
that.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
1
�JN:
My arrival at the Utah State Agricultural College School of Forest, Range and Wildlife
Management Forestry Camp was in June 15, 1950. We had a huge group; well over 100
undergraduate students were participating in the summer camp. Most of them were
World War II veterans (like me). It was really an interesting group. The camp itself was
composed of a central building (which was basically the mess hall and the primary
meeting room); the second permanent building involved some dormitory space, but was
mostly occupied by the instructors (the professors in the program). The next two building
were World War II Quonset huts that housed the balance of us in double-decker bunks.
When I got there on the 16th of June we had a lot of cold weather still; there was snow on
the ground. The classes started (I don’t remember exactly what day the 16th was – I think
it was a Friday), but the classes started the following Monday, at any rate. The group was
big enough that it was divided up into three sub-groups, and each sub-group went into a
specific specialty headed by one of the professors.
The professors that were involved at that time were Dr. Ted Daniels, Ray Moore (who
was at that time still had not had his doctorate, but after World War II he became a
professor here), Bill Sigler (who headed the wildlife program), George Kilker was also
involved in that as part of the wildlife program, Bill Heldy did the aquatic stuff and
George did the terrestrial wildlife stuff. Art Smith was involved, and he was in the area of
range management. Wayne Cook was also involved, he was range management. That I
think was basically the basic faculty group that handled the program.
BM:
And Ted Daniels would’ve been in Forestry?
JN:
Ted was Forestry, so was Ray Moore.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
Was Art Smith working for Fish and Game?
JN:
Well he had a joint appointment.
RG:
Like Phil Urness.
JN:
Like Phil Urness, yeah. His salary was paid by Fish and Game, but he held tenure as a
professor at the university.
BM:
So was that a cooperative appointment?
JN:
Um-hmm.
RG:
Do they still have that John?
JN:
Yeah they do.
RG:
I don’t even know who it is anymore.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
2
�JN:
No, I don’t remember who it is either now.
BM:
And that was Art Smith that had that?
JN:
That was Art Smith that had it, yeah. He was followed by Phil Urness. Then when Phil
died – I don’t know who took over –
RG:
Charlie Jensen was in there for a while.
BM:
Now you mentioned a connection with World War II – these folks coming out of the war
(you said that specifically for Ray). Was that typical for any of these other folks that you
mentioned?
JN:
Well let’s see. Bill Sigler was a lieutenant (kept two bars) on the sub-chaser during World
War II and then was assigned later on to the formation of the United Nations in San
Francisco. Ted Daniels was not in the military, but Ted (before he joined the faculty here
and graduated from Berkley) he ran ferry boats in San Francisco Bay. He was a captain
on one of the ferry boats there. Ray Moore, Wayne Cook both were in the military – I
don’t recall exactly what branch of the service they were in. Art Smith was a captain in
the Army; George Kilker was not in the military he was a “4 Fer.” I think that pretty well
did all of it. Most of them were returned veterans though – most of the students. So you
know it was –
RG:
Everybody was a veteran.
JN:
Yeah, it was a brotherhood actually, when you get right down to it. It was a very informal
relationship between student and professor. It was really a lot of fun.
BM:
Now you said, “a 4Fer.” What is that?
JN:
A “4 Fer” – you were excused from the military for physical reasons.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
One A was the top – you were most vulnerable if you were classified as “1A” and all the
way to a “4F” that was exempt.
BM:
So it was a range. That’s kind of interesting because is this where the GI Bill comes into
play?
JN:
Oh yeah. Virtually all of the students were supported by the GI Bill. That was one of the
– I wish to heck we would have something like this going again. It really stimulated our
economy – this is what made our economy bloom like it did. Getting a lot of the people
an education that they would never have had the chance to get before. Then they
managed to go on through and become professionals in a lot of the resource management
agencies. For a long time throughout the [19]‘50s and into the ‘60s (if not throughout the
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
3
�entire ‘60s up to the ‘70s), Utah State University was the prime source of personnel for
the federal land management agencies; and a lot of the state agencies. The class that I was
in, for example (in that summer camp), we had [counting to himself] three people that
became directors of Fish and Game departments in states around the country. At least
three: Bud Phelps –
RG:
Harold Wilson.
JN:
Harold was later on, he wasn’t in that particular class.
RG:
No, not in that class.
JN:
Don Smith, Jack Hammond – he became director of Ohio and then later on of New
Hampshire I think. Anyhow, there were a bunch like that for the state organizations.
RG:
Was Tom Trelease part of that?
JN:
He became Chief of Fisheries in Nevada. Don Andriano
became Chief of Fisheries here
in Utah. You know, the people in that particular class (they’re all retired or dead now),
they all got into leadership positions.
BM:
Now they’re going to places that are outside of Utah –
JN:
Oh yeah!
BM:
Were they also coming from outside of Utah?
JN:
Oh yeah, yes I’ll say! There were very few Utahans in that group, actually.
BM:
Hmmm.
RG:
Yeah, natural resources in general were primarily non-resident.
BM:
So what was the pull for Utah State and who were the other competitors at the time?
JN:
The other competitors at the time: Michigan State University –
RG:
Montana was pretty –
JN:
Montana was; Oregon State. In the fisheries area, University of Washington – they were
mostly marine fisheries.
RG:
Missouri had one too.
JN:
Missouri did, yeah, but it didn’t produce as much as some of the others. Oh, Penn State!
That was one of the major –
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
4
�RG:
That’s where –
JN:
Yeah, that’s your organization, yup.
BM:
That’s kind of interesting to me that there’s a much smaller range of universities to
choose from at that time.
JN:
Oh yeah!
BM:
And Utah State is getting such a national presence, as well as a national student body.
RG:
It was known – I got guys to come to Utah State from – Mel Stein who was the director
of the Nebraska Fish and Game – when I decided I wanted to do it I wanted to talk to him
and went to his office and talked to him about if he had ideas where I might go.
BM:
So what was going on here? Were people just so well known? Were the issues that were
being looked at Utah State so critical in terms of the whole national picture? Why such a
presence?
RG:
I think it had to do with the people that started these programs.
JN:
Yeah actually there was a big transition from a political system to these various positions
as Game Wardens (for example), and as Foresters. Well you had to meet certain criterion
to get into the Forest Service which meant you had to have a bachelor’s degree in
Forestry.
RG:
In Utah; well in a lot of those states also got out of the patronage system and it went to
like here, you had to be a professional to be director.
JN:
That came later on, actually.
RG:
It still was a political appointment, but they had to appoint it to a professional.
JN:
Yeah, that was changed under the Leavitt administration.
RG:
That was when [Joe] Valentine became director [Utah Wildlife Resources]; I think he
was the first one that was not a professional.
BM:
What was the nature of these people in terms of this “patronage” idea? These were the
people that lived in the area, knew the landscape and just slipped into these positions?
JN:
Basically that’s what it was.
BM:
But good land experience?
JN:
Not necessarily.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
5
�RG:
Not necessarily.
JN:
Depended upon how high up you were in the political party.
RG:
I think they did that right at the time, that’s how they got Joe Valentine in there.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
They actually had to change the law.
JN:
They had to change the law –
RG:
[inaudible] would be director.
JN:
That was the Leavitt administration that did that. And Ron was responsible for getting
Leavitt all hot and bothered about it.
[Laughing]
RG:
I brought levity into the whole thing.
BM:
Well you know, that must be interesting though for that transition because you have
people put in place that may or may not have the experience, and then you guys are
coming out of – you and a bunch of others – are coming out of these programs with
professional training, exposure, and what sounds like a lot of field experience. What was
that transition like?
JN:
It was interesting. Bill McConnell and I were the first two professionally trained Fishery
Biologists in the Division of Wildlife Resources. We started a program that basically took
hold. Harold Crane became the director while I was working for the Division, and up
until then it was Perry Egan was the director. He was a banker and he turned out to be a
very good leader. He was all for getting professional things started in the Division of
Wildlife Resources (or the Fish and Game Department as it was known at that time).
RG:
But they had to hire good people in order [inaudible]. You can be a good leader but
they’ve got to surround themselves with good people.
BM:
Right.
JN:
And that was one of his strengths; he was really a neat guy and I really enjoyed working
for him.
RG:
J Perry Egan
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
6
�JN:
J Perry Egan – or as his wife referred to it, she was not one of the Irish Eagan. She had a
French background and she pronounced her name as E-gan! [Laughing] And she insisted
upon that, “Egan!”
RG:
The Eagan Hatchery is named after J Perry Eagan.
BM:
And where is that?
RG:
Bicknell.
BM:
Bicknell?
JN:
Bicknell.
RG:
There’s another Egan up here in Richmond that built one of these barns. That was one of
the body guards of Brigham Young. So there’s quite a history there. I don’t think Perry
was tied up with that group of Egans. Do you think he was?
JN:
He probably was, yeah. Anyhow, it was a period of transition. Working in that system,
you know most of the people that we worked with they have only two professionally
trained fishery biologists: Dale Jones, Jay Udy and Bud Phelps – they all came on but
they were on the terrestrial side. The transition was interesting because all of our
fieldwork – we had to interact with these patronage type people holding down regional
and district game warden jobs and that sort of thing. It became pretty chancy at times
because they were very jealous of their prerogatives and they didn’t want these college
kids telling them what to do, you know and so on. So we had to exercise a lot of tact to
get through it. We won most of them over actually, when you get right down to it.
BM:
Do you remember any particular experience with that transition that was interesting?
JN:
Oh yeah. See, one of the programs that I initiated and was leading was doing the lake and
stream survey up in the Uinta Mountains. And we had a CO up there (Guy Bronson, was
that his name, Bronson?) –
RG:
Yeah.
JN:
Man! I’ll tell you – if we didn’t inform him that we were going to be in the area, he’d go
down to the director and complain. We had that kind of stuff coming up from all kinds of
directions. We never did swing him over.
RG:
His son was better.
JN:
His son was better, yeah.
RG:
Quite an artist.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
7
�JN:
Oh yeah, that’s right. He did a lot of the area –
RG:
A great wildlife artist – Clark Bronson.
BM:
Say the name again?
RG:
Clark.
BM:
Clark?
RG:
Clark Bronson. He was Guy Bronson’s son.
JN:
But you know, we had other guys in the organization like Bit Clark (who became,
actually, regional director), Jess Wynn –
RG:
Jack Rensel.
JN:
Well Jack came on actually after I did.
RG:
Jack was the first actual regional director.
JN:
He was the first regional director.
RG:
He’s the one I suggested you might want to talk to.
JN:
Yeah, as a matter of fact I talked to him yesterday and told him he’d be expecting a call
from you, so. He would be a really good one to talk to.
RG:
Jack’s a first-class guy, I really like him.
BM:
Did any of these people come to field camp? Were they part of the experience at all to
meet any of these agency people?
JN:
No.
BM:
No.
JN:
No.
BM:
So it was strictly professors at that time?
JN:
Strictly professors.
RG:
There was another dimension here though, as far as the existence of the field camp, they
did use the field camp quite often.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
8
�BM:
Who’s “they”?
RG:
People like the regions and the DWR would have –
JN:
But that was substantially later.
RG:
Yeah, I know, but they used the camp.
JN:
Yeah, they used the camp.
RG:
That’s why I said there was more than just school. The camp served for the in-service
training and that sort of thing. I don’t know what they paid for that, but they used it
because you could stay there; they could be billeted right there, you know.
BM:
I wonder if there was more of a transition later on as that transition eased over time?
JN:
Yeah, there actually was because when J Perry Eagan retired (or he died, actually, on the
job), Harold Crane took over. Harold Crane had a Master’s Degree – a degree from the
University of Utah in Mammalogy. He was really a top notch leader. He had a tendency
to get drunk too often! [Laughing]
RG:
Yeah, he was [inaudible]. He was director when I hired on.
JN:
Yeah. He insisted that anybody that was hired by the Division had to have a Bachelor’s
degree, at least. The only area there was an exception to was in the hatcheries.
RG:
And some of the law enforcement.
JN:
And some of the law enforcement, yeah.
BM:
Why hatcheries?
JN:
Well because it was slop jobs.
RG:
A lot of that was just labor.
BM:
So more “tech” kinds of things?
RG:
Actually, I was the one that started training the hatchery people; so now they have to be
trained and they have to take tests.
JN:
Well actually after Ron took over, most of the hatchery people that ended up being hired
had degrees. Those that didn’t he ended up training.
BM:
And when is that transition? What’s the timeline there?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
9
�JN:
Oh, it took a long time. My experience started in the [19]‘50s and Ron came on in the
early ‘70s (wasn’t it?).
RG:
’66 is when I took –
JN:
Oh, ’66.
RG:
I first came here to school in ’57. But I came back here from Missouri and started to work
in ’66. That’s when I started taking over that part and driving it up to get the professional.
BM:
How long did that transition take – from ’67 when you started – until they started to
really look at hatchery people needing Bachelor’s degrees.
JN:
Well right away actually.
RG:
Yeah, they started looking at it right away. They started the assistant’s job at my place
(like the one job Doug Routledge has now), they would put up the work for me just for a
short while and they would be trained while they worked for me. Then I started
developing the two-week intensive training for all of them. So I ended up teaching
everybody that worked for the state. Now when they apply for the job, they are tested for
that body of knowledge. They have to know how to do those basic things.
JN:
But it was actually until well into the ‘70s that we finally had that all taken care of. So
you know it was a long transition period. A lot of the patronage appointments they went
out by way of attrition; they simply retired. And when they retired they were replaced
with the appropriately educated people.
RG:
Actually when that started working best for me was when Bill Gear became chief when
Don Adriano retired.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
Because that’s when I told him that I felt that hatcheries needed to be straight line, and
not my staff. They had people supervising the hatcheries that didn’t know anything about
hatcheries. So I wanted them to answer to Salt Lake and the chief of hatcheries, not to the
regional supervisors. I think about the only place in the state in that organization where it
is such a straight line.
JN:
That’s right, it is the only place they have a straight line.
RG:
I told them you’ve got to have them working for professional hatchery people who
understand what the problems are.
JN:
It’s really a lot different.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
10
�BM:
So just staying on this idea of transitions, before we go out to field camp, it’s a long time
that you both have worked in the industry, as well as the years you’ve had in retirement
to look back and watch the changes. Is there another transitional period that the agency is
going through in terms of the kinds of people or the kinds of training that newer people
have coming in? What’s the difference?
JN:
I think that’s right, first of all the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources is dominated by
USU graduates. But that slowly has been changing and you find more BYU graduates in
the organization now than you ever did before. And actually the University of Utah
doesn’t have that many people in it.
RG:
Most of the people I find they hired were all from out of state.
JN:
A lot of out-of-staters, yeah.
BM:
So why did BYU dominate?
JN:
Who knows? They kind of fancy themselves as a natural resource organization down
there, which they were not.
RG:
But I think also that USU (and this is strictly my opinion – John may agree with it, but he
probably won’t).
[Laughing]
JN:
That’s right!
RG:
The University up here started to get away from the idea of management of the resource.
I don’t think they learn the management principles anymore.
JN:
Well, I agree with that.
RG:
And so they’re looking elsewhere, people who do have those management principles.
BM:
Tell me more about that.
RG:
Well we used to have a course, for instance, Principles of Wildlife Management,
Principles of Fisheries Management, and so on. They teach how to actually go out and
manage the resource: the tools that you need. That doesn’t seem to be there anymore.
You’ve got ideas of Fisheries Biology you know, and some of them have some pretty
good training in fisheries biology, but they’re not taught how to go out and manage the
resource.
JN:
No, that’s right. And actually (of course I was involved in teaching a lot of that stuff,
management parts of it), you get right down to the nitty-gritty of what those field
biologists do, for example, when they go out in the field. There is a PR part to that:
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
11
�you’re dealing with wild populations that you’re manipulating one way or another and
you have to get that kind of information too. In the fisheries area, we used to teach
courses in getting information on fisherman usage, which meant core census work. That
required a lot of statistical input. We trained a lot of our students with good statistical
backgrounds (and this was also true in the terrestrial part of it). But you don’t get any of
that anymore. You get a basic understanding of statistics, but not the application of it.
RG:
No. Now they have a computer program to do it for them anyway.
JN:
Yeah. Right. Well we used to have three departments: Department of Range
Management, Department of Forest Management, and Department of Wildlife
Management. The management was basically the application of ecological principles.
And that’s one of the reasons that we became so strong in ecology – actually I became
the first director of the Ecology Center.
RG:
That was one of the chief conservations that you got at the summer camp.
JN:
At the summer camp, right; exactly. One of the interesting things about the summer camp
was when Ted Daniels – one of the instructions that we got from Ted was when you get
out into the forest, stop and listen to the trees. And he really was serious about this. So we
used to sing (how did that go?) –
RG:
[Singing] “I talk to the trees” –
JN:
[Singing] “I talk to the trees, but they won’t listen to me.”
[Laughing] [Dog barking]
BM:
Your dog’s enjoying that too!
JN:
Yeah, I bet!
RG:
I think that’s what she’s saying!
[Laughing]
JN:
One of the things that we got up at summer camp in the forestry area – and actually I
went to work for Ted after summer camp – and that was setting out growth plots in the
forest and measuring the growth of trees and this sort of thing. When I was back at the
University of Wisconsin, my mentor back there was Phil Woodford who was a plant
ecologist and he was doing studies on growth in deciduous forests. I went to work for
him and one of the things that did me good, that made a lot of points with Ted, was the
fact that I could identify trees in the wintertime!
[Laughing]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
12
�JN:
Hardwood trees.
BM:
Right, right; with few clues.
JN:
With few clues, yeah.
BM:
So with summer camp, what’s the male-female ratio of your students?
JN:
Well, it was almost no females at all. All male at that time, yeah.
RG:
That would be different now.
JN:
It’s quite a bit different now – 50%.
RG:
That was something they just weren’t part of it.
BM:
They weren’t allowed?
RG:
No, they just –
JN:
No, they weren’t interested.
RG:
They would’ve been allowed; they just weren’t interested. I don’t ever remember one, in
fact. They just basically weren’t that interested in the fundamentals of wildlife and
resource management.
BM:
Right.
RG:
Now, they’re probably a very important part of it. I don’t know why that is. I don’t know
why that transition happened, but we’ve got some really good people out there now and a
lot of the leaders are.
BM:
Do you remember when that transition did happen, that women were allowed into -- ?
JN:
Oh, that didn’t occur until the ‘70s.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
That we first started getting a few of our women coming in. And they were mostly in the
graduate area at that time.
RG:
Yeah. Well, there were some practical things there too. If it was just one or two women it
would have been hard to deal with them up there because it was the barracks.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
13
�JN:
When it finally did happen, they did segregate – the women were in the house that used
to be the faculty. They housed them there, separate from the men. But that didn’t occur
until the ‘70s. And then mostly it was mostly graduate students at that time.
RG:
I saw it as a non-problem. There were some things they had to take care of to make it
work for both, you know, but it wasn’t a problem.
BM:
Sure, um-hmm. Was there any resistance in the transition?
RG:
Not that I know of. John might.
[End Tape 1: A; begin Tape 1: B]
BM:
John Neuhold and Ron Goede on summer camp.
JN:
We didn’t actively go out to recruit women into the program; it was mostly volunteers as
the women came in. And actually the motivation for women to get into the field was
really somewhat different than for men.
RG:
It wasn’t hunting and fishing.
JN:
Yeah, the men were hunters and fisherman, the women were aesthetics – you know, they
were in for the aesthetic part.
RG:
The environmental activists.
JN:
Yeah, they were, yeah. That was the difference. That’s what you’ll find right now, I think
predominately, is that the women in the organization as undergraduates are attracted to it
because (we used to say because of the fuzzy bunnies) –
RG:
Yeah, that’s why they don’t go into fish, because they’re not fuzzy and grow feet.
[Laughing]
JN:
Yeah, not very many of them went into the fisheries – they’re too slimy.
BM:
Okay, so give us an idea of what it was like in a day at field camp.
JN:
It was really interesting. You know, I recall some really interesting things about that. We
get up in the morning (just like in the military), there were barracks (just like in the
military); the first thing was to go into the mess hall and have our breakfast. And our
cook at that time was an interesting guy. It was a man that was suffering from
Parkinson’s. He was a very good cook, but he was suffering from Parkinson’s. And to
watch him prepare food – well, first of all to watch him go into the cook shed and open
the place up – it was always padlocked at night (you couldn’t get in there at night) – he’d
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
14
�come along and he would be shaking like that, like crazy, and he’d bang! hit the thing
every dang time! He never missed.
[Laughing]
JN:
And then you watch him slicing onions – he’d hold an onion in his hand and bonk, bonk,
bonk. He never cut himself!
BM:
It almost sounds like a Monty Python routine!
JN:
[Laughing] Yeah, it was! He was an excellent cook; we always had really good meals.
And then after breakfast we (as I pointed out earlier) we are divided up into three separate
groups and each group went to specific activities for that particular period of time
(usually a week). Let’s see, summer camp lasted two months. It didn’t finish up until
toward the end of August. Everybody had training in Forest Management, Range
Management and in Science [Fisheries] Management. And you progressed on through the
different groups every two-week period, or something like that.
BM:
So like a module you had to go through?
JN:
It was a module, yeah right.
BM:
Now wait – you said, “Forest Management, Range Management and Science”?
JN:
Fisheries Management.
BM:
Fisheries Management, okay.
RG:
You know one part that people don’t think about is that two months – for the average
student – that’s when you made the money to go to school the rest of the year!
BM:
Right.
RG:
So you know, that’s where it really helped to have the GI Bill.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
That’s what they were getting the money for, they could go do that. But once you’ve got
away from a lot of the GIs it wasn’t so easy for students to deal with that.
BM:
Right. That’s a great point because you’re financially set with the GI Bill and you don’t
have the pressure of the summer work.
Let me ask one more question before this. You went to summer camp once in your entire
career as a student? Or did you go to summer camp every summer?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
15
�JN:
No, just once.
BM:
Just once, okay. So then other summers you picked up jobs?
JN:
Oh yeah.
RG:
Yeah.
BM:
So what would be an example of where some of the students would go?
JN:
Oh, you’d find jobs in the research area. I found a job, for example, in my second year in
the Forest Service – I worked on the Fish Lake National Forest as a “Recreation
Assistant” which meant that I had a pick honey buckets out of outhouses. I met one of my
girlfriends doing that! As she was sitting on the pot!
[Laughing]
RG:
Them were the good old days! “Excuse me!”
BM:
Oh boy.
JN:
The experiences we had up at summer camp were really quite interesting. For example, in
Forestry you’d be put through a course in field surveying (and that was mostly compass
and chain type work).
BM:
And this is a forestry chain –
JN:
Yeah, it was a metal chain and compass, plane table work, all that kind of stuff. You went
into the kind of rough field surveying that foresters were practicing at that time.
BM:
So that would be like a crew?
JN:
Yeah, we’d go out and we’d line up into work crews. Every crew was responsible for
creating a report –
RG:
Measuring the DBHs and so on.
JN:
Well, that was yeah, when you get out in the forest and do the growth plots, that was all
part of that.
RG:
Do you know what DBH is?
BM:
Can you tell our audience what that is for those people that don’t know?
JN:
Diameter at breast high on trees. (Four and one half feet above the ground) The
responsibility there was to calculate the board feet that was available for lumber.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
16
�BM:
So you not only got the diameter, you also had to get the –
JN:
The height, yeah.
BM:
Okay. And how did you do the height at that time?
JN:
It was basically using an Abney –
BM:
Okay.
JN:
Abney level.
BM:
Yup. When did clinometers come in? It must have been later on.
JN:
Yeah, we didn’t have them there.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
It was all hand work.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
In the Range Sciences area – our main job there was we would go out and measure – well
first of all identify all the various plants that you’re dealing with like the herbs and
grasses (you concentrate a lot on grasses and herbs; forest type material for livestock and
wildlife). You’d also do plots measuring; learn how to do plots. You’d do something
similar to what you’d do in forestry, but basically it would be much smaller plots,
identify the herbage in that particular area and come up with a measure of usage, for
example. You’d measure such things as pellet counts, deer, this sort of thing.
BM:
Was it also the amount of vegetation as far as –
JN:
Yep; the amount of vegetation. You learn all that kind of stuff. And then in the fisheries
area, that was basically going out and collecting fish with various different collecting
equipment: seines, electro-shocking.
BM:
Okay, wait. Tell us how a seine works for those people that are listening that may not --
JN:
Well a seine is a big net that you have two people –
RG:
A guy on each end.
JN:
A guy on each end and you just simply drag it through the water. Then when you get to
an area where you could beach it, you’d come up and you’d count the species of the
fishes that you had caught.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
17
�RG:
If that was in a stream that wasn’t always –
JN:
Actually we did a lot of that work. We’d go over to the Bear Lake Bird Refuge and work
on that. But in the streams in the Logan River, for example, or Temple Fork we used
electric shocking.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
I think USU was one of the pioneers in that too.
JN:
Yeah, we were.
BM:
Oh really?
JN:
Yeah, electro-shocking.
BM:
Could you just tell us how you do that? I’ve seen it, but I’m not that familiar with it.
JN:
The science of electric shocking has really developed a long way. At that time we were
using mostly the red current DC shockers. We had a DC generator – great big long cord
that you had two electrodes on (a negative electrode and a positive electrode), and you’d
put those in the stream and the fish that were caught in between them would get shocked
and they’d come to the surface and you’d scoop them up with a net, put them in a bucket
and then you could count them and measure them and do all that sort of stuff.
RG:
And then put them back.
BM:
Then how do you not get shocked?
RG:
You do if you’re not careful! Of course you’re in boots.
JN:
Oh, I’ll tell you. We used to get the guys on that.
RG:
Yeah!
JN:
We had metal buckets. And you’d carry out – if both metal buckets touched the water
while you were in the field [laughing], you’d actually get sparks between the fillings in
your teeth!
RG:
You could even see it happening, “Watch this!”
[Laughing]
RG:
Some of those shockers we were using surplus from the government from old auxiliary
power units!
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
18
�JN:
Yeah, one we had was a big old –
RG:
It would vaporize the room!
JN:
It was an old man shocker, huge, heavy thing. You couldn’t carry it; it had to be in the
back of a pickup truck. You had a great big old wheel (a tenth of a mile of cable, it was a
great big, heavy cable like that you know, that you’d carry around). It was a lot of hard
work!
RG:
But now they’ve got it figured out, the conductivity in the water, and you can really fine
tune; you can also kill them (whip them around so fast that it breaks their back). And then
if you’re using the direct current, the fish will come to the positive electrode, so you can
pretty well figure where they’re going to go. In the alternating current they don’t do that.
BM:
What is the amount of shock based on? Do you have to look at the cubic volume of the
water to know how much power to use?
JN:
Conductivity and the size of the fish, actually. The amount of shock of the animal given
depended on its length: the bigger it is the more shock that it gets.
RG:
The littler ones are harder to shock.
JN:
And of course, if you were carrying two buckets and you put them – the amount of shock
you got was determined between the distance between those two buckets – which meant
that it was getting a hell of a lot more than the fish were getting.
RG:
Yeah.
BM:
It sounds like there is a bit of a rite of passage here with the fisheries.
JN:
It was, yeah! It really was. You learned a lot.
RG:
Well, you could even use that a lot of times if people were upset; the public was upset
about – they’d say “There’s not enough fish in the Logan River, you guys got to put more
in….” You would invite them out to watch you shock and they would see then the fish
just boiling out of there, you know. And that’s all you would need and they would
understand, the fish are out there they just aren’t catching them.
BM:
That’s a great visual. Now were you also looking at the invertebrate population, in terms
of fish?
JN:
Oh yeah! Yeah, that was the other thing. We would have invertebrate collecting devices
that you’d put out in the stream or in a lake. We had the Kemmerer Samplers that you’d –
RG:
Water sampler.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
19
�JN:
Water samplers.
BM:
Now what is that?
JN:
It’s a water sampler that you could sample water at different depths. And then you’d put
them through a (at that time we had what we referred to as the “Hatch chemical kit”) –
RG:
They still use them.
JN:
Still use them.
BM:
H-A-T-C-H isn’t it? Hatch kit.
RG:
Yeah.
JN:
We’d measure hardness or acidity, total dissolve solids. You know, all of these sorts of
things.
BM:
A lot of chemical analysis of the water?
JN:
Right. Then we had the Peterson bridge – you’d scoop up a part of the bottom and bring
it up to the surface and stick it through screens, and then measure the invertebrates that
you picked up (mostly midge larvae).
RG:
The Kemmerer water bottle he’s talking about is interesting to go to Bear Lake, you can
drop it down to a given depth and send the brass messenger down and it trips it and you
can take a core at that point. And then you can take it up and analyze the water chemistry
from that depth.
BM:
So it stays sealed all the way down until you are at your depth that you want to take a
sample from?
RG:
Yeah.
BM:
And then you trigger to open it, catches that –
RG:
Yeah, that trigger opens it and then you start pulling up and it closes it down.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
There’s a lot of those on the bottom of the lake!
[Laughing, and some inaudible comments]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
20
�RG:
Yeah, that’s when you realize you have to put a knot on this end so the brass messenger
goes out this way. It’s really funny when you’ll hear something go “boop” and then
you’re, “uh-oh.” [Laughing]
JN:
Then the other thing that we sampled were the invertebrates in streams. And that was
basically using nets (stream nets); you’d kick up the bottom and then measure the
mayflies and the caddis flies, stoneflies and this sort of thing; midges.
RG:
And so you’d get a square you’d put a thing like a square, then you’d kick it up and
gather what’s ever there so you could tell how much there is per square foot.
BM:
So somebody must be kicking upstream –
RG:
Yeah, or a lot of times you can just put – in a stream it’s easier because you can put it out
there like that and just kick.
BM:
Right and it moves it right into your net then. Okay.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
Yeah.
JN:
Those were all part of the mechanics of operating in the field that we were teaching then.
This sort of thing is not being taught anymore.
BM:
Um-hmm.
RG:
Bill Sigler – the term I remember him using is that it teaches you, you have a “bag of
tricks” that at least makes you look like you know what you’re doing.
[Laughing]
RG:
Because a lot of times, those techniques are fine-tuned when you go to work for an
agency or you find out what they’re using and you get more advice, you know. But if you
go out there not knowing anything – actually it was the electro-shocking that got me the
job in Missouri. I knew a lot about it because we did so much of it.
JN:
We did so much of it here, yeah.
RG:
I had my arms strained out like this several times! [Laughing]
BM:
So you went back there and then introduced them to that technology, as a student?
RG:
They had some technology for it, but they really didn’t understand much about it and so I
introduced them. When I went to Leetown they had equipment that they didn’t know how
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
21
�to use, for collecting parasites, you know. They had an electric seine there and I set that
whole thing up so they could collect fish to do the parasites studies.
BM:
It sounds tremendously hands-on as far as the kinds of tools and techniques and “bag of
tricks” (as Bill Sigler referred to it).
RG:
Yeah. Those are we’d go set nets at Hyrum or something or the old Pelican pond out
here. And you did learn your basic trade that way.
JN:
Yeah, that was one of the other collecting devices in fisheries that we had was the gill
nets.
RG:
Yeah.
JN:
We used a lot of gill nets and –
RG:
Everybody hated them though.
BM:
Because?
RG:
They’re a lot of work.
JN:
They’re a lot of work.
RG:
Especially if you get any of the yellow perch or something like that.
JN:
Get any yellow perch or bullheads, or catfish.
BM:
Tell us why they were a lot of work.
JN:
Because of the spines.
RG:
Spines, and those ctenoid scales. Once they get into the net they’re awful to get out. You
have to pick those nets and there’s also lots of them. You might have 1,000 fish there,
you know, that you just picked up in a net. And you’ve got to take every one of those out
and they don’t come out easy because of the spines get tangled up in the net.
BM:
Hmm.
RG:
I remember the guys in Schofield, not Schofield, Strawberry doing all that work at
Strawberry they found one of the chubs that they were working on. Bud Phelps said,
“Best way to pick the net is to lay it out in the road and drive over it in the truck a few
times and then shake them off.”
[Laughing]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
22
�JN:
Yeah. That works.
BM:
So you have these modules that each of the groups is rotating through so they get
experience in all the disciplines.
JN:
Yeah, all around.
BM:
At the end of one module then, are you putting that together in terms of looking at the
health of the fisheries? Are you looking at the data and making assumptions on what
we’re finding?
JN:
Yeah. Usually you’d have to write a paper – everybody had to write a paper on what
you’d learned in that particular module.
RG:
Yeah. And then you’d do things like age and growth, you know and measure the annual
line in the scales and measure that and project that to the length.
JN:
One of the other techniques that we used in fisheries that we were introduced there was
using rotenone to sample (actually it was sampling), but actually we became pretty
knowledgeable about using it to reclaim lake populations.
RG:
We did that for a little while with toxifine too.
JN:
We toxifine, yeah -- toxifine lasted too long in alkaline waters and they couldn’t really
rehabilitate the waters.
BM:
Okay. Help me understand the application of rotenone: how you prepare it and how you
apply it.
JN:
Rotenone, you know, is a powder made from Derris root, Amazon basin.
RG:
They use it a lot to spray in gardens and stuff.
BM:
Right.
JN:
We used to use the powder rope – we’d get big sacks of it and then it wasn’t very easily
emulsified, so you’d have to mix it up in water and then spread it out, usually with a hose
of some kind.
RG:
It was dangerous for the user.
JN:
It was really dangerous for the user. Later on they came up with an emulsifiable form of
it. And we did some of the first big reclamation projects in the United States here what
we learned. Bill McConnell and I did that. What we learned in school, using rotenone.
Navajo Lake and Panguitch Lake were two of the first ones. Diamond Lake in Oregon
was one of the first ones that was built, and I think we were the second and third one.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
23
�RG:
And then we did it at Strawberry and that was –
JN:
Oh, that was the biggest one.
RG:
That was the biggest one ever. That was a million and a half pounds of rotenone.
BM:
And so you are putting this as a liquid into the water, or spraying a powder? You’re
putting it as a liquid?
RG:
Well, it depends. You can get it as a liquid. They started using it; they developed a
method for us to use in Strawberry, we did. Using the rotenone; you’re sucking the
powder up into and then it’s mixing and you can spray it. And then you would do it when
the lake is stratified too. The limnology was important: understanding stratification, you
know, so you wouldn’t have to treat the whole reservoir, you could treat the part where
the fish were.
BM:
Sure, that makes sense.
RG:
Take advantage of some kind of knowledge of that lake and the chemistry involved in
those strata. And that was a million and a half – we had people come from all over the
world (most of them were from around the country; Michigan sent several people to work
through the whole project because they wanted to see it done).
BM:
So what happens to that rotenone then? It goes into the water column –
JN:
It disperses pretty well, actually.
RG:
And you can detox it with potassium permanganate.
JN:
Yeah, you can detox it. The way it works on the animal is it constricts the blood vessels
in the gills and they suffocate. As a matter of fact, it also does that to humans. If you get
it into the eyes, for example, it will constrict the blood supply to the eyes and you become
temporarily blind.
RG:
When they did that up Strawberry on Schofield then, almost all the crews were blinded.
And they didn’t know that then and all at once, nobody could see, you know. They ended
up setting up a field station and they had to give them all cortisone shots.
JN:
Cortisone shots, yeah.
RG:
To help. But it scared the hell out of all of them.
BM:
Oh, I bet.
RG:
Then I took that when we did the big million and half pounds at Strawberry, I told them
“You guys at Schofield – that was an afternoon – we’re talking about two weeks out there
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
24
�on Strawberry.” And I said, “The people are not going to be able to do that.” And so I
said, “I would insist that they take care of the personnel, too.” And so they spent
$100,000 on the protection for the personnel.
BM:
So what kind of protection did they have?
RG:
Gas masks and breathing devices, you know. And organizing so that people were only
out there a short time, you know. So I was in charge of that whole safety program for that
whole thing.
JN:
The first time that happened to me was down in Panguitch Lake. I had a student from the
University of Utah that was on my crew and he got blinded. His name was Robert E. Lee,
incidentally! He actually became a colonel in the Air Force. He was an interesting guy.
You know the fish that we killed, they were edible – you could eat them, it was not
dangerous to eat them. So we’d pick up the biggest trout, for example, and take them
back to camp and cook them up and Robert cooked his up in neatsfoot
oil! [Laughing]
But it tasted alright!
[Laughing]
BM:
So the fish are edible, but –
RG:
Well the FDA maintained that they weren’t, so it became illegal for us to do that.
BM:
So what’s happening then is these fish are coming to the surface, they’re suffocating and
coming to the surface, and then you are counting? You are –
RG:
Well, yeah you do. You know the [inaudible] massive load of fish.
BM:
Yeah.
RG:
You do some sampling and –
JN:
The idea was to get rid of all the fish in the area.
BM:
Right.
RG:
Yeah. I was kind of always against that. I fought that project in the staff meeting because
I told him I don’t like using poison on that grand of scale – because you’re killing
everything.
JN:
Yeah, you kill the invertebrates as well.
RG:
I thought that was too heavy handed.
BM:
What did the water surface look like when this started to take effect?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
25
�JN:
A lot of white bellies.
RG:
Yeah, and of course there’s also going to be a huge stink.
BM:
Yeah.
RG:
Pelicans and fish-eating birds (particularly pelican), they would get so many fish they
couldn’t get out of the water. They’d fly off and then splash down again. It was really
funny to watch them try to get off the water.
BM:
Holy smokes.
RG:
You had to make sure people – we had quite a force going around making sure people
weren’t taking them up and eating them.
BM:
Right.
RG:
We had cornered the entire world market on rotenone. A lot of the Derris that grows in
South America – they’re taking a lot of those out and putting in coke plants. So it was
getting harder and harder to get that and it was quite a job to get that much rotenone.
BM:
Now tell me one more time the name of the plant that rotenone comes from?
JN:
Derris root.
RG:
Derris root.
BM:
How do you spell that?
JN:
D-E-R-R-I-S.
BM:
Okay. [Derris is a genus name; Derris elliptica from the tropical and subtropical climates
was used to derive Rotenone.]
JN:
These are all techniques that we learned in summer camp, actually when you get right
down to it. It was carried on into the profession by the students that went through those
programs.
RG:
Yeah, but a lot of those were wrong and they’d just refine them so they would understand
more how to fine-tune the program and actually use what you know. Taking out, you
know, mosquitoes with a hammer or something like that.
BM:
Right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
26
�JN:
Actually the summer camp was really very interesting: in addition to all of these
techniques that you learned, you developed a real fellowship with your fellow students.
We’re in the field together, you slept together, you ate together; all of that sort of thing.
RG:
Camaraderie in a lot of ways.
JN:
You made life-long lasting friendships, actually which was very useful. We also had a lot
of hijinx that went on. One that I remember particularly, we had one Japanese student (a
guy by the name of Min Herinaca [spelled phonetically]. (He ended up getting his
doctorate, and I think he’s retired as a professor up at University of Idaho now.) But
anyhow, we had these mummy bags that we were sleeping in and I remember the Bud
Phelps and two or three other guys got together and it was time to get up. Min was kind
of reluctant to get out of bed in the morning and he was always snuggled down inside his
sleeping bag. So we grabbed his sleeping bag and pulled off to the side and drop it like
that (of course, two other guys would catch him) and he’d be going inside his bag like
that! [Laughing] It’s amazing that he wouldn’t rip it out!
[Laughing]
JN:
And the other thing is that we had . . .Yale University would bring their geology classes
out and we would put them during summer camp in that area. Of course during the
weekends – those poor guys they were out working all the time (the Yale guys were) –
and our boys would go downtown to Delmar [bar in Logan, Utah] and get drunk! And
they would come back up and in the middle of the night they would singing “bah, bah
black sheep, have you any wool for me?” [Singing and laughing] Serenading the Yale
boys!
BM:
Well you know, as far as you mentioned, all that stuff goes on and it does create
fellowship and collegiality. And from what I’ve heard from some other folks about field
camp is those are lifelong colleagues and lifelong friendships in many cases.
JN:
Yeah, absolutely.
BM:
Alright. Do you have one in particular that you can remember?
JN:
Life long fellowships? Bill McConnell and me.
JN:
Bill McConnell and I, we became like brothers, actually. We went to work for the
Division of Wildlife – or the Fish and Game Department at that time.
RG:
That was the second and third PhD for USU.
JN:
Yeah. Yeah Bill was the second – Kenny Wolf was the first.
RG:
Wolf, I got to know real well when I was at Leetown.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
27
�JN:
Kenny became a world-class virologist and was the “father” actually of fish virology.
JN:
Yeah. He was the first, and Bill McConnell was the second and I was the third PhD out of
Fish and Wildlife.
RG:
Ken was also the one that figured out the life cycle of whirling disease.
JN:
Right. Nobody believed him!
RG:
But we’re not talking about just in Wildlife: that was number one, two, three, and four for
the whole university.
BM:
Oh!
RG:
That was the beginning of the PhD programs.
JN:
Yeah.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
They were just as college for a while.
JN:
The Wildlife Department actually started the PhD programs in the university.
BM:
That’s right. What was your PhD in?
JN:
It was in Aquatic Ecology, basically: Aquatic Toxicology.
BM:
Studying?
JN:
It was studying florid effects on fish. That was mine. Bill McConnell’s PhD was on
stream periphyton.
BM:
What’s that?
JN:
Stream algae.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
And Kenny Wolf’s was –
RG:
Blue sac.
JN:
Blue sac disease in fish.
BM:
And what is that disease?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
28
�RG:
He did a lot of that work for White’s trout farm.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
It’s tied up more with –
JN:
It’s a bacterial disease.
RG:
Well, but no. No, it’s ammonia and low circulation in the eggs.
JN:
Oh, yeah; it’s secondary bacterial infections.
RG:
Yeah, you got the – and it’s blue; the egg sac is blue.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
It took a long time before we figured it out. A lot of it was just short-circuiting the eggs
while they were being incubated. Some of them weren’t all getting water.
BM:
And what was the source of that?
RG:
Mostly ammonia was actually part of the metabolism of the fish –
JN:
Metabolism of the eggs themselves.
BM:
Okay.
RG:
But the circulation was so poor that it would be high and up –
[End Tape 1: B; begin Tape 2:A]
RG:
So anyway, like the two week intensive training that I gave the hatchery people. They
were there for two weeks – through the weekends, you know. We went straight through
because I didn’t want to send them back, way out all over the state, that’s too much
money. So, on Sunday we would have a picnic or something you know. But I noticed that
over the years – I took about 12 or 13 of them at a time, you know. And then we’d do it
until we had them all. So we were about a dozen groups that I would have for two weeks.
But I noticed that every time, after that when you’d have a section-wide or division-wide
meeting at Camp Williams or whatever, those guys were hanging out together. And that’s
part of that life-long –
BM:
Right.
RG:
It’s just not the fact that you took the group, but it’s a fairly intense thing. They live
together, they work together, they slept together, have a good time together, you know.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
29
�BM:
Um-hmm. Right.
RG:
So it takes more than just, like up here just taking a class with somebody.
BM:
Um-hmm.
RG:
That’s really important, I think.
JN:
That was one of the really great benefits about summer camp, I thought. Like I say, we
have lifelong friendships that unfortunately we keep burying now. One of the things that
stemmed out of it was our Mossback group. Actually our peers that we’ve worked
together for all these many years, but the summer camp together (a lot of us did) and
ended up carrying out in our so-called Mossback group.
RG:
We were the ones that did the transition from empirical wisdom to science.
JN:
Yeah.
BM:
Do you want to explain that?
RG:
A lot of the empirical wisdom, you just kind of learn on the job from you know, a lot of
them were pretty good at that. The people had a lot of good motivation and so forth, but
they didn’t have that kind of training. The professionals went from the good ol’ boys that
you hired that just knew what the animals in Logan were, to guys who were
professionally trained and were going to use all these new procedures and methods and
assessments. And all that becomes part of the interpretive stuff that’s brought up all the
way through the legislature.
BM:
Um-hmm.
RG:
You know, and a way to keep track and compare and start to develop these data bases.
And that was – John and Bill probably started that. They’re the ones that kicked that off.
But that whole bunch then became that – I call it the “vanguard” for that transition. I also
called it – in that Mossback book, I called it “vanguards of a young profession;” because
it was very much a young field.
JN:
After World War II it was.
BM:
Now, tell us a little bit about the “Mossback” group because I think they are crossreferenced at Special Collections, or will be.
RG:
Yeah, they have a copy of that book. I gave that to Brad [Cole] [USU Special Collections
& Archives: 925 G551]
BM:
So the Mossbacks are…..doesn’t sound like foresters.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
30
�RG:
No.
JN:
No, it was actually mostly fishery people.
RG:
Yeah, it’s basically something that’s been around long enough that it’s got moss growing
on its back!
JN:
We had some few other people come in.
RG:
They are still peers.
JN:
Yeah Doug Day was a peer. I think he did one year of work up here at Utah State, and he
got his degrees down at University of Utah. And the other guy we brought in was Bob
Benke, who was actually University of California-bred.
RG:
And Bob Wiley.
JN:
Bob Wiley, who was University of Wyoming-bred. But they were peers and they were
people that we worked with.
RG:
They were working on Flaming Gorge, and all these things, where we shared the waters,
you know: Flaming Gorge, Lake Powell, a lot of interstate waters. I remember those kind
of became part of your peer group.
JN:
Jack Jensen was the other one too.
RG:
Jack was actually one.
JN:
He was a Penn Stater.
RG:
You’ll enjoy talking to Jack. He’s just a first-class guy.
BM:
I’m looking forward to it.
What about, you know? What field camp faces through the decades with so many other
people that have talked about it are challenges. And keeping in form, you mentioned one
in terms of the GI Bill being so beneficial to supporting, and so that pressure for earning
money that summer wasn’t there. Were there other challenges with you? I mean how did
they handle families? If people came in that had wives or children?
JN:
Oh. Well here at the university we had temporary housing.
BM:
JN:
Okay.
They were actually military buildings that were – actually Utah State was known for one
time as the “West Point of the West.” We had a huge ROTC group here.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
31
�RG:
The student housing was called “Morning Sickness Row.”
JN:
Yeah.
[Laughing]
JN:
It was! Yeah –
RG:
It was “Morning Sickness Row”! “We’re over in Morning Sickness Row…”
JN:
But the temporary buildings – they’re all gone now, but –
BM:
Where were those located?
JN:
Where the Ag Sciences building is right now –
BM:
Um-hmm.
JN:
That area.
RG:
They used to be over where the over where the Triads [married student housing, now
called Aggie Village] are too, weren’t they?
JN:
No. That was all farm land.
RG:
Yeah, that’s right.
JN:
And an airport. We had an airport up here when I first came out here.
BM:
So what did these buildings look like?
JN:
Well, have you seen those temporary military barracks? We also had Quonset huts were
part of it.
RG:
Quonsets.
JN:
We had a trailer park that –
RG:
They weren’t very plush.
JN:
Yeah, they weren’t very plush, but they were old military trailers. And then we had two
story buildings that were divided up into apartments. When Ruth and I came out here (we
were married when we came out here), we rented an apartment in one of those – an
upstairs apartment. It was a one bedroom (I don’t think there were any two bedrooms,
there was only one bedroom ones), and a combination living room/dining room, and a
bathroom and that was it.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
32
�BM:
You’re up in summer camp for two months and Ruth is in town?
JN:
I wasn’t married at that time.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
She came later. I told you about when I first came out here in 1950 and came across a dirt
road down Laketown Canyon to Bear Lake. I got this spiritual experience going through
the canyon. Two years later I brought my new bride down the same way: down through
Laketown canyon. And it was in January, and the lake was frozen, there was snow all
around it, you know. And we came down into the bottom of the Logan Canyon and came
to a sign that says, “You are now entering Logan: a town designed for living.” And Ruth
said, “Where’s the town? Where’s the town?”
[Laughing]
JN:
I took her over to the Quonset, which was just upside and said, “This is our apartment.”
And she said, “Well where’s the town?”
[Laughing]
JN:
I finally took her downtown and she was so delighted to see that there was a drugstore
down there.
RG:
Only one: Lowcost.
JN:
Lowcost, yeah!
BM:
How big was Logan at that time?
JN:
Oh, only about 8,000 people, I think. Something like that.
RG:
Yeah, the whole valley was about 30,000.
JN:
Well at that time, no, the valley was even less than that! It was, I think it was 16,000
people.
RG:
Strictly rural.
BM:
Wow.
JN:
Strictly rural, yeah.
[Stop and start recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
33
�JN:
Fieldwork that went on, we’d have to get permission from the Ranger. So the Ranger
would work with us, for example.
BM:
This is the Ranger on the Logan District?
JN:
The Logan District, right.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
Let’s see, we also – I can’t remember that we had any Fish and Game people involved at
that time. No, not at that time. It was mostly the Forest Service. And some of our field
trips took us out into Bureau of Land Management land, and we’d have the BLM Ranger
talk to us, give us some of the umbrella-sort of experiences.
BM:
And where did you go?
JN:
Well, for the Forest Service we stayed here in the Cache.
BM:
Um-hmm.
JN:
A lot of the Fish and Game work we went down to the Bear River Bird Refuge – we did
a lot of work down there on birds and also on fish. Bureau of Land Management was over
in Rich County, basically. We’d get into that and we’d have (I can’t recall the names of
the people that we had involved down there at that time). Most of our fieldwork was done
locally. We didn’t go off on any long distance – a lot of that came later.
At the university in our junior and senior years, especially senior year, we organized into
what we referred to as “senior field trips.” These were usually two week affairs that we
went through the west. We’d go – two of them that I was involved in as a student – we
went into the Columbia River basin, for example, stayed at Oregon State, Northern
California, southern Washington and Oregon; spent our time there looking at salmon
fisheries and all this sort of stuff.
The second one that we went into the desert. We went down into the Grand Canyon area,
Arizona, New Mexico, desert big game range. It was mostly a big game thing. This was
the wildlife thing. The foresters also had similar trips, as did the range management
people. But that also stopped after a while; they stopped doing that. I remember after I
joined the faculty I took several of them out on field trips myself. You know, it always
ended up being a big logistic problems because you had to find places to stay and feed
your troops kind of stuff.
RG:
Even that sort of thing, I think, was probably impacted to a certain extent by the GI Bill.
BM:
How so?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
34
�RG:
Because even two weeks was not an easy thing for somebody that was having to work
just to stay in school.
BM:
Right.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
And I think once the GI Bill petered out, that was pretty much what stopped it.
JN:
That pretty well stopped that kind of stuff, yeah.
BM:
Well and it also sounds like field camp was all of the departments together –
JN:
Yeah, it was.
RG:
Yeah.
BM:
And these senior field trips were more separated by your specialties.
JN:
They were separated, yeah.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
Into your specialty areas, yeah. Up here in the Cache, a lot of our work was centered on
what became the school forest later on. And actually I remember when I went to work
after summer camp, I went to work for Dr. Daniels and Ray Moore, my two team leaders
were Sterling Rickman and (I can’t remember his name, he was from Arkansas) [Sam
Jackson]. Anyhow, our job was basically to go out and lay out growth plots. We did
chain and compass work with that. And we laid out a grid of growth plots that became the
basis for growth on the forest. Later on they would revisit these plots every year to see
what the changes in growth were and the species composition, and so on. And that was
really very interesting work for me.
BM:
And you’re getting long-term information.
JN:
And long-term information that the school really benefit – or the research done by the
Forestry Department - actually benefited from. I do remember that we had a campout –
we didn’t have cabins or anything to stay in, so we stayed in tents – and I became very
constipated and developed a severe case of bleeding hemorrhoids.
BM:
Oof!
RG:
It was the pain in the ass!
JN:
Yeah, it was a pain in the ass.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
35
�[Laughing] [Omitted from transcript personal information]
BM:
Well one other thing that you haven’t mentioned is Benchmark Hill. Was this part of your
era?
JN:
Yeah, that’s where we did a lot of our surveying work.
BM:
Right.
JN:
That’s why it was called “Benchmark Hill.” We learned about the U.S. Geological
Service benchmark system. And we did have a benchmark there. Then we had to locate
benchmarks on the rest of the forest; that was part of our exercise. That’s where we also
found a lot of rattlesnakes. That was “Rattlesnake Hill” as far as I was concerned. The
first three rattlesnakes I ever saw in the state of Utah, I stepped on…before I saw them!
BM:
Yeah.
JN:
Fortunately I was never bit.
BM:
Oh!
RG:
They were still taking courses in surveying too, weren’t they?
JN:
Yeah, that was surveying courses.
RG:
You’d take actually a course in surveying.
JN:
Yeah, that was after.
RG:
After.
JN:
No, no, no. That was – I transferred from the University of Wisconsin, so I had my
surveying back there. But you took your surveying here as a freshman and a sophomore,
before summer camp.
RG:
Yeah. I took mine at Nebraska.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
Everybody had benchmarks to work with.
BM:
You know, it sounds like (and you mentioned before) what an experience this was in
terms of eating, sleeping and dreaming together and working hard. I mean I bet there
were some long hours.
RG:
Yeah.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
36
�JN:
There were long hours. It was hard work, there were long hours, yeah.
RG:
But you didn’t mind it; I didn’t mind it. You’d get tired, but you had fun doing it. Just a
great experience.
JN:
Oh, Sam Jackson was the other guy’s name: Sam Jackson and Sterling Rickman. Sterling
Rickman died, I think two years after we graduated from the University, from the college.
And Sam Jackson became some kind of a big shot down in Arkansas. I think he became
the director of the Arkansas Department of Fish and Game.
BM:
Hmm. Well when you think of students today that are graduating in these fields (you
know, all the departments within Natural Resources), what are they missing by not
having something like a field camp experience?
JN:
Well one of the things I think they’re missing is the camaraderie; field experience, the
technology and techniques. This is the sort of thing now they have to learn on the job,
after they get hired.
RG:
We also, in those days, we didn’t have such thing as work study students. You helped
your colleagues.
JN:
Oh yeah!
RG:
Otherwise, you were dead in the water. Everybody would just go out and go help set nets,
or go help electro-shock or work with bottom samples. I learned more from those things
than I did from my own study. And they would help me to.
BM:
So you weren’t getting paid for it, but it was hands-on learning?
RG:
Yeah.
BM:
That you could do with somebody doing a research project?
RG:
Yeah and none of you could do it because you’re all needed, so somebody’s got to hold
the other end of the seine, or something like that.
BM:
Right, right.
RG:
If you don’t have –
JN:
And that was all volunteer.
RG:
Yeah.
JN:
Everybody volunteered to help everybody else.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
37
�RG:
A lot of times you would end up – if you caught a bunch of fish – you’d have a big
barbecue up the canyon or something like that.
JN:
Send [?] from Logan to Wyoming to bring a keg of beer back.
RG:
A keg of beer, yeah!
[Laughing]
JN:
And the wives would make potato salad, and all that kind of stuff, and we would have a
great, big blastoff.
RG:
It would often be last minute a lot of times because you didn’t plan it because you didn’t
know you were going to have those fish always.
BM:
Right, right.
RG:
I don’t know whether I’m not that aware of it anymore because I’m not that involved up
here anymore, but I don’t think it’s there; I don’t hear it, I don’t sense it.
JN:
I’ve got that impression. I’ve got the same impression that there isn’t that same kind of
camaraderie among our graduate students, for example, as it used to be. Or among the
faculty; the faculty have basically become isolated in their own area of endeavor, you
know, and they don’t seem to want to get out of it for some reason.
RG:
They’ll all have lunch at the Skyroom [USU campus restaurant] or something, you know.
But we used to have lunch right here and everybody was invited you know.
JN:
Yeah. Cases of glicksteich [unsure of spelling].
BM:
What is that?
JN:
Malt liquor!
RG:
Malt liquor. It was pretty strong stuff. It came in about this size.
BM:
Well it sounds like the camaraderie was field oriented, versus being office or building, or
Skyroom oriented, as you’re saying.
JN:
Well it was and it wasn’t. After I became a faculty member, I used to have a graduate
student bull pen where all my graduate students would be housed together. And that sort
of a thing went on after I graduated as a student and became a faculty member. And those
were interesting. Every morning I would go down and sit with the graduate students and
we would just talk about things at random. We kind of learned a hell of a lot from each
other. I learned a lot as a faculty member too.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
38
�RG:
[inaudible] good reason.
JN:
Yeah. The one thing that impressed me about that whole thing is I was the only Democrat
in the whole bunch and all my students were Republicans.
[Laughing]
RG:
Well they had the old cubicles there –
JN:
Oh yeah, in the old building.
RG:
In the old forestry building.
JN:
That was a bull pen.
RG:
Where the parking thing is out on the – what is that street? 8th?
BM:
Or 7th?
RG:
7th?
BM:
Um-hmm. 7th North.
RG:
Yeah that was where – then you also had the guy you walk up the street – the old College
Bluebird. That’s where everybody had coffee.
BM:
Where was that?
RG:
It was basically where the LDS Institute is up there.
BM:
Okay.
JN:
Right on that corner.
BM:
So on the corner of 8th East and 7th North, at that light? In from there?
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
Yeah.
JN:
Right across from the Student Center.
RG:
And that’s where all the non-Mormons were.
BM:
The College Bluebird? So this is the Bluebird Restaurant?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
39
�JN:
Yeah.
RG:
It was the same logo –
JN:
It was owned by the same people.
RG:
-- same people. Everybody ate lunch there; you had coffee there. That’s where you’d go
see Bill Sigler.
JN:
Yeah.
BM:
Huh.
RG:
A lot of big conversations sitting – you could also smoke there then.
JN:
Yeah, no smoking. Well, no actually we were allowed to smoke in the buildings at that
time, yeah. A faculty member could smoke in their own offices; that’s what it boiled
down to. Students always went outside to smoke.
BM:
If you wanted to change that and you look at what we have now, because I think what
you’re sharing is very similar to what many other people talk about. If you wanted to
bring back or move ahead with increasing that feeling of camaraderie and some of the
benefits that were in these other programs – if you ran the world, what would you do
differently? What would you suggest for that, if I can ask?
RG:
Well there’s one thing that I’ve been thinking about just recently, a couple of things that
Obama has actually suggested: volunteer service where you got credits (like the GI’s did
for the GI Bill, you know) to go to college and that sort of thing. I think that’s one of the
serious things that’s missing. We don’t have that kind of shared experience anymore in
this country. We all had a do it or something like that, or the ones that did do it got some
kind of reward for doing. So they had that sense of group and also some tangible reward
for going to college so they could do things like this.
JN:
The culture has changed substantially though. Personally, I would like to see something
like the CCC started again. I think what Ron is talking about – not necessarily a volunteer
(you get paid for it, you get paid poorly), but you do get that kind of experience.
RG:
I suppose like the Peace Corps and those types of things.
JN:
Like the Peace Corps. You know, there are a variety of things like that. But boy, our
parks and our Forest Service facilities, and all of these things are in sore need of
attention; financial attention of one sort or another, and by George this administration
could create a CCC to put people to work in these areas.
RG:
I think that’s kind of what he has in mind.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
40
�JN:
I sure hope so, that’s what he has in mind.
RG:
He made quite a play with that.
JN:
Yeah.
BM:
Well, and even being paid poorly in those positions, for many people, being paid at all
may be very important in the next few years.
JN:
Absolutely! Yeah, sure.
BM:
And being able to use those skills.
RG:
But you know, like I say, I really don’t think that stuff would have been at all available if
it hadn’t been for the GI Bill.
JN:
Yeah, I agree.
RG:
In fact, after the GI Bill dried up, that was the end of it.
BM:
And when did that dry up? When was that over?
JN:
In the ‘70s, with Vietnam, yeah. Well, you could still get credit for college in the military
(right now you can get it now), but it’s not like it used to be. It used to be you could get
the full ride and they paid you a salary and everything.
RG:
Yeah, but in those days, during the Second World War, everybody was in.
JN:
Yeah.
RG:
Everybody. I mean, you were classified, you had a draft classification. When I was 18 I
got my draft card.
JN:
There were two programs that were started. One was the education program on the GI
Bill. It was a really great program because it was a full-ride program: you got a salary,
they paid your tuition, they bought your books; they bought any fees for the college, and
so on. It didn’t cost you a penny. You could go on through and get your education that
way. And then they offered one other thing they called 52-20. And you’d get $20 for 52
weeks, and you didn’t have to go to school for it. However, if you took advantage of that
you couldn’t take advantage of the GI Bill in college. So a lot of the people that didn’t
want to get an education, they went to 52-20.
RG:
And a lot of them that did get it wouldn’t have if it hadn’t been for the GI Bill.
JN:
Yeah, that’s right. Yeah.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
41
�BM:
Well any closing thoughts that we have on your experience? Personally or
professionally?
JN:
I had a great life. That’s all I can say. I’m 80 years old now, and I really enjoyed just
about every minute. Well, there were some things that I would’ve done differently I
suspect. I got into University Administration; in retrospect I would have been happier, I
suppose, if I’d have stayed as a teaching and research professor.
BM:
The administration you’re talking about is the Ecology Center?
JN:
It was the Ecology Center, yeah. And of course I became Associate Dean and all that sort
of stuff. And dealing with people issues mostly. Of course I did a lot on the national
scene: I became Director of Ecosystem Analysis at the National Science Foundation for a
couple of years. Then became Director of the Institute of Ecology for four or five years, I
think, I was involved in that. And that was TIE – it was basically environmental activism
and that sort of thing.
BM:
And what is T-I-E?
JN:
The Institute of Ecology.
BM:
The Institute of Ecology, okay.
RG:
That’s the one that Art Hasler had.
JN:
Yeah, Art Hasler was the first director of it and I took over from him. Art Hasler was a
BYU graduate, became professor of limnology in Aquatic Sciences at the University of
Wisconsin and a long time professor in that area. He managed to establish a really good
aquatic program there. It’s still going pretty strong.
RG:
I think that stuff thought, I could echo that, but I think a lot of it had to do with that
camaraderie though. Lifelong peers and peer group type of associations and great friends.
You fought a lot of the good, hard battles together, you know. I always like to say back to
back, you know. That’s just hard to replace. And I really don’t see that happening – not in
the same sense – not lifelong. I’ve felt that way for some time, that we don’t have that
sort of thing even available in this country anymore.
BM:
So the opportunity doesn’t even exist?
RG:
Yeah. There is no place – service used to be one of the big equalizers. Everybody grew
up doing service.
JN:
One of the faculty members – he and I stay in close email contact with each other – Jack
Schulz (and Joann Schulz). They had a similar experience at the University of Michigan.
They have a group that they call “les voyageurs” that is basically they take the name from
the French explorers in the area. They get together every year. In the wintertime they do
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
42
�snow shoeing. Long treks in the summertime they get together, as a group; the same sort
of a thing that we had then. It’s a camaraderie that started at the University of Michigan
and has lasted. Michigan State University had a summer camp at Gull Lake in Michigan.
And those people, as I understand it, do pretty much the same thing that we’re doing here
– in the camaraderie. But these are all people from back post-World War II. A lot of them
are dead or retired and/or dead now. But that sort of thing is missing; I agree with Ron
completely it is missing. You don’t see the same thing happening.
Do you see it going up at the university?
[End recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
John
Neuhold
and
Ron
Goede
Page
43
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/36">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/36</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Radio Shack Cassette Recorder: CTR-122
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-11-12
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
John Neuhold and Ron Goede interview, 22 February 2009, and transcript
Description
An account of the resource
John Neuhold and Ron Goede discuss their experiences at the Utah State University Summer Camp (and the skills and camaraderie they gained there) and other experiences in their education, including those with the GI Bill.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Goede, Ronald W., 1934-
Neuhold, John M.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Middleton, Barbara
Subject
The topic of the resource
Goede, Ronald W., 1934---Interviews
Neuhold, John M.--Interviews
Utah State University--Faculty--Interviews
Utah State University. Forestry Field Station Camp
United States. Montgomery G.I. Bill
Veterans--Education--Utah--Logan
Forestry schools and education--United States
Utah. Division of Wildlife Resources--Officials and employees--Training
Ecology--Study and teaching--Utah--Logan
Forests and forestry--Study and teaching--Utah--Logan
Forest management--Study and teaching--Utah--Logan Canyon
Range management-Study and teaching--Utah--Logan Canyon
Fishery management--Study and teaching--Utah--Logan Canyon
Rotenone--Utah
Goede, Ronald W., 1934---Friends and associates
Neuhold, John M.--Friends and associates
Mossbacks (Club)
Logan (Utah)--History
Utah State University--Students--Anecdotes
College teachers--Utah--Logan--Interviews
Utah State University. Forestry Dept.--Research
Ecology--Fieldwork--Utah--Logan Canyon
Forests and forestry--Fieldwork--Utah--Logan Canyon
Forest management--Fieldwork--Utah--Logan Canyon
Range management--Fieldwork--Utah--Logan Canyon
Fishery management--Fieldwork--Utah--Logan Canyon
Voluntarism
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral histories
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1950-1959
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
20th century
21st 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, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 3 Fd. 2
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</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 Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx3fd2RonGoedeJohnNeuhold
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
22 February 2009
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2009-02-22
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/e4cc18c408d866d65ef2c2d896546348.pdf
a5538929e680eebbdf8a3dd88a8e17bd
PDF Text
Text
Jul :i. <::\ (301 c:I
140 South 44th St. Apt.2A
Philadelphia, PA 19104
r'1ar"ch 14 'J
1.987
Mr. Clifford Forsgren, Project Manager
CH2M Hill! Salt Lake City Office
P» 0 •
B0
~<
22 1 8
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Before moving to Philadelphia last summer I lived in
Logan for more than 6 years and have become very attached to
the beauty and diverse recreational opportunities of Logan
Canyon - a place of striking natural scenery only a five
minute's drive away from my door step in Logan. As a planner
and landscape architect I have become very concerned with
the repeated efforts of the Utah Department of
Transportation to widen portions of highway 89 which serves
primarily recreation traffic to various destinations in the
canyon and to Bear Lake.
The enviromental impacts of road widening in a narrow
canyon especially during the construction phase are
tremendous, ranging from pollutants carried by increased
runoff to complete rechanneling of the river severely
altering flow patterns, stream velocity, the aquatic and the
riparian life zones. However, I will not talk about the
environmental effects here. I assume others who are more
qualified will do so. Instead, I will talk about the scenic
experience one has on Logan Canyon highway and how it will
be affected by the proposed developments.
Beautiful scenery can make driving an enjoyable
experience. Especially when the road changes direction
frequently allowing the driver to enjoy views from a number
of different angles without having to take his eyes away
fl'"om thE·? r-oc1.d.
Speed of travel greatly influences what the driver can
see. At high speeds only far away objects will be visible
long enough to be noticed. A wide open valley is suited ver-y
well for high speed tr-avel, because scenery at a distance of
several miles~ such as mountain ranges~ will be visible long
enough to make an impression on the driver.
In a canyon the time allowed to enjoy a particular view
greatly r-educed if travelling at the same high speeds. In
the wider parts of Logan Canyon from Ricks Springs to Bear
Lake summit a travel speed of 40-50 mph allows the driver to
view a number of peaks and long valleys, such as Steam Mill
Peak, Beaver Mtn. ~ Bunchgrass Canyon, and the Sinks.
IS
:I.
�In the lower part of the canyon, from First Dam to
Right Hand Fork? the road follows the river in wide arcs
around dominant ridge lines that fade into light blues in
the distance. Each ridge is the gate to a new segment of the
canyon leaving the driver in constant anticipation of what
lies ahead. The road in this part of the canyon has been
widened in the past to allow for travel speeds up to 50 mph
and it includes passing lanes. The general openess and width
of the canyon can accomodate this speed as the driver still
has sufficient time to enjoy the scenery.
The canyon narrows down further after Right Hand Fork.
Steep slopes on either side of the canyon reduce the field
of vision substantially. Even at 25-30 mph one can only
catch a glimpse of the splendid views, sometimes through the
canopy of road side vegetation. It is this part of the
canyon that offers the viewer the most dramatic limestone
walls, wooded slopes, and the closest views of the river
rapids through lush riparian vegetation.
Most objects
viewed are within 100 feet of the road. Passing by at speeds
exceeding 30-35 mph would result in nothing more than a
blurr and tunnel vision.
It becomes evident that a widening of the road to allow
for faster travel will only result in a diminished
experience of the canyon's beauty. Logan Canyon highway need
not become a high speed connection for travellers concerned
only with how fast they can reach their point of
destination. Interstate highways serve these needs far
better. Tourists with tight schedules are better advised to
use 1-15 and Rte 30 to travel to Grand Teton and Yellowstone
National Parks.
Logan Canyon j c a scenic attraction in itself. Along
with the valley it may be one of the most memorable
experiences for travellers who enjoy being away from the
fast paced systems of transportation.
Do we want to sacrifice the scenic experience of Logan
Canyon for those who want to beat the lift lines at Beaver
Mountain Ski area or those who race their motor boats up the
canyon on their way to Bear Lake? Granted, some of the
proposed improvements such as bridge replacement, turnoff
lanes, parking areas off the highway, and signs warning of
bicyclists would greatly reduce some of the problems
experienced in the past.
I support only some of the proposed actions in Plan B
spot improvements. Left turning lanes at Tony Grove Lake and
Beaver Mountain will greatly reduce the inherent conflict of
fast moving vehicles, and vehicles waiting to make a left
turn. Many recreational vehicles move slower than the
average traffic resulting in long lines and sometimes
dangerous passing maneuvers. These problems could be
2
�improved by providing turnoff lanes and requiring slower
vehicles to make use of them. I strongly oppose a passing
lane in the dugway section, even though it is the only
feasible stretch of road for a passing lane in that part of
the canyon. The extensive blasting and resulting
destabilization of the above lying steep slopes will cause
ongoing erosion problems for the road as well as add
sediments to the river below.
I feel that an approach, where each segment of road is
studied as a separate problem by weighing the benefits of
improvement against the degree of environmental impact~
responds much better to the unique areas of Logan Canyon.
I urge you to reconsider some of the Plan B spot
improvements proposed for Logan Canyon highway, to assess
the real values of the canyon and the interests of those who
enjoy its recreational and scenic qualities most.
�
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/14">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/14</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
2768298981
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1553053 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 Julia Gold to Clifford Forsgren concerning the proposed changes to Logan Canyon
Description
An account of the resource
Correspondence from Julia Gold to Clifford Forsgren of CH2M HILL concerning the proposed changes to the Logan Canyon Highway 89. She discusses the scenic experience of driving Logan Canyon and briefly mentions the environmental effects. Also suggests studying each segment of road separately and urges reconsideration of spot improvements proposed for the highway.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Gold, Julia
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)--History
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
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
1987-03-14
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (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, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 1
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_Fd1_Page_9.pdf
Highway 89;